The Sydney Anglicans, and believing in Adam as an historical figure ...

(Above: a chance to run R. Crumb's impression of a real historical person in Genesis. Click to enlarge).

One of the more interesting and amusing manoeuvres conducted by religious writers in a post-Darwin world is to take a scientific term, drape religion around it, and emerge with religion and science inextricably intertwined.

So it is with theological anthropology, which allows for all kinds of speculation about humans and their gods, dressed up with all sorts of grand terms, whether monism, trichotomism, or dichotomism.

It gets even more interesting when it comes to the origins of humanity. Does a theological anthropological view of the world allow for evolutionary theory, or does it accept Adam and Eve as real historical figures?

Well the answer is in, thanks to Michael Jensen and the Sydney Anglicans in Preaching Theological Anthropology.

It's not in the actual Jensen text, but in the comments below:

Andrew Mackinnon: Michael, do you believe that Adam was a real, historical person?

Michael Jensen: In short, yes ...

Which presumably - according to that other anthropologies the pond once studied - means that Adam was born in Africa, was likely black and was a long way away from the usual geographical location of the Garden of Eden in Mesopotamia (though it's fair to say it's been placed all over the map, right down to Jackson County, Missouri) ...

Whatever, it's more than a tad troublesome to find a perch for Adam in the scheme of things, as opposed to tracking the movements of H. sapiens out of Africa ... suggesting the meeting of theological anthropology and paleoanthropology might like mixing oil and water

In longer form, Jensen attempts a little wriggle room of a shared history 'in Adam' and historical narratives, but truth to tell, if this is theological anthropology, click your heels Dorothy and take me to Kansas ... or perhaps Jackson County, Missouri ...

Not to worry, because Michael Jensen's piece is large on theology, and not at all to do with meaningful anthropology.

After taking an awfully long time to stake out his chosen turf, Jensen arrives at a trinity of great acts: 1) creation in the image of God; 2) sin and 3) redemption and recreation with the incarnate Son of God:

What do I mean? Well for example, the human body needs to be understood as a good gift of God the creator. That it is marred and scarred by sin and faces judgement is doubly tragic in the light of its created purpose.

But what does this mean, say in the matter of homosexuality, which so troubles the Sydney Anglicans?

If the body is a good gift of god the creator, and in his image (remember 'shes' are just a rib plucked from the cage), then it follows that homosexuality is a natural inclination, observable in all kinds of creatures strutting the earth, and perhaps god himself, with his love of the patriarchy and spa baths and saunas, might be inclined to bi-sexual dabbling ...

Yep, homosexuality needs to be understood as a good gift of god the creator, who surely must have realised it was an option, in much the same way as if she provided her preferred car with a souped up Peter Brock crystal powered V8 engine, the likely outcome is a bit of speeding ...

Never mind, we're just having fun on a Sunday.

Jensen proposes a series of themes for contemporary preaching, but really the pond found itself in trouble right away as it sought inspiration:

1) what is an authentic human life? Contemporary discussions of career guidance and in education are full of assumptions about what a fulfilled and authentic human life ought to look like. The mantra is ‘be true to yourself’. Yet the gospel of the crucified celebrates a life given up to suffering and death before its time – a life that the disciples of Christ are called to imitate.

Say what? Sydney Anglicans should imitate the life of Christ, and go and get themselves crucified, or at least make sure they endure suffering, before death (perhaps by way of the salmon mousse) comes knocking early ...

(Above: that bloody salmon mousse).

Well it seems only fair to torture Sydney Anglicans by poking and prodding at them and marvelling how in this modern age, even allowing for reflexive reversion to superstition, Adam and Eve can still get a run as real historical figures ... (as opposed to say mythological or metaphorical figures) ...

Some of the other Jensen themes involve goobledegook of the first water, along the lines of Peace is our profession, or we had to destroy the village to save it, as Jenkins contemplates the notion of freedom and recoils in horror:

... the inability of human beings to exercise the freedom they have is a sign itself of the judgement of God – his ‘giving of them over’ to their own desires. The New Testament gospel of justification by faith (see Galatians) is the arrival of a new freedom in the service of a Lord whose ‘service is perfect freedom’.

Put it another way, service as a slave is indeed perfect freedom, and it's a damn shame they got rid of the notion of slavery and eternal service. Why the entire civil war in the United States could have been avoided if only plantation owners had been allowed to explain that service is in fact perfect freedom.

Now you might think it a little odd that a patriarch might create a whole tribe of humanity - going on seven billion right at this moment - simply to offer perfect freedom through eternal service, slavery and dedicated worship (rather like an Egyptian pharoah) but there you go ...

So how is it that the pond has no-one, not even Beulah, to peel it a grape?

Well it wouldn't be a proper Sydney Anglican piece without the matter of gender raising its ugly head.

You see, there's all this anxiety and nervousness that's been induced in stout-hearted Christian men by all this feminist nonsense. Not that we want to go back to the 1950s, not when we could go back to 1960:

... the tension between the genders set in train with the fall is mitigated by the gospel of Jesus Christ which calls men to use their natural power advantage in loving and sacrificial service to the extent that Christ did; and women to let them.

Yep, that bloody Eve and the serpent and the damn apple, and it's all been downhill ever since, and the only way out is to for men to use "their natural power advantage", and for the hapless, helpless, insidious, devious, passive women to let them use "their natural power advantage".

After all, it's the only way for women to achieve forgiveness for the way that first damned, serpent worshipping, apple lusting woman set in train the fall and the explusion ...

Happily there was one malcontent in the comments section:

It would appear that the genders are valued equally in God's sight, yet one gender is more equal than the other (apologies to G.Orwell).

Theological andrology apology?

Very droll reader Grant Hayes, and with a bit of luck, Michael Jenkins might have rushed off to the wiki to read up on Andrology.

Or maybe not.

Whatever, the Sydney Anglican pages remain a remarkable read, and provide a reminder that just at the end of King Street in Newtown - just a hop skip and a jump from the pond - there are people who still believe in a real Adam, and all the consequences for men and women in relation to sex and sexuality (and love pain happiness and the whole damn thing), and dress it up as theological anthropology ...

Wonders, as we note on the pond all the time, never cease ...

(Below: oh dear, you can see where all this naked cavorting lusty flesh might lead, but here no spoilers, no spoilers here. Click to enlarge).