Looking at Razie Mah’s  (2015) A Primer on How Institutions Think  (Part 16 of 24)

0097 The sixth primer introduces the contenta level of the societyC tier, while discussing the family.

The seventh primer develops a general picture of institutionsaC by reviewing a book, by anthropologist Mary Douglas, titled How Institutions Think (1986).

0098 Here is a diagram for the institutionaC.

Figure 33

The normal context of institution3aC brings the actuality of organizational objects2aC into relation with the potential of righteousness1aC.

0099 From A Primer on the Family, I know several things.

Institutions3aC put the organizationB tier into perspective.

The organization’s objects2aC address the individual in communityA and call him and her to participate in a proper organizationaB.

0100 The interplay between the societyC, the organizationB and individual in communityA tiers is complicated.  So, the primer is fairly long.

Plus, the seventh primer ends with a challenge.  Can the category-based nested form apply to the trial of Jesus in the Gospel of John, verses 18:28 through 19:23?

0101 Here, I attempt an application.  First, I associate elements of the theodrama to the nested form.  Second, I discuss some implications.

0102 Here is the story.

In John 18:33-35, Pontius Pilate, disappointed that the crowd outside the praetorium lobbies for executing Jesus, comes back into the praetorium and asks the Son of Man, “Are you king of the Jews?”

Jesus asks Pilate.  What are those outside saying about me?

Pilate replies that they want you (Jesus) to be executed.  So Pilate asks again.  Are you (Jesus) claiming to be king of the Jews?”

I pause.

0103 Does any of this associate to the normal context of institution3aC?

Those outside the praetorium belong to one institution, the Jewish temple authorities.

Those inside belong to another institution, the Roman authorities.

Obviously, Jesus belongs to neither of these two institutions.

0104 One organizational object2aC is held in common by these two institutions3aC.

Jesus is being positioned as an organizational object2aC that serves as a site of contention.  Roman authority does not permit the Jews to establish a king.  But, the religious leaders claim that Jesus regards himself as the king of the Jews. Therefore, Jesus has broken Roman law and must be executed.

So. the objectorg2aC is the king of the Jews.

Figure 34

0105 What associates to righteousness1aC?

I suppose that the normal context of the Jewish temple3aC brings the king of the Jews2aC into relation with the possibility that a king would defend his people against the occupying Roman forces1aC.

Also, the normal context of Roman authority3aC brings the king of the Jews2aC into relation with the potential that a Jewish king would lead a rebellion1aC.

0106 I continue.

In John 18:36-37, Jesus answers Pilate’s question.  Jesus’s kingdom is not of this world.  He is here to bear witness to the truth.

So, the righteousness1aC underlying the purported claim that “Jesus is king of the Jews”2aC does not support the normal contexts3aC.

Figure 35

0107 Implications?

Well, one obvious take home point is that neither normal context applies to Jesus.  Jesus stands above both temple and empire.  His kingdom is outside the earthly realms.  Yet, here He is, about to be executed as a worldly king, when clearly He is not.