"'On the cross, God stretched out his hands to embrace the ends of the earth,' said Cyril of Jerusalem. He invites the whole earth to understand his suffering and his hopes in the outstretched arms of the crucified Jesus and therefore in God. ... This symbol is an invitation to understand the Christ hanging on the cross as the 'outstretched' God of the Trinity." (P. 207)
Trinity, in an illuminated Italian manuscript by Christoforo Majorana, before 1491.
Chapter 6 engages the implications of the crucified Christ for the concept of God, the first of three "systematic" chapters to include anthropology (7) and church and society (8). Chapter 6 is like a small book unto itself, nine sections and 79 pages not including the end notes. I urge serious students of theology to consider the relevance of Moltmann's insights for contemporary questions of church and society. Does a flawed understanding of God and theology contribute to the suffering and oppression of our fellow humans, or distract us from an appropriate attentiveness to these realities in the human condition? I believe it is the case, and as such, I believe that there is no more serious task for students of theology, as well as pastors and leaders, than to apply ourselves to deep analysis of our understanding of God that is sufficient for our calling. To maintain the status quo in the face of suffering with an assumption that theology requires no critical analysis or revision is a dangerous complacency that is completely out of step with the humility of the crucified Christ.
We continue with selections from Jurgen Moltmann's 1974 work, The Crucified God.
"Over recent years, many Christians and theologians have been made uneasy by the controversy over the existence of God and belief in God. Long-familiar religious notions have been shattered, and many people feel disoriented when faced with the slogans "God is dead' and 'God cannot die." ... Behind the political and social crisis of the church, behind the growing crisis over the credibility of its public declarations and its institutional form, there lurks the christological question: Who really is Christ for us today? ... Rooted in the christological question about Jesus is ultimately the question about God. Which God motivates Christian faith: the crucified God or the gods of religion, race and class?" (200-201)
"The 'death of God' theology has at least been successful in compelling theologians to begin with christology and thus to speak of God for Jesus' sake, in other words to develop a particular theology within earshot of the dying cry of Jesus. The theological traditions have always considered the cross and the resurrection of Jesus within the horizon of soteriology. ... This is by no means false, but it is not radical enough. We must go on to ask: What does the cross of Jesus mean for God himself? 'Jesus died for God before he died for us', said Althaus in an ambiguous way, meaning that a serious fault of earlier Protestant theology was that it did not look at the cross in the context of the relationship of the Son to the Father, but related it directly to mankind as an expiatory death for sin. ... But how can the 'death of Jesus' be a statement about God? Does that not amount to a revolution in the concept of God? (201)
"When one considers the significance of the death of Jesus for God himself, one must enter into the inner-trinitarian tensions and relationships of God and speak of the Father, the Son and the Spirit. But if that is the case, it is inappropriate to talk simply of 'God' in connection with the Christ event. When one uses the phrase 'God in Christ', does it refer only to the Father, who abandons him and gives him up, or does it also refer to the Son who is abandoned and forsaken? The more one understands the whole event of the cross as an event of God, the more any simple concept of God falls apart. In epistemological terms ... one moves from the exterior of the mystery which is called 'God' to the interior, which is trinitarian. This is the 'revolution in the concept of God' which is manifested by the crucified Christ. But in that case, who or what is meant by 'God'?" (204)
"The death of Jesus on the cross is the centre of all Christian theology. It is not the only theme of theology, but is in effect the entry to its problems and answers on earth. All Christian statements about God, about creation, about sin and death ... about history, about the church, about faith and sanctification, about the future and about hope stem from the crucified Christ... In coming to terms with this Christ event, the christological tradition closely followed the Christ hymn in Philippians 2. It therefore understood the incarnation of the Son of God as his course towards the humiliation on the cross. The incarnation of the Logos is completed on the cross. Jesus is born to face his passion. his mission is fulfilled once he has been abandoned on the cross. So it is impossible to speak of an incarnation of God without keeping this conclusion in view. There can be no theology of the incarnation which does not become a theology of the cross." (204-205)
"When the crucified Jesus is called the 'image of the invisible God', the meaning is that this is God, and God is like this. God is not greater than he is in this humiliation. God is not more glorious than he is in this self-surrender. God is not more powerful than he is in this helplessness. God is not more divine than he is in this humanity. The nucleus of everything that Christian theology says about 'God' is to be found in this Christ event. The Christ event on the cross is a God event. And conversely, the God event takes place on the cross of the risen Christ. Here God has acted in himself and has gone on to suffer in himself. Here he himself is love with all his being. So ... christology which tries to think of the 'death of Jesus as the death of God', must take up the elements of truth which are to be found in kenoticism (the doctrine of God's emptying of himself). It cannot seek to maintain only a dialectical relationship between the divine being and human being, leaving each of these unaffected; in its own way the divine being must encompass the human being and vice versa. That means that it must understand the event of the cross in God's being in both trinitarian and personal terms. In contrast to the traditional doctrine of the two natures in the person of Christ, it must begin from the totality of the person of Christ and understand the relationship of the death of the Son to the Father and the Spirit." (205-206)
"The 'mystical theology' of the Eastern church, unrestricted by the doctrine of the two natures by which God and man are distinguished, could go further here and say: 'The kenosis ... and the work of the incarnate Son is the work of the entire most holy Trinity, from which Christ cannot be separated. (quoting A. Lossky) But if the kenosis of the Son to the point of death upon the cross is the revelation of the entire Trinity, this event too can only be presented as a God-event in trinitarian terms. What happens on the cross manifests the relationships of Jesus, the Son, to the Father, and vice versa. The cross and its liberating effect makes possible the movement of the Spirit from the Father to us. The cross stands at the heart of the trinitarian being of God; it divides and conjoins the persons in their relationships to each other and portrays them in a specific way. For as we said, the theological dimension of the death of Jesus on the cross is what happens between Jesus and his Father in the spirit of abandonment and surrender." (206-207)
"Most previous statements about 'the death of 'God' have lacked a dimension, the trinitarian dimensison. 'On the cross, God stretched out his hands to embrace the ends of the earth,' said Cyril of Jerusalem. This is a symbolic expression. He invites the whole earth to understand his suffering and his hopes in the outstretched arms of the crucified Jesus and therefore in God. ... This symbol is an invitation to understand the Christ hanging on the cross as the 'outstretched' God of the Trinity." (207)
To be continued.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Jurgen Moltmann. The Crucified God. 1974. Harper & Rowe, Publishers. (First Fortress Press edition published in 1993.)
Chapter 6 engages the implications of the crucified Christ for the concept of God, the first of three "systematic" chapters to include anthropology (7) and church and society (8). Chapter 6 is like a small book unto itself, nine sections and 79 pages not including the end notes. I urge serious students of theology to consider the relevance of Moltmann's insights for contemporary questions of church and society. Does a flawed understanding of God and theology contribute to the suffering and oppression of our fellow humans, or distract us from an appropriate attentiveness to these realities in the human condition? I believe it is the case, and as such, I believe that there is no more serious task for students of theology, as well as pastors and leaders, than to apply ourselves to deep analysis of our understanding of God that is sufficient for our calling. To maintain the status quo in the face of suffering with an assumption that theology requires no critical analysis or revision is a dangerous complacency that is completely out of step with the humility of the crucified Christ.
We continue with selections from Jurgen Moltmann's 1974 work, The Crucified God.
"Over recent years, many Christians and theologians have been made uneasy by the controversy over the existence of God and belief in God. Long-familiar religious notions have been shattered, and many people feel disoriented when faced with the slogans "God is dead' and 'God cannot die." ... Behind the political and social crisis of the church, behind the growing crisis over the credibility of its public declarations and its institutional form, there lurks the christological question: Who really is Christ for us today? ... Rooted in the christological question about Jesus is ultimately the question about God. Which God motivates Christian faith: the crucified God or the gods of religion, race and class?" (200-201)
"The 'death of God' theology has at least been successful in compelling theologians to begin with christology and thus to speak of God for Jesus' sake, in other words to develop a particular theology within earshot of the dying cry of Jesus. The theological traditions have always considered the cross and the resurrection of Jesus within the horizon of soteriology. ... This is by no means false, but it is not radical enough. We must go on to ask: What does the cross of Jesus mean for God himself? 'Jesus died for God before he died for us', said Althaus in an ambiguous way, meaning that a serious fault of earlier Protestant theology was that it did not look at the cross in the context of the relationship of the Son to the Father, but related it directly to mankind as an expiatory death for sin. ... But how can the 'death of Jesus' be a statement about God? Does that not amount to a revolution in the concept of God? (201)
"When one considers the significance of the death of Jesus for God himself, one must enter into the inner-trinitarian tensions and relationships of God and speak of the Father, the Son and the Spirit. But if that is the case, it is inappropriate to talk simply of 'God' in connection with the Christ event. When one uses the phrase 'God in Christ', does it refer only to the Father, who abandons him and gives him up, or does it also refer to the Son who is abandoned and forsaken? The more one understands the whole event of the cross as an event of God, the more any simple concept of God falls apart. In epistemological terms ... one moves from the exterior of the mystery which is called 'God' to the interior, which is trinitarian. This is the 'revolution in the concept of God' which is manifested by the crucified Christ. But in that case, who or what is meant by 'God'?" (204)
"The death of Jesus on the cross is the centre of all Christian theology. It is not the only theme of theology, but is in effect the entry to its problems and answers on earth. All Christian statements about God, about creation, about sin and death ... about history, about the church, about faith and sanctification, about the future and about hope stem from the crucified Christ... In coming to terms with this Christ event, the christological tradition closely followed the Christ hymn in Philippians 2. It therefore understood the incarnation of the Son of God as his course towards the humiliation on the cross. The incarnation of the Logos is completed on the cross. Jesus is born to face his passion. his mission is fulfilled once he has been abandoned on the cross. So it is impossible to speak of an incarnation of God without keeping this conclusion in view. There can be no theology of the incarnation which does not become a theology of the cross." (204-205)
"When the crucified Jesus is called the 'image of the invisible God', the meaning is that this is God, and God is like this. God is not greater than he is in this humiliation. God is not more glorious than he is in this self-surrender. God is not more powerful than he is in this helplessness. God is not more divine than he is in this humanity. The nucleus of everything that Christian theology says about 'God' is to be found in this Christ event. The Christ event on the cross is a God event. And conversely, the God event takes place on the cross of the risen Christ. Here God has acted in himself and has gone on to suffer in himself. Here he himself is love with all his being. So ... christology which tries to think of the 'death of Jesus as the death of God', must take up the elements of truth which are to be found in kenoticism (the doctrine of God's emptying of himself). It cannot seek to maintain only a dialectical relationship between the divine being and human being, leaving each of these unaffected; in its own way the divine being must encompass the human being and vice versa. That means that it must understand the event of the cross in God's being in both trinitarian and personal terms. In contrast to the traditional doctrine of the two natures in the person of Christ, it must begin from the totality of the person of Christ and understand the relationship of the death of the Son to the Father and the Spirit." (205-206)
"The 'mystical theology' of the Eastern church, unrestricted by the doctrine of the two natures by which God and man are distinguished, could go further here and say: 'The kenosis ... and the work of the incarnate Son is the work of the entire most holy Trinity, from which Christ cannot be separated. (quoting A. Lossky) But if the kenosis of the Son to the point of death upon the cross is the revelation of the entire Trinity, this event too can only be presented as a God-event in trinitarian terms. What happens on the cross manifests the relationships of Jesus, the Son, to the Father, and vice versa. The cross and its liberating effect makes possible the movement of the Spirit from the Father to us. The cross stands at the heart of the trinitarian being of God; it divides and conjoins the persons in their relationships to each other and portrays them in a specific way. For as we said, the theological dimension of the death of Jesus on the cross is what happens between Jesus and his Father in the spirit of abandonment and surrender." (206-207)
"Most previous statements about 'the death of 'God' have lacked a dimension, the trinitarian dimensison. 'On the cross, God stretched out his hands to embrace the ends of the earth,' said Cyril of Jerusalem. This is a symbolic expression. He invites the whole earth to understand his suffering and his hopes in the outstretched arms of the crucified Jesus and therefore in God. ... This symbol is an invitation to understand the Christ hanging on the cross as the 'outstretched' God of the Trinity." (207)
To be continued.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Jurgen Moltmann. The Crucified God. 1974. Harper & Rowe, Publishers. (First Fortress Press edition published in 1993.)