A Theologian’s Influence, and Stained Past, Live On
By MARK OPPENHEIMER
Can a bad person be a good theologian?
All of us fall short of our ideals, of course. But there is a
common-sense expectation that religious professionals should try to
behave as they counsel others to behave. They may not be perfect, but
they should not be louts or jerks.
By that standard, few have failed as egregiously as John Howard Yoder,
America’s most influential pacifist theologian. In his teaching at Notre
Dame and elsewhere, and in books like “The Politics of Jesus,”
published in 1972, Mr. Yoder, a Mennonite Christian, helped thousands
formulate their opposition to violence. Yet, as he admitted before his
death in 1997, he groped many women or pressured them to have physical
contact, although never sexual intercourse.
Mr. Yoder’s scholarly pre-eminence keeps growing, and with it the
ambivalence that Mennonites and other Christians feel toward him. In
August, Ervin Stutzman, executive director of Mennonite Church USA, which has about 100,000 members, announced the formation of a “discernment group” to guide a process to “contribute to healing for victims” of Mr. Yoder’s abuse.
In 1992, after eight women pressured the church to take action, Mr. Yoder’s ministerial credentials were suspended
and he was ordered into church-supervised rehabilitation. It soon
emerged that Mr. Yoder’s 1984 departure from what is now called Anabaptist Mennonite Biblical Seminary,
in Elkhart, Ind., had also been precipitated by allegations against
him. He left for Notre Dame, where administrators were not told what had
happened at his last job.
But Mr. Yoder emerged as a hero of repentance. His accusers never spoke
publicly, and their anonymity made it easier for some to wish away their
allegations. And in December 1997, after about 30 meetings for
supervision and counseling, Mr. Yoder and his wife were welcomed back to
worship at Prairie Street Mennonite Church in Elkhart. To cap a perfect
narrative of redemption, he died at 70 at the end of that month
.
Without denying the wrongness of his acts, his supporters continued to
celebrate Mr. Yoder and the Mennonite leaders who had rehabilitated him.
“How John’s community responded to his inappropriate relations with
women” was “a testimony to a community that has learned over time that
the work of peace is slow, painful, and hard,” wrote Stanley Hauerwas, a retired Duke University professor and Yoder’s heir as the leading pacifist theologian, in his 2010 memoir.
Mr. Yoder’s obituary in The New York Times did
not mention his sexual misdeeds. None of his victims received monetary
settlements. Mr. Yoder apologized, sort of, with a statement that “he
was sorry that we had misunderstood his intentions, as he never meant to
hurt us,” according to Carolyn Holderread Heggen, one of the eight
complainants.
Ted Koontz,
a professor at Mr. Yoder’s old seminary and a member of the church’s
discernment group, said the church needed to take stock of what was — or
was not — done for Mr. Yoder’s victims.
“There are a lot of different opinions about what was done and wasn’t
done to hold him accountable,” Professor Koontz said.
The committee will probably conclude its work, he added, in time for the
Mennonite Church USA’s 2015 convention in Kansas City, Mo., where there
may be a ceremony “of confession, repentance, reconciliation.”
Of course, reconciliation was what the four-year process in the 1990s
was supposed to achieve. It obviously failed. And Mr. Yoder remains
inescapable for Mennonites, his work read and referenced often and
everywhere.
“Physically he died, but his work and his theological writings live on,”
said Linda Gehman Peachey, a freelance writer in Lancaster, Pa., who is
also part of the six-member group. “For those who have known this other
side — his behavior, particularly toward women — that is really
painful.”
Mr. Yoder’s memory also presents a theological quandary. Mennonites tend
to consider behavior more important than belief. For them, to study a
man’s writings while ignoring his life is especially un-Mennonite.
Professor Koontz regularly tells his students reading Mr. Yoder that
“his behavior is one thing we ought to take into account when we read
his work.” Ms. Peachey noted that Mr. Yoder wrote a good deal about
suffering as a Christian virtue, but “if you know this part of the
story” — how he made women suffer — “you tend to read it with a
different eye.”
Mr. Yoder seemed very attentive to the notion that theology should align
with behavior. It turns out that in unpublished papers, he formulated a
bizarre justification of extramarital sexual contact.
In his memoir, Professor Hauerwas alludes to what Tom Price, a reporter for the newspaper The Elkhart Truth, described in a five-part 1992 series
as Mr. Yoder’s defense of “nongenital affective relationships.” Mr.
Yoder said that touching a woman could be an act of “familial” love, in
which a man helped to heal a traumatized “sister.”
Mr. Price quoted from “What Is Adultery of the Heart?” a 1975 essay in
which Mr. Yoder wrote that a “bodily” embrace “can celebrate and
reinforce familial security,” rather than “provoking guilt-producing
erotic reactions.”
Ms. Heggen, called Tina in the newspaper articles, told Mr. Price that
Mr. Yoder had a grandiose explanation for his advances, which he tried
out on multiple women.
“We are on the cutting edge,” Mr. Yoder would say, according to Ms.
Heggen. “We are developing new models for the church. We are part of
this grand, noble experiment. The Christian church will be indebted to
us for years to come.”
On Wednesday, Ms. Heggen, agreeing to be identified as a victim for the
first time, recalled driving Mr. Yoder to the Albuquerque airport in
1982. He asked her to get out for “a proper goodbye,” Ms. Heggen said.
“Then he pulled me into his belly and held me tight for a painfully long
time. I realized I couldn’t escape his clutch.”
In 1992, Ms. Heggen, who now lives in Oregon, published a book about sexual abuse.
Traveling the world, lecturing about her book, she said she met
“significantly” more than 50 women who said that Mr. Yoder had touched
them or made advances.
“Women inevitably come up after these events and tell you their story,”
Ms. Heggen said. “The scenario was so familiar to me, and I would
interrupt them and say, ‘Are you talking about John Howard Yoder?’ They
would say, ‘How did you know?’ ”
After his advance toward her, Mr. Yoder mailed Ms. Heggen an essay in
which he advocated physical contact, including nudity, between unmarried
people, so long as “there wasn’t lust.”
16 comments:
Why is it that the first scripture that comes to mind on the mention of John Howard Yoder's name is Matthew 7:21-23?
“Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’
I understand Mr. Howard was a fan of country music and his favorite song was "Heaven's Just a Sin Away." Another one was "How Can It Be So Bad When It Feels So Good?" or some such thing.
Favorite album was "Dolly Parton's Biggest Hits." Get it? (Heh,heh.)
The problem with someone who is a hypocritical bullshit artist is, how can you have any confidence in anything he has to say, even if some of his scholarship may be right on the money?
I was not nearly so eloquent as professor Yoder, who talked about being on the “cutting edge” and developing “new models for the church” and “celebrate and reinforce familial security” and “this grand, noble experiment.” As a kid, I simply said, “Gee, Honey, if we love each other, we’re married in the eyes of God.”
Some good thoughts here folks. I think that what SSS said is what some in the church are trying to figure out. However, I must say that there have been numerous scientists who have made brilliant contributions to their fields, and later in life have gone off the deep end with crazy ideas and beliefs. This does not negate their previous work; but, it is also easier to assess scientific work than that of theologians and philosophers - but definition, whatever the latter say must be right in their opinion!! :-)
I have no idea how John Yoder's brain works and I haven't read his stuff, but he may be on to something. Practically everyone is familiar with Matthew 5, which states, among other things, to turn the other cheek, who takes your coat, give him your cloak also, love your enemies, do good to them who hate you, give to those who ask, loan to those who want to borrow, etc.
BUT practically everyone ignores those commands, which are pacifism and non-violence in a nutshell, and Yoder is saying Matthew 5 should not be ignored.
Right Cousin. Recently an evangelical friend and colleague who has been at the forefront in the science and religion 'discussions' lamented that there are too many "Christians" that don't take seriously many of the teachings of Jesus; said it made him want to be called something other than "Christian" because of the negativity often associated with the word.
I don't think your friend should abandon the Christian label. He could call himself a "true Christian" or "God of the Bible Christian," which could stir up some interesting conversation. That would distinguish him from the pick and choose or anything goes type of Christian. Believing the facts of the gospel, that Jesus is God, born of a virgin, died for our sins, and was resurrected does not automatically make a person a heaven-bound Christian. There is that little technical obligation to make Jesus Lord in our life, which is a tall order, and most Christians back off at that point. It does mean, among other things, that one actually becomes familiar with and strives to obey His teachings as expressed in the Bible.
Perhaps rather than a person describing himself as a Christian, which could mean practically anything nowadays, he could call himself a Mennonite, or Nazarene, or Southern Baptist. That would offer a good deal of clarity.
Even then, there are many in those denominations, who are not true believers. One way to separate the wheat from the chaff is to determine if an alleged Christian has a testimony, not just made up bull, but a valid testimony as to how the Lord came into and changed that person’s life. Also, “by their fruits ye shall know them.”
Steve - I see a very big problem with your suggested label of "true Christian" because I would contend that every person/congregation/denomination would claim the title of being true Christians while every one else is compromised, unfaithful, apostate, etc. Catholics vs protestants, Baptists vs Mennonites, everyone vs Mormons, and so one. Also, many folks would question the God of the Bible label because they could say "which one?" The typical answer is that there is only one, but questions remain about the widely disparate behavior ranging from ordering genocide to sacrificing one's life.
Very good point Douglas E. Given the wide variety of “true” Christians, it’s not a good idea to go about proclaiming oneself as such. Keep it to yourself and avoid irritating others. In my discussions about religion, telling people, “I am a Christian,” or “I am a believer” is too general and leaves too much to the imagination, thus I identify myself as a Bible-believing Christian who belongs to a Southern Baptist church. That gives people about all the information they may want to know as to where I stand on doctrine.
Douglas E., you mention God ordering genocide. I think that was only a one time deal which applied only to the Canaanites, a pretty awful people who "needed killin'." Had the Canaanites been put out of business way back when, there would have been no 9-11 and no maniacal fanatics today seeking the extermination of every last Jew.
Agree with S3. If Iran nukes Israel and sends a few our way, you can thank Islam, founded by the Arabs, who are the modern day Canaanites, who God ordered put out of existence, whose command was ignored. John Howard Yoder could have loved the shit out of them, but that wouldn't change anything.
SSS - I think that you are mistaken about 'only the Canaanite' - I believe that there are other examples, the Amalekites, the Midianites, and other foes in battle. Not worth trying to justify from my perspective, particularly trying to blame the current problems on events over two millenia ago.
Agree about the blame. “Of all sad words of tongue or pen, the saddest are these, 'It might have been.'” John Greenleaf Whittier.
Was always curious, with all the women out there who would welcome Yoder's sexual advances, why did he choose women for whom his sexaul advances were unwelcome?
JA - good point because I too have thought the same about johns who pay prostitutes :-)
Post a Comment