Table Of ContentTHE ABSENT CHRIST AND THE INUNDATED COMMUNITY:
CONSTRUCTING A PROCESS-ANABAPTIST MICROMETAPHYSICS
A Dissertation
presented to
the Faculty of
Claremont School of Theology
In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree
Doctor of Philosophy
by
Justin Heinzekehr
May 2015
©2015
Justin Heinzekehr
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
J88S
This dissertation completed by
Justin Heinzekehr
has been presented to and accepted by the
faculty of Claremont School of Theology in
partial fulfillment of the requirements of the
Doctor of Philosophy
Faculty Committee
Roland Faber, Chairperson
Monica A. Coleman
J. Denny Weaver
Dean of the Faculty
Sheryl A. Kujawa-Holbrook
May 2015
ABSTRACT
THE ABSENT CHRIST AND THE INUNDATED COMMUNITY:
CONSTRUCTING A PROCESS-ANABAPTIST MICROMETAPHYSICS
Justin Heinzekehr
This dissertation will argue that the distinctive contribution of Anabaptists to Christian
theology has been muted by a lack of metaphysics consistent with its ethical and ecclesiological
commitments. Anabaptists have engaged in one of the longest, most consistent experiments in
nonviolence in history, and therefore have evolved styles of thought that run in sometimes
surprising directions in relation to mainstream Christianity. Yet it has also been a temptation for
Anabaptists to allow the idea of nonviolence to stagnate, in part because there has been no
accompanying metaphysics that pushes for a constant renegotiation of peace.
In fact it is this very commitment to nonviolence that makes Anabaptists rightly
suspicious of claims to universal metaphysics, systems that attempt to justify themselves
incontrovertibly to any reasonable person. Most contemporary Mennonite theologians recognize
that Anabaptist theology must avoid a foundationalist methodology in order to be consistent with
a message of nonviolence. The imposition of universal metaphysics would be itself a form of
coercion, since it seeks to make resistance to its worldview impossible. The solution, however, is
not to reject the medium of metaphysics completely. This too tends to undermine the vibrancy of
Anabaptist thought, in this case by masking implicit metaphysical positions and consequently
making one less open to criticism and modification.
I propose a constructive metaphysics that is consistent with the basic distinctives of
Anabaptist thought, but uses a nonfoundational methodology. This would constitute a worldview
that seeks to interpret all of reality based on a community’s interpretation of local, particular
experience. In a way this mirrors the twentieth-century turn toward microhistory, or the narration
of history through the lens of a particular event, community or object rather than pretending to a
universal viewpoint. So metaphysics based on local experience and interpretation can be termed
“micrometaphysics,” which avoids the violent implications of traditional, foundational
metaphysics. Micrometaphysics differs from traditional metaphysics in that it represents itself as
one possible lens through which to view reality given a certain set of experiences, but does not
expect to supplant other views that arise from other possible sets.
I argue that, given the assumptions of Anabaptism, process thought is one of the most
natural conversation partners in the construction of a consistent Anabaptist micrometaphysics.
Process thought has the advantage of extended, explicit metaphysical reflection which can help
clarify many Anabaptist intuitions. In particular, a process-Anabaptist metaphysics will
emphasize the relational basis of the universe, the mutual influence of God and the world, the
location of the universal in the particular, and the rejection of any ultimate dualism of conflicting
elements in favor of creative, nonviolent transformation.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
One might say, in good Whiteheadian fashion, that “dissertation is robbery.” A project like this is
impossible without the donation of time and energy from many innocent parties. My dissertation
committee, Roland Faber, Monica Coleman and J. Denny Weaver, spent many hours helping to
sharpen my ideas and my writing. Many of the seeds of this dissertation come from
conversations with other faculty and students at Claremont, in and out of the classroom. This
includes especially Philip Clayton, Grace Kao, Richard Amesbury, Santiago Slabodsky, Najeeba
Syeed, Drew Baker, Timothy Murphy and Hannah Heinzekehr. I am also grateful to Duane
Friesen, who allowed me to test my ideas with a group of professors, pastors and lay leaders in
Newton, Kansas. Most of all I thank my wife Hannah, who read and commented on each chapter,
and my children Ellie and Conrad, who were too young to understand why I had to spend quite
so much time in the library, but never seemed to hold it against me.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction: The Danger and Necessity of Anabaptist Metaphysics 1
SECTION I THE (PUTATIVE) ANABAPTIST REJECTION OF METAPHYSICS
1 Anti-clericalism in Sixteenth-Century Anabaptism 12
2 Anti-foundationalism in the Twentieth- and Twenty-First-
Century Mennonite Church 34
3 The Implied Metaphysics of Anabaptism 62
SECTION II THE POTENTIAL OF PROCESS METAPHYSICS FOR ANABAPTISM
4 The Metaphysical Task 83
5 The God/World Relationship 101
6 Jesus as Metaphysical Datum 123
7 Whitehead and Mennonite Pacifism 148
SECTION III ANABAPTISM UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF PROCESS
8 Following the Trace of Christ 180
9 The Liberation of Process-Anabaptist Micrometaphysics 206
10 Adventures in Nonviolence 232
Bibliography 245
DEDICATION
To Hannah, Ellie and Conrad
Introduction: The Danger and Necessity of Anabaptist Metaphysics
The suspicion of metaphysics is certainly not unique to the Anabaptist tradition. Philosophers
have been announcing the end of metaphysics since Nietzsche, and the problematic nature of
metanarratives is now about as widespread an assumption as you can find in Western society. In
theology, too, it is not rare to encounter post-metaphysical views, such as John Caputo’s
theology of the event or Stanley Hauerwas’ narrative theology. Anabaptist theology is, however,
somewhat unique in that it traces its anti-metaphysical stance all the way back to its origins in
the sixteenth century, in a more or less unbroken lineage. Specifically, Anabaptists might claim
to be among the first Christian groups to intuit the link between formal intellectual thought and
violence, largely due to their position as an outlawed and persecuted religion in sixteenth-century
Europe. Even if they would not have articulated these insights in the same form, early
Anabaptists might have agreed with Derrida or Foucault that abstract metaphysical reflection
tends to both uphold and mask systems of domination.
At least since John Howard Yoder, Mennonite theologians have drawn on this history to
advocate for nonfoundational types of theology; that is, theology that does not pretend to be
indisputable. Rather than attempting to ground theology in a priori rational arguments or by
appeal to the universal structure of human experience, Mennonites have preferred to base their
reflection on a communal experience of the concrete, historical person of Jesus. The Mennonite
experience of Jesus is mediated through the early Christian records in the New Testament, but
also through the church’s ever-changing context which shapes its interpretation of this record.
Anabaptism is therefore a biblical tradition, but not (when it functions well) a fundamentalist
one. That is, scripture is not simply a straightforward account of truth, but becomes a medium for
truth as it is interpreted in a community. For this reason, many Mennonite theologians are more
1
comfortable with the concept of narrative rather than metaphysics as a vehicle for truth.1
Narrative implies a shared interpretation that is passed along as a community retells its own
history. Metaphysics implies a system of abstractions that could be constructed by an individual
scholar in an ivory tower apart from any relation to his or her community.
Nonfoundational theological method goes hand-in-hand with the Mennonite commitment
to nonviolence; a theology that is always contingent or disputable cannot be imposed by force.
And in fact, Mennonites have for the most part avoided the militant evangelism that has
characterized many other forms of Christianity throughout history. Mennonite mission efforts,
though they have had their own ambiguities, have at least tended to emphasize service and
cultural sensitivity over conversion.2 And as Mennonites have branched out into international
peace work, their stance of humility and openness has served them well. In Northern Ireland, for
instance, Mennonite peace workers have earned a good reputation by entering a conflict with a
listening ear rather than a pre-made solution.3 It is right, therefore, that Mennonites should be
proud of the nonfoundationalism that developed out of a history of persecution and grounded a
long history of nonviolent practices. The vindication of this way of thinking in the postmodern
age makes it unlikely that Anabaptists could let go of their heritage of nonfoundationalism even
if they wanted to.
1 Though most of these scholars would not want to settle on narrative as the only possible framework for
theology. See Chris K. Huebner, A Precarious Peace: Yoderian Explorations on Theology, Knowledge, and Identity
(Waterloo, Ont.: Herald Press, 2006), 49-68.
2 In discussing some of these very ambiguities, Marc Gopin writes, “Mennonite self-doubt serves as a
strength, however, in peacemaking. It leads to an extraordinary level of cross-cultural sensitivity and also leads to a
deep commitment to listening and receptivity, which have prominent and longstanding places in Mennonite Central
Committee methods of peacemaking.” Marc Gopin, Between Eden and Armageddon: The Future of World
Religions, Violence, and Peacemaking (Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2000), 152. This is the ideal
picture; of course, there are many cases in which Mennonite missions have failed to live up to this ideal. For an
example of the ambiguity of Mennonite missions in the United States, see Felipe Hinojosa, Latino Mennonites: Civil
Rights, Faith, and Evangelical Culture (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2014).
3 As related to the author by Joe Liechty, professor of Peace, Justice and Conflict Studies at Goshen
College and former peace worker in Northern Ireland.
2
