Jesus the Crucified and Resurrected Lord Part 1
A friend recently asked me whether I align myself more with the “theology of the cross” or the “theology of glory.” Not really understanding what he meant by either of those terms, I asked for a clarification. The “theology of the cross,” as he explained it, is an understanding of our life now, primarily understood in terms of dying to the flesh, to sin, etc. Our lives now are primarily cruciform in shape and our main task is to be conformed to the Messiah in the likeness of His death, while being conformed to the likeness of His resurrection awaits us in the age to come. The “theology of glory,” as he explained it, would emphasize the present tense dimensions of the power of the resurrection in which the cross mostly lies behind us as the once-and-for-all payment for and defeat of sin. Our lives now are primarily to live in the victory of the resurrection and move “from glory to glory” (2 Cor. 3:18) and “from strength to strength” (Ps. 84:7).
I seem to think that both approaches have shortcomings which if taken to far could quickly become altogether different from that to which the biblical texts witness. The deficiencies of the “theology of glory” are readily recognized by a postmodern society strongly reacting to centuries of oppression, power games and imperialistic rhetoric, in addition to whenever residue of such is seen surfacing in contemporary society. My fear is that a “theology of glory,” which from my (albeit limited) perspective translates to a “praxis of victory” may leave the weak, broken, suffering and afflicted behind, with a momentary wonder as to why they don’t “get it together,” “move on,” “walk in faith,” “live in victory,” etc. As I’ve run into this approach over the years, there seems to be little understanding of human pain, little expression of compassion, and general confusion as to why their instructions do not “fix” people.
While I believe that such a “theology of glory” could in fact be dangerous to the people of God, I do not believe a thorough-going “theology of the cross” leaves us in a much better place. Where all we do is conform to the Messiah’s death, there seems to be little or no expectation of or room for the startling newness of what Christ has already accomplished. The dramatic thrust of New Testament eschatology, where the future of God’s righteousness and justice rushes forward in the justification of the people of God becomes little more than the “forgiveness of sin” conceived in abstract categories. The justification of life in the Messiah is “not merely a gift that has been made manifest, but means also the power of the Giver which is at work in the life of the believer.” Justification, far from being mere relief to our guilt-anxiety complexes, is the beginning of return from humanity’s long exile of sin and death. In this dynamic work of God, we know can indeed “walk in newness of life” (Rom. 6:5) because “if anyone is the Messiah, the New Creation has come!” (2 Cor. 5:17). The future of God for the world has rushed forward into the present by Jesus the Messiah and is not to be interpreted merely in judicial or moralistic terms.
My fear is that a “theology of the cross” may too readily reconcile with sin, death, suffering and injustice, understanding it to be part of being conformed to the cross, while inadvertently being a shield from the deeper pain of wrestling with the contradictions between what God has promised and present reality as it exists and more difficult still, who God is as He says in His word and who we believe in by faith, and what present reality as it exists shows us God to be like. Far from accepting suffering and death the woman or man “who is justified begins to suffer under the contradiction of this world with which he [sic] has a bodily solidarity, for he must in obedience seek the divine righteousness in his body, on earth and in all creatures” (Jurgen Moltmann, Theology of Hope, p. 206). In light of the cross and the resurrection, our suffering is not an acceptance of all things that are, but a suffering in and against the realities of the fallen world in anticipation of God’s righteousness covering the earth when He comes.
Paul says in Romans 3:21, “But NOW…the righteousness of God has been made manifest,” that is God’s faithfulness to his covenant promises, the righteousness of God that will set all things right in the age to come is made manifest NOW. The “but now” indicates the presence of the future even in the midst what by all other indicators is still “the present evil age” (cf. Gal 1:4). This echoes what he said earlier in the letter to the Romans, that he is not ashamed of the gospel (see earlier entry “the Gospel of God” for clarification as to what I mean by this term) – why? – because it is in itself the power of God that brings salvation. The gospel, the declaration that Jesus is the crucified and resurrected Lord of the world, in itself, is the dynamic power that brings salvation—not security for my soul to float off to heaven when I die—but the restoration of all things, righteousness, peace, joy. life and freedom on the earth in fellowship with God when He comes here to reign forever. The proclamation is the power that brings those realities into the present tense, not in wishful thinking but in the sense that we can truly say “the reign (kingdom) of God is in your midst (Luke 17:21).
What I think may be coming out in what I am saying, is that, in my opinion, the problem with the theology and praxis of “glory” and “the cross” are at heart Christological. How do the crucifixion and resurrection relate, not only in our personal lives, but in the person of Jesus himself? To this question I will proceed in my next entry.
Related posts
Jesus the Crucified and Resurrected Lord Part 2 »
