Jesus' Deviance Approach

        Throughout the Gospel narratives the view of Jesus may be interpreted as a person who acted as a positive deviant. What these few select events represent is a perspective of Jesus as a positive deviant within first century Judaic culture. The evidence of this labeling of Jesus as a deviant is the disapproval that was leveled against him by the Pharisees, the scribes and the Chief Priests, those who appear in the narrative to have social position and power to directly affect the lives of the marginalized. Sullivan and Thompson assert, “A key element of the sociological approach to deviance is that it is a function of the judgments of particular groups. Behaviors and characteristics are deviant because they are so defined by a particular group.”[1] The Judaic culture demonstrates the sociological markers that determine the acceptance or rejection of the practices and strategies of Jesus.

            Jesus’ practices and strategies went against the prevailing status quo. The inclusion of Gentiles in the eschatological visitation of God, table fellowship with those whom the general culture deems as unacceptable and attributing Jesus’ ability to cast out demons as originating from a demonic source are just a few examples of how Judaic culture considered Jesus to be a deviant. Sullivan and Thompson write,

Some people approach deviance in an absolute way, judging certain behaviors and characteristics to be good or bad and right or wrong by comparing them to some fixed standards. Religious views of deviance, for example, often reflect this approach, with some divinely revealed truth representing the ‘standard.’[2]

Jesus’ most dramatic examples of positive deviance challenged the Judaic cultural norms involve his use of social space. In each instance cited in this study the practices and strategies of Jesus take place in social space and exhibit his use of social power. Jesus’ practices and strategies in each of these events create a redemptive environment and the restoration of the marginalized. Concerning Jesus’ use of social space, Morse writes, “The purpose of ‘taking up space’ is not to enhance or secure one’s personal influence, but to enhance the influence and well-being of those who need redemption or restoration, whether individual or cultural.”[3] Jesus’ use of proxemics in social spaces throughout the Gospels appears to bring redemption and restoration for individuals and groups.

            The positive deviance practices and strategies Jesus exercised were for the express purpose of creating an environment of change by subverting the status quo. The subverting of the status quo was accomplished through upsetting the equilibrium in the traditional social spaces amid the Judaic community. This subversion creates tension for the community’s orthodoxies resulting in undesirable consequences for the stakeholders whom Jesus challenged. Jesus challenged the issue of cultural imperialism.[4] Therefore, by following Jesus’ practices and strategies, through challenging the cultural imperialism of the modern contemporary and institutional church, allows the church to engage marginalized people and groups by creating redemptive and restorative environments. Through these environments marginalized people may experience their humanity, gain acceptance and value as part of the community elevating stigmas, but not removing them from connecting within their culture. Through the Gospels narratives the early church was saturated with Jesus’ practices and strategies. What can be concluded is that the practices and strategies of Jesus intuitively reflect the Positive Deviance Approach. Jesus worked from within his context, the Judaic culture, in order to effect change within the Judaic culture. He did this through the use of the resources available in order to help create a new identity for the marginalized people. His practices and strategies where distinctive and challenged the traditional and conventional wisdom of the Judaic culture. His practices and strategies laid a foundation for a sustainable movement. Finally, Jesus challenged his followers to act into a new way of thinking rather than think their way into a new way of acting by inviting his disciples to follow his example. Jesus was essentially a practitioner of the Positive Deviance Approach.

The direction the early church would engage, emulating the practices and strategies of Jesus, eventually would lead to the subversion of an exclusive Judaic Christianity. The next chapter of this paper will show the early church’s practices and strategies were based in following the Jesus’ modeling and how they were able to practice contextualization as the normative practice amid the Gentiles.

---

[1] Sullivan, Sociology--Concepts, Issues, and Applications, 143.

[2] Ibid.

[3] Morse, “Jesus’ Use of Social Power in Honour-Shame Conflicts - Crucible 1-2 October 2008.pdf,” 8.

[4] Cultural imperialism is the overlaying of a one culture over another culture in order to obliterate the underlying culture, Ray Sherman Anderson, An Emergent Theology for Emerging Churches (InterVarsity Press, 2006), 55.