Julia M. O’Brien. <i>Prophets Beyond Activism: Rethinking the Prophetic Roots of Social Justice</i>

Julia M. O’Brien challenges what she calls the “progressive orthodoxy,” namely, that the Hebrew prophets were “forthtellers not fortetellers,” individual champions of social justice who raged against structural injustice. O’Brien is convinced that “the progressive orthodoxy . . . does not serve us or our planet well” (p. 130); it does not result from a careful reading of the prophets and, “more importantly, silences the voices of diverse people, too often perpetuating injustice in the name of social justice” (p. 3). O’Brien seeks through this work to promote better readings of the prophets and greater justice for humanity. She advocates for justice and dialogue across traditions and orthodoxies.O’Brien, a self-proclaimed progressive Christan, writes not as an outsider but to her own tribe. She was trained and continues to operate as a rationalist (p. 2). She has worshipped and taught in progressive Christian circles, and the legacies that birthed the progressive orthodoxy continue to influence her work (p. 65). Nonetheless, O’Brien is not content to allow the progressive orthodoxy to continue to offer caricatures of the prophets.The book is divided into two parts. In the first, O’Brien demonstrates why the progressive orthodoxy does not reflect the prophetic texts. In the second, she discusses several justice issues, showing how the orthodoxy (mis)reads texts from Amos, Micah, Jeremiah, and Isaiah in light of these issues. She then provides an alternative reading.In chapter 1, O’Brien argues that the historical contexts of the prophetic books upend several aspects of the orthodoxy. First, in the ancient world and in the Hebrew Bible, the prophets were indeed seen as foretellers. They used intuitive and indictive divination to understand and predict what would happen in the future. In the HB, accurate predictions were a test of true prophecy. Second, although the prophetic books present the prophets as individuals, the books were redacted over time. This process was likely completed in the postexilic community. The prophetic books offer retrospective theology, an explanation of why the nations of Israel and Judah fell and a defense of Yhwh in letting this happen.Chapter 2 turns to literary and readerly concerns. O’Brien argues that prophetic poetry is deliberately ambiguous. Thus, reconstructions of the historical referents and situations to which the prophets speak must be put forth with humility. In addition, the plethora of newer methodologies and perspectives have shown that the prophets do not advocate justice for all.In chapter 3, O’Brien traces the development of the progressive orthodoxy through the enlightenment, the rise of biblical criticism, the spread of German biblical scholarship, and through the social gospel. In chapter 4, she evaluates the legacy of the orthodoxy.In chapters 5 and 6, O’Brien focuses on economic justice and systemic oppression, respectively. In both chapters, she highlights Amos’s and Micah’s ambiguity in the language about justice. These books do not clearly describe who are “the poor,” the specific mechanisms of injustice and oppression, or a clear vision for justice (mishpat). As a result, interpreters fill in the gaps and apply these books in a variety of ways, some of which are contradictory. Furthermore, she argues that often those who tote Amos and Micah as paragons of social justice ignore that the God of Amos and Micah executes harsh judgment, often through war, which inevitably results in more suffering for the poor! Therefore, the picture of these prophets as “social activists” is inaccurate.In chapter 7, O’Brien argues that the vision of justice in Isa 2, 58, and 61 is not as inclusive as social activists often assume. Rather, these passages speak to a future for Jerusalem after judgment, and the beneficiary of the restoration is a limited group within Judah, those deemed “YHWH’s servants” (p. 96). O’Brien suggests activists would be wise to read these passages with an eye toward the pain of the postexilic community in which the texts reached their final form.In chapter 8, O’Brien discusses Jeremiah as the quintessential individual prophetic voice and argues that a trauma-informed methodology is more fruitful for interpretation. Finally, in chapter 9, O’Brien addresses the climate crisis, arguing that the creation care models that prioritize stewardship are not up to the task of combating the crisis.This work has several strengths. First, O’Brien challenges simplistic readings that gloss over or ignore complexities (e.g., God’s judgment, p. 124). Second, this work speaks both to and beyond the guild. She challenges interpreters of every stripe to move past slogans and caricatures of the prophets and of people from other orthodoxies. In a polarized time, this is an important call. O’Brien models how one can graciously challenge one’s own tribe without becoming a “traitor” or compromising core values. O’Brien calls for honesty and humility in interpretation from all sides, arguing that in doing so the door is opened for dialogue. Third, O’Brien frequently asks readers to allow themselves to be addressed by the prophets. She argues that those invested in the work of justice should investigate their own visions of justice and blind spots in light of the prophetic critiques.There are also several weaknesses. A passion for “justice” motivates O’Brien throughout the book; however, there is no clear definition of “justice” nor a description of how one might arrive at a definition. She notes that the prophets are vague in their pictures of justice and readers and activists often come to the text with their own visions of justice. How might one adjudicate between competing visions? Moreover, she also notes that in the public square, appeals to justice should begin with social scientific analysis and only as a second step identify resonances in the Bible. Left unaddressed is where visions of justice should come from. Can the Bible also play a role in shaping people’s moral vision?Finally, O’Brien shows convincingly that poetic prophecy is often ambiguous. Prophet-poets use metaphors and puns, their language is frequently allusive, and they often do not give enough detail to clearly determine who causes injustice. O’Brien rightfully argues that interpreters should recognize that they must fill in gaps to reconstruct the ancient contexts. O’Brien’s appreciation of the literary nature of prophetic poetry is needed! However, the reader is left wondering if it is possible to know anything; is it really the case that “prophetic poetry is affective rather than effective” (p. 34)? Or is this a false dichotomy? O’Brien does come to some conclusions about what the prophets do and do not say. Thus, interpreters can make some conclusions.All in all, this book is stimulating and well written. O’Brien effectively challenges the “progressive orthodoxy” and advocates for better readings of the prophets.