Thursday Theology #452
February 8, 2007
Topic: Book review: "Cross Examinations: Readings on the Meaning of the Cross Today"
Colleagues,
[I thought I'd get around to ruminating on last week's wingding Crossings
conference for this week's ThTh post. But not yet. Just this a.m. we took the
last of our five international guests to the airport--all of them having
crashed with us--so now first we can breathe. Tomorrow, perhaps, think. Next
Thursday, maybe . . . . However while we regenerate at our place, the conference
committee--cyber-savvy all of them--is blogging up a storm of follow-up stuff.
If they don't tell you directly before next Thursday about that, I'll try to
clue you in.]
Today's posting is a book review, the work of William L. Yancey, pastor at
Bethel Lutheran Church in University City (suburban St. Louis), Missouri. Our
family has been part of the Bethel congregation for 36 years. That means that
Bill is our pastor. He's a Seminex grad and also did his doctorate in
systematic theology at Seminex. He's a wordsmith--both here and in his
preaching--and also a thoughtful theologian in both arenas. Read on and see for yourself.
Peace and Joy!
Ed Schroeder
Cross Examinations: Readings on the Meaning of the Cross Today.
Marit A. Trelstad (Editor).
Minneapolis, Fortress Press.
Paperback. 336 pages.
Online price $20.00
In Cross Examinations, a collection of articles that explores the meaning of
the cross in today's context, Editor Marit Trelstad, Assistant Professor of
Religion at the Pacific Lutheran University, describes a pendulum swinging away
from an emphasis on atonement for personal sins toward an understanding of
"the cross, atonement, and salvation" from a perspective "of live, pressing
social issues." The writers make no claim that Christ atones only for the massive
social structures of sin, such as racism and sexism, but that socially
organized systems of death must not be ignored in a fuller understanding of God's
action in Jesus. An exclusive focus on individual sin and salvation permits the
social manifestations of evil to work their destruction unchallenged.
Without critique, the perpetuation of unjust social systems is encouraged, and the
truth of the cross is twisted to support historical systems of oppression.
Writers in this volume critique traditional atonement theories: "ransom" to
the devil; Anselm's "satisfaction" for the injured honor of God; Abelard's "
moral" example of love; the reformer's "substitution" of Jesus for us for
sin; Aulén's Christus Victor (warrior) over sin and death. Because these
atonement theories necessarily mirror their historical context, they often prove
inadequate for contemporary times. Worse, structures of systemic oppression
have co-opted these older theories, coercing victims to accept passively
self-denigration and victimization. From this perspective "the cross" can be used to
support systems that perpetuate suffering.
Womanist theologians especially note the tendency of traditional atonement
theories to sacralize victimage and suffering. They note that women of color
have historically experienced the structural overlay of racism upon gender
oppression. Specifically, black women have been made to bear sexual, economic, and
racial oppression and endure death itself on behalf of the dominant culture.
The technical term used to name the black woman's lived reality of passive
suffering is "surrogacy." Womanist writers reject any use of the cross to
justify surrogacy and oppression at the hands of abusive individuals or
structures. An oft-cited example is the idea that an abused woman should "bear her
cross," that is, stay in an abusive situation for the sake of maintaining "the
relationship."
Current attention to forms of oppression such as racism and sexism emphasize
theoretical understandings, such as liberation, that promote release from
victimage and make self-acceptance possible.
Within the theme of liberation, the pendulum swings towards human agency and
resistance to evil. James Poling, for example, "raises to ontological status
human resistance to evil," suggesting that resistance to death is in human
beings' true nature, reflecting God's will embodied in Jesus to resist death and
bring life through the experience of repaired relationships. The cross, then,
represents resistance to evil and Jesus' solidarity with victims.
Other authors in this volume question the idea that Jesus' death is an
acceptable sacrifice for a debt owed to God. Womanist theologian Delores S.
Williams states that "[h]umankind is...redeemed through Jesus' life and not through
Jesus' death." Rosemary Carbine clarifies in her article "Contextualizing the
Cross for the Sake of Subjectivity" why atonement theories should move away
from placing singular emphasis upon Jesus' death: Disconnecting Jesus' death
from its historical and theological context, namely from the whole of his life
and ministry, risks idealizing a victim identity and losing active agency in
confronting sin in its historical context. Furthermore, in an atonement
system in which a death seems to be demanded, God becomes an "avenger," (see J.
Denny Weaver), even an "abuser."
The problem is solved, according to writers like Carbine, by paying attention
to Jesus' whole ministry. By focusing upon Jesus' resistance to contextual
forms of death and oppression in his life and ministry, that is, by
underscoring Jesus' absolute intention to bring life to all whom he encountered as a
complete articulation of God's will for him, the cross is reclaimed as a
life-giving symbol and reality. Carbine sees the truth of the cross as the in-breaking
of the future realm of God. Eschatology calls for a new world, one in which
Jesus' followers risk suffering, rather than passively endure oppression.
A movement toward a wholistic understanding of Jesus' ministry reflects
another theological trend or recovery, namely, the emphasis upon the "relational"
nature of salvation. In fact, in this edition, the concept of relationship
emerges as the fundamental understanding of atonement. Mary J. Streufert writes
that, "[r]elationship, as the heart of life, indeed, as the heart of the
gospel itself, saves." James N. Poling sees the encounter with the living Christ
who enters humankind's historical story as part of a "relational web"
(emphasis mine) that transforms the individual. Trelstad imagines a relational model
as a "parental model of love or grace," God's free gift of life-giving
relationship with humankind. Salvation is the "human-divine relation" reconciled.
German theologian Jürgen Moltmann also argues for a relational theology and
understanding of atonement. He begins, however, from an analysis of
"suffering" as the fundamental relational moment. In the midst of suffering, and most
clearly upon the cross, Jesus related completely to humankind in the very
depths of suffering places where no one else can find us. Christ relates most
deeply to us and for us in the passion. Moltmann's emphasis upon the profoundly
relational quality of Christ's suffering distinguishes him from other European
theologians. This distinction is fascinatingly highlighted in a posthumous
exchange with Catholic theologian Karl Rahner, who with his disciple Johann
Baptist Metz argues against such a passionate God and for a Deus impassibilis.
For Moltmann, such a characterization suggests a deity disconnected from
humanity and incapable of offering real comfort.
A relational concept of atonement also plays into responses to Martin
Luther's theology. Mary J. Streufert claims that Luther's theology of the cross
relies upon a sacrificial paradigm (the sacrifice of a hero) in which Luther's
"happy exchange" seems more like a legal transaction than an impacting,
transforming relationship. While acknowledging the divide between contemporary
feminist theologians and Luther, Deanna A. Thompson argues compellingly that
Luther's theology is deeply relational. She offers an insightful explanation of what
it means for Jesus to become sin for humankind: Jesus meets humans in the
depths of their need. The cross becomes the image and reality of God in Jesus.
Following Gerhard Forde, Thompson understands Luther's famous pro me assertion
concerning Jesus' actions to mean standing "on our behalf" not "instead of
us." By choosing to be in relation with us, Jesus bears all for us. Thompson
calls this a model of deep friendship as opposed to a forensic model of
payment for a debt owed.
Mary M. Solberg claims that "Luther understood theology to be relational at
its heart," moving him to be concerned with how human beings live in
relationship with others. One understands who God is by Jesus' relational connection to
the poor and lost. Failure and culpability are confronted in this relational
connection to Jesus. All are called to a "responsive accountability" to
stand in solidarity with the "excluded." In the context of a relationship with
Jesus and neighbor, humankind recognizes failed relationships with God and
others: We stand coram deo and coram mundo, individually and corporately
convicted, having opposed God's will and having oppressed the one whom God sent.
Having come to give life, Jesus experiences death all around him. His experience
underscores that his life was not simply a "lead-up" to the cross event, but
rather that all the events of his life were marked by the cross. There was
never a moment when Jesus failed to resist sin, death, and the devil in all their
individual and corporate forms.
In Cross Examinations, the Gospel of John implicitly emerges as the
fundamental scriptural resource for critique of atonement theories based on an
understanding of death as a payment to a vindictive God. The reviewer offers two
observations. First, the Gospel of John emphasizes Jesus' announcement that he has
come to give life, as opposed to the synoptic Gospels' emphasis on the
prediction of Jesus' death. Second, John's gospel is more conversational and
relational. Unlike the synoptics in which the realm of God is often read as a
place, in John's gospel the realm of new life is a conversation in which the
dialogue partners with Jesus radically "believe into" him and his new reality.
In a relational understanding of atonement, and in critique of the notion
that Jesus was sent to die, traditional language of "sacrifice" also falls under
suspicion: either God is an avenger, or powerless people are encouraged "to
sacrifice" their agency and personhood to abusers. In an insightful article,
Mark S. Heim, relying on the recent work of the literary critic René Girard,
argues that Jesus was indeed a sacrifice in the sense that since the beginning
of history scapegoats have been killed to placate humankind's violent nature
and maintain social order. But Jesus' death was the sacrifice to end all
sacrifice, to renounce all violence, to restore all victims. Heim claims that the
"kind" of death Jesus died, that is death on the cross, makes a difference.
Any other death is simply the sound of inevitability. Jesus' death is our death
as we are the ones who sacrifice and who are sacrificed. Only a death on a
cross can be effective, not because God demands extreme suffering, but because
this death is uniquely ours both in cause and victimage. Jesus' death on the
cross puts an end to it all. Heim's analysis of sacrifice language echoes
Moltmann's assertion that the cross of Christ ended sacrificial religion "once
for all."
The articles in Cross Examinations attend to another pressing social concern,
an ecological understanding of God's work. Cynthia Moe-Lobeda asks, "What
suffers more these days than our own planet?" In "A Theology of the Cross
for the 'Uncreators'" she calls us to think of the earth itself as being
crucified, and for humanity to understand sin as actions that undo God's creation.
Attention to the creation concomitantly attends to the oppressed and lost
because they are the human casualties of economic policies that wreak havoc on
the environment. (On this topic, see also the article by Jay McDaniel.)
This collection of articles describes the cross not as an isolated reality,
but rather as reflective of the life Jesus lived and came to bring. In
bringing good news and the realm of God to all people, especially the lost, Jesus
lived a cruciform existence, rejecting all offers of power that depended upon the
oppression of others. He accepted the consequences of standing with those
who endured the devastation of being devalued and deemed unworthy of God's
acceptance and love. Jesus stands in divine relationship with all in need and
calls the powerful to repent of actions contrary to God's will to care for all of
humanity and creation. Inasmuch as the cross marks Jesus' entire life, it is
the will of God. God's will for us is that Jesus find us where we suffer,
never permitting suffering to deflect him from God's will to bring life.
Finally, these articles describe the cross as a paradoxical image, a
simultaneity of contraries. Jesus willingly goes to the cross to find the lost, driven
there by the forces of death, in which all participate. The very place to
which he has been driven becomes the place from which he restores. The cross
simultaneously serves as an image of individual and systemic sin. It symbolizes
the violence by which political systems maintain order and also stands as a
symbol of particular victims and individual participation in systems of
violence. Because human beings have driven Jesus to the cross, he becomes sin for
us, "pro nobis," not to assuage God, but to change us. We cannot be
transformed until we stand before the cross, which tells us the truth of ourselves: we
have opposed God and driven Jesus in a deadly way to the cross. From the
cross we are embraced in the new truth that transforms our existence. We are
transformed by Jesus standing with us and forgiving us. Because the articles are
more victim- than sin-oriented, the authors only thinly reference
forgiveness-a notable omission because forgiveness is a deeply relational and
transformative reality in either understanding.
This volume also has implications for the concept of faith. (See particularly
Alice Vargas, "Reading Ourselves Into the Cross Story.") The wholistic
approach corrects an exclusive emphasis on Jesus' death that distances human life
from Jesus' life, rendering faith an abstract event hardly involving the
believer. Looking at the entirety of Jesus' life and ministry reveals not only the
truth of Christ but also the truth of ourselves. Consequently, Paul's call to
die daily to sin and rise to new life makes experiential sense, and faith
becomes a transformative force in the world. Jesus is really present in daily
life, not a supernatural ideal.
Salvation, then, is relational, not substitutionary. Jesus' complete
ministry--his life, death, resurrection-- is one of relating to humankind in the most
extreme circumstances. Faith, a deep trust in the one who relates completely
to us and brings life, is no passive event, but an event of agency in which
we confess the truth of ourselves and cling to the one who finds us and
forgives our worst and most deadly moments. Then, called to agency by the Holy
Spirit, we are empowered to resist death wherever we encounter it.
William L. Yancey, pastor
Bethel Lutheran Church
St. Louis, Missouri