Markus Vinzent's Blog

Wednesday 16 March 2022

Christi Thora and the Prophet Simon Kimbangu, Congo - Werner Ustorf's response

 My friend and former colleague Werner Ustorf from Birmingham University wrote to me the following response to my recently published book "Christi Thora" ("Christ's Thora") which I am publishing here with his consent:

I have read most of your argumentation in “Christi Thora” (not all the scriptural evidence though). Being a layperson in this regard, my impression is that your research is eminently fruitful. It is a line of thought that began to take shape decades ago and needs to be pursued with determination. The crux seems to be that the whole debate (or 98% of it) is in the hands of those who say what they always wanted to say (I am talking of the “Christian” bias, i.e. that bias that became victorious in the history of this religion).

Translating your questions into my words, I would say that what happened in response to Marcion is a complete takeover of his gospel by the group that became victorious (“orthodox”). Hijacking his texts, they re-attached the story of Christ to the Jewish tradition. And in doing so, they signalled to the Roman Empire that they were the ‘right’ version of Judaism, namely conform to the system and non-dangerous. Unfortunately, this claim, i.e. Christianity as the only legitimate continuation of Judaism, created the historical roots of antisemitism.

If Marcion had his text ready already in his Pontus years, you would probably want to know where he got his knowledge from. All these “Q”-issues would come back into the discussion. There should also be a new, and serious (non-Christian) investigation of the gospel of Thomas. Then, a step by step chronology of the mythology of Christ could be developed.

As you know, I was able to a small extent to do just that in relation to the Prophet Simon Kimbangu in the Congo. This was my summa cum laude PhD thesis, but nobody, neither in theology nor (of course) the Kimbanguist Church itself, was interested in this. I could show how the prophet’s own sayings and letters were ignored and replaced by plain inventions of sacred wonders and how these developments were promoted by people high up in the service of the then Belgian colonial government. The ’new’ image of the Kimbanguist tradition was non-violent and strictly non-political. A few years later, these Neo-Kimbanguist leaders cooperated with the dictator Mobutu and killed (literally) all survivals of the previous incarnation of Kimbanguism. All the books were re-written. Today, Kimbangu has been declared God’s second incarnation - that of the Holy Spirit. Dogma is also that every human being at the point of death will be judged by Kimbangu. This latter development I would explain as a consequence of the religious competition in the Congo. The Kimbanguists needed to up their game in order to compete.

Anyway, you have got yourself a massive research programme for years to come. I am not worried about this. I am worried about mediating the results of this research to the public. This is probably something that needs to be thought about.

Best wishes,
Werner

To this kind email I replied:

how right you are. I think, the same pattern runs through history, be it that of writing the history of early Islam or as with your experience in Congo. It would be worth to have a comparative study of how religions move from not always pacifist enthusiasts to a smoothened, altered and accommodating and colonially institutionalised movement that fits quite often culturally the very different political powers, leading to a kind of novel political structure with a remodelled religion.

And with regard the public, these ideas will go out. I just had last week and this week interviews with Jacob Berman who is running quite a successful History channel on Early Christianity on youtube. So, the combination between research and publications, traditional and novel, is the way forward. And, actually, I am doing this type of research, because I like doing it, irrespective of how many people it read or are inspired by what is written.

yours Markus 

1 comment:

  1. A very interesting coincidence!

    That "new, and serious (non-Christian) investigation of the gospel of Thomas" is already here, and demonstrates that Thomas precedes the NT

    https://www.academia.edu/46974146/

    600 pages on Thomas alone.
    I am working on deepening my work on the Thomas-NT parallels by taking Marcion into account and aim to finish they later this year.
    My current position on Marcion is that "his" Chrestianity came into existence around 0 CE; when we follow the anti-Judaism on history we can see where it blossomed. The +/- 50 CE being of Judaics from Rome is essential, but so are the Kitos wars that stretched out from 60-130 CE.
    After that the Romans were left with no other choice than to rewrite the narrative: to combat its anti-Judaic nature they fused it with Judaism - with devastating results

    Regarding the reconstruction, I have developed an alternative view:

    Marcion ends at Mark 15:39, the centurion proclaiming Jesus to be the son of God.
    Mark has to mitigate the "fact" that Romans killed Jesus at the instigation of Judaics but can't undo it, so he adds up till 16:8 in order to suggest that Jesus lived; the women are put on the scene immediately in 15:40 with the sole goal of their sole role: to take the brunt for no one knowing that "in fact" Jesus did arise from the grave. A pathetically feeble story but at least he tries to make it plausible by conjuring an impartial aid to the scene: Joseph "the disciplest", an allegedly trustworthy source who isn't one of the Twelve nor one of the Judaics.
    Then naturally the story develops that the disciples faked his resurrection by hiding his body: Matthew 28:11-15, and by incorporating it into his own gospel Matthew successfully p0wns that.
    Matthew then adds an incredibly lengthy narrative to his *Ev copy, Luke, but can't resist letting Peter take credit for being the first to discover the risen Christ by letting him find the bindings - while the women were still unbelieving, Peter isn't! Matthew sticks to the Markan story in his own gospel though, he often uses Luke to go an extra mile while keeping his own narrative pristine

    ReplyDelete