He begins by reiterating the point that the drama we are participating in is ultimately comic, not tragic. Not funny comic, but comic in the sense that because of God's providence, we can trust that it will end well in Act 5, to continue using Sam Wells' metaphor from last week.
But as we live in Act 4, with its attendant suffering and brokenness, we need to dig a bit more deeply into providence not as an insurance policy against harm, but as a promise of provision and redemption. This flies in the face of the 'health and wealth' gospel that draws heavily on the verses which seem to promise blessing and protection. What do we do with these verses? Well, it seems that we ought to treat them in the same manner as we treat other parts of scripture: Read them in their context. The larger narrative paints a picture that includes not only these verses, but the story of Job.
So given the reality of the world, and our deep instinct to seek security in fearful surroundings, where do we go looking for it? Well, it seems clear that wealth, power and domination aren't the answer if we look even only superficially at scripture.There we find a "paradoxical reversal of strength and weakness" (93) that manifests itself most clearly in the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. But to place our security in a God whose power is vulnerable love? Seems sort of risky. It seems counter-intuitive almost to trust a God who seems silent in the face of evil. But as you can probably guess, Bader-Saye again has something to say about interpreting events that helps give voice to the silence.
He draws again on Sam Wells and his metaphor based on theatrical improvisation, which I really love. "In the lingo of improvisation, an actor can respond to an 'offer' (an action, speech or gesture) from another actor by 'accepting', 'blocking', or 'overaccepting'." (94) Accepting the offer is to play out the scene on the terms as given. To block is is to refuse the offer and "disrupt the scene in such a dramatic way that what follows has no coherence with what preceded." (94) To overaccept is to receive the offer, even an evil offer, but in a way that refuses take it on its own destructive terms.
The Genesis flood could be taken as an example of an act of blocking on the part of God, after which he promised to not 'block' humanity in such a way again. Joseph serves as an image of overacceptance by both he and God, taking the 'offer' of his brothers selling him into slavery and, rather than responding in violence, transforming the evil into a good in the larger narrative. Obviously, Christ again also presents to us the pinnacle of overacceptance, turning the evil of the cross into victory. In all of these stories, we see God refusing to 'block' the sin of humanity, but instead working through it to produce good. He redeems the situations and provides for the people within their own experience, even if not in the direct way they (and we) might initially choose.
So when faced with fear producing realities like, say, cancer, while we are powerless to fully 'block' the offer, we can choose to re-narrate and transform the event (and ourselves) by responding in trust to God. If we seek first the kingdom of God, making Him rather than security our primary goal, we can better meet life with courage in the face of fear.
Again I find these chapters on providence difficult to condense, so I hope that this makes some sort of sense. From here Bader-Saye moves to combating fear by risking hospitality, generosity and peacemaking.
Next week: The Risk of Hospitality
