Ecology and the Theology of the Cross: A continuation of a study on the Theology of the Cross

Jürgen Moltmann, author of the book “The Crucified God,” begins his book by explaining “the cross is not and cannot be love.” Moreover, he further notes that “only the crucified Christ can bring the freedom which changes the world because it no longer afraid of death.”1 The cross was a method of torture, humiliation, and murder and it is here that Jesus’ revealed his glory to the world. In the first paper, a summary was given about the two theologies by mainly focusing on the work of Gerhard Forde. The relevancy of a theology of the cross can still be debated. We live in a post modern-world where scientific fact is valued more than religion or philosophy. It is for this reason that a more in depth comparison study is needed between contemporary theologies and a theology of the cross. The Theology of the Cross is still relevant in the church today especially when view through Ecological theology.

First we must begin by looking at the historical context of Eco-theology. The cross is at the center of any credible Christian Theology. It has come to define the faith of Christians, but not always in the same way. For any theologian, whether they be an Ecologist or a Liberationist theologian, “the cross either offends rationality or becomes a tool to perpetuate an anemic will and a slave-like disposition.”2 The interpretation of the cross is a complicated debate in the church today. Each group holds a different interpretation of the cross and the crucifixion. For some, the cross is a gruesome sign of torture and is avoided at all cost, while others see the boldness “of a god that dies the death of a condemned criminal” as something to be desired.3 Living 2000 years post the cross event, it is difficult to determine what the intended meaning of the cross was for Christianity. The church is still left with questions as to why Jesus had to suffer and because of these questions, multiple interpretations of cross abound rather than unity surround the Cross event.

The study of ecology first began in the 1950s, and was intended to explore what humanity’s affect has been on the environment.4 In recent years, Ecology has become an important issue in the church once again. Kwok Pui-lan, author of the article “Ecology and Christology,” expands on ecology as not only encompassing “nature (natural ecology) but culture and society (human ecology, social ecology, and so on).”5 According to Victor Westhelle, author of the book “The Scandalous God, the early church viewed ecology and creation as something to be cherished, not to be exploited and abused as it is today.

Ecology, when viewed through a theological lens, finds its origins in the Doctrine of Incarnation. According to Westhelle, this doctrine and the ideas found within are uniquely a Christian construct. It is here that God’s embodiment “is not a lofty display of God’s majesty, but a descent into the most deprive level of the human condition, down to the abject death itself.”6 God did not separate God’s self from creation but became a part of creation. Martha Kirkpatrick, author of the article “For God so loved the world: an incarnational ecology,” argues that the covenant made with Noah was not just to humanity, but was made with all of creation. It was this covenant that express “the constancy of God’s love for all life, human and non-human alike.”7 God is constantly recreating the world “by deconstructing it until nothing remains but a stump, so that it may be redeemed.”8 Simply put, God went to the bottom of creation, into humanity, so that all of creation might be encompassed.

God has included all of creation into the covenant but how does that covenant translate into life at the end of time? Is the world condemned or will the world be resurrected just as we will be resurrected? There are scripture references, however, that could be interpreted where creation is condemned. In Luke 23:42, Jesus tells the condemned convict hanging on the cross next to him that he will join Christ in paradise. Westhelle argues that this promise essentially condemns the world. Reformation theology tries to combat the notion that all creation is condemned. Martin Luther’s supposed claim that he would plant an apple tree even if he knew the world would end tomorrow shows the idea that creation will not stop when the world stops but will continue.9 There is a Latin dictum that says, “Justice be done even if the world is doomed” but does that mean creation will be resurrected just as we are resurrected?10

The importance of creation can be seen throughout Luther’s sermons, commentaries, letters, and lectures. Luther taught “the view we have of nature is the blindness we have to creation” and “only faith can see creation.11 But to acknowledge creation as good also means acknowledging that parts of creation has evil interlaced in it. To deny this claim would mean denying the cross.

Suffering and evil are a result of the human condition and are therefore a part of creation. Westhelle uses the metaphor of a neatly wrapped present to explain this. While the wrapping is beautiful, the true gift is not the paper, but rather what is inside that holds the promise. We have to trust and hope that the gifts given are good but sometimes the gifts we receive are not what we were expecting. Evil can exist even in the best wrapped gifts but we still need to open the box and explore so that we can show the respect the gift rightfully deserves. Creation is the same way. To limit God to just the beauty of the wrapping paper would limit the power of God and the ability to have God revealed on the cross. God is not just hidden in the beauty and goodness of nature but also in the ugliness and evil of nature as well.12

Now that we have a basic understanding of an eco-theology, we now can begin to investigate how this contemporary theology fits into a theology of the cross. Both a theologian of the cross and an ecologist will argue that God is even present in the evil and ugliness of creation. It is because of this understanding of God in this way that our entire view of God has to change. This is where a distinction of a theology of the cross and a theology of glory can be made. A theologian of glory would call all of creation good because it is created by God and ignore the evil and ugliness left in creation. A theologian of the cross calls a thing what it is--evil and ugly. Westhelle makes the point that “God should not be praised for the greatness of creation in spite of evil; God should be praised in the midst of evil where God’s continuing creation works out the annihilation force of evil.”13 When God created (and still creates) God’s creation, God created “out of nothing, out of sin and evil, the terrifying abyss of utter emptiness (creatio ex nihio).”14 To deny that God cannot take something as evil and turn it into something astonishing is to deny the cross event. It is here that God took the cross, a representation of evil and ugliness in the world, and revealed what the coming Kingdom of God would envision.

For both a theologian of the cross and an ecologist, evil is a part of the world because of the human condition of sin. All of creation suffers because of humanity’s sin. Westhelle argues that we cannot “ignore the visible or to flee from it in search of the pure Word.” To do this would “take the cross out of this world.”15 To deny evil and suffering as a result to the human condition denies the cross.

Westhelle argues that ecologists believes all of humanity shares in the responsibility of the world’s problems. It is here that our failures and faults come to the surface and our suffering “makes the visible transparent when the suffering seen is proclaimed by the Word to be the suffering for which humans share responsibility, either by action that perpetrates it or by omission in failing to respond to it.”16 Ecologists argue that we all share in this common responsibility to care for the creation that suffers because of our own sin. Jesus never tells us that we can simply sit on the side lines but that we all need to invest ourselves into the community and world around us. The cross gave us the revelation of God’s kingdom, but it also showed us that Jesus was crucified because he taught us to care for one’s neighbor and community. It is through the cross that we are given the ability to strive for more and to care for what God has deemed good. We are no longer limited but liberated by the cross and are therefore freed to do what Jesus taught us to do.

Puilan offers three ways to show God is with all of creation: “In acts of compassion and solidarity, in movements of people who are bearers of hope, and in rituals that celebrate life and evoke the power of the divine.”17 First, we must remember that Jesus’ life was spent among the poor, the needy, and the oppressed. Jesus went against the status quo and proclaimed that the Kingdom of God was for all. For many Christians today, humanity is at the top and the rest of creation is below humanity. In both of these theologies, however, humanity is at the bottom and by Christ going to the bottom, all of creation benefits from the cross. Second, Jesus disclosed himself as a renewer of society and was therefore condemned to death for it. The authorities condemned and tried to destroy everything Jesus stood for. But by the cross, all that Jesus taught and did was brought to the surface. If it was not for the cross, Jesus would have been in vain. Finally, it is in the rituals that we not only remember but we see the incarnation of Jesus. Christians have been doing rituals for centuries. They remind us of not only who we are, but also shows us a glimpse of God’s love. In communion and baptism, our earthly elements are taken and made holy. God takes the ugliness of our earthly elements: societal outcasts, the cross, and our rituals and creates something beautiful. Our rituals may define us but it is the cross that gives meaning to the rituals.18

It is through a “theology of the cross [that] the suffering in and of the world is recognized as the locus of God’s creative work.”19 In Jesus’ death, we see who God is meant to be, how God takes evil and ugliness and turns it into something good and beautiful, and it is in creation that we see God’s imagination continue.

A theologian of the cross and an ecologist view the cross very similarly. The church has always been for creation and it is only recent years that this mindset has been lost. Ecology’s first goal was to study how humanity has affect creation and the cross reminds us that we all have a responsibility in creation. The cause of evil is our human condition. God will continue to create good out of evil, but we are left with the responsibility to care for it. God is in creation, both good and evil, just as the cross is found in both joy and suffering.

------------------------------

• 1 Jürgen Moltmann, The Crucified God (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993), I.
• 2 Victor Westhelle, The Scandalous God (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2006), 2.
• 3 Victor Westhelle, The Scandalous God, 2.
• 4 Victor Westhelle, The Scandalous God, 27.
• 5 Pui-lan, Kwok. "Ecology and Christology." Feminist Theology: The Journal of the Britain & Ireland School of Feminist Theology no. 15 (May 1997): 113.
• 6 Victor Westhelle, The Scandalous God, 27.
• 7 Kirkpatrick, Martha, "For God so loved the world": an incarnational ecology." Anglican Theological Review 91, no. 2 (March 1, 2009): 199.
• 8 Kirkpatrick, Martha, "For God so loved the world": an incarnational ecology," 200.
• 9 Victor Westhelle, The Scandalous God, 94.
• 10 Victor Westhelle, The Scandalous God, 94.
• 11 Victor Westhelle, The Scandalous God, 97.
• 12 Victor Westhelle, The Scandalous God, 101.
• 13 Victor Westhelle, The Scandalous God, 101.
• 14 Victor Westhelle, The Scandalous God, 101.
• 15 Victor Westhelle, The Scandalous God, 103.
• 16 Victor Westhelle, The Scandalous God, 103.
• 17 Pui-lan, Kwok, "Ecology and Christology," 124.
• 18 Pui-lan, Kwok, "Ecology and Christology," 123-124.
• 19 Victor Westhelle, The Scandalous God, 103.

Second Sunday after Pentecost

This was a sermon I preached in class. Enjoy

In the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

As we complete our Easter and Pentecost season, we enter into a point of the church year where we grow as a community. Easter was a time when we heard the stories that make us who we are (creation, Noah and the Ark, the great Exodus to just name a few) and now we will hear stories that define our Christian faith. We grow as a community not only in numbers but in faith as we learn the life that God wants us to live. Today, we begin this cycle with the raising of a widow’s son.

And I know what some of you may be thinking. How does this story of the raising of a widow’s son help us grow as a community? Well you will just have to listen for a bit. First, we need to look at the Old Testament for some background information. This particular story in Luke parallels two other stories found in 1st and 2nd Kings. They involve the prophets Elijah and Elisha. In the first story, Elijah is summoned to a widow’s house because her son has died. She is bitter at God and Elijah at the death of her son. Elijah cries out to the Lord, "O LORD my God, have you brought calamity even upon the widow with whom I am staying, by killing her son?"
Then he stretched himself upon the child three times, and cried out to the LORD, "O LORD my God, let this child's life come into him again" (1Ki 17:20-21 NRS). Notice who does the actions. We will come back to that in a bit.

The second raising was done by the prophet Elisha. If you remember your biblical history, Elisha was the “apprentice” to the prophet Elijah. Elisha met a Shunammite woman back in 1st Kings. She showed hospitality to the prophet. However, her son falls ills and eventually succumbs to his illness. I can only imagine the pain Elisha felt at the loss of the young child. He enters the house and prays over the body to the Lord. The child received life back into his body and Elisha called for his mother said, “Take your son.”

Flash forward some 800 years. Jesus is traveling from village to village proclaiming that Kingdom of God is near. He comes upon the tiny, little village of Nain. I am talking small and insignificant. It is in the area that hold no real religious significance to people. Who would have ever thought something significant would happen in this place? In this village, he is met face to face with a grieving widow who just lost her only son. The crowd following Jesus meets the crowd following the widow. Jesus looks at the boy’s mother and says, “Do not weep.” Now let’s talk about this for a minute. “Do not weep.” The woman just lost her only son, her husband is dead, and now she has nobody to support her. And Jesus says, “Do not weep.” It would be cynical for any of us say “do not weep.” You have lost your son, your sole source of income, your social status is now gone and now this stranger walks in says, “Do not weep.” Ah but there is more to these three simple words. Luke does something here and I am sure everyone read over it without even thinking about it. Luke calls Jesus, “Lord.” Not only that, this is the first time Jesus is call Lord in the Gospel. Now for us, Lord means so many things. Lord could be a dignitary’s term and also used to identify someone who owns land. But it is so much deeper than that. κύριος, Lord, is how God is referred to in the Old Testament. In both of the stories in 1st and 2nd Kings, Elijah and Elisha pray to κύριος. Now Jesus is κύριος.

Jesus touches the structure carrying the body and says, "Young man, I say to you, get up!" "Young man, I say to you, rise!" Notice, Jesus does not pray to the κύριος but rather commands the man to sit up, to rise up, to get up, to live.The dead man sits up and fear seizes the crowd for they saw the glory of God that day. They saw the κύριος, Jesus, raise a man from the dead by his own power.

Imagine the look in everyone’s eyes. Imagine the awe, shock, and amazement they all felt. Imagine the feeling the mother felt when Jesus handed back her son from the grave. The young man is not the only one healed in this story but the widow has also been healed. In fact, I would even make the argument that she is the central character in the story and not her son. Woh Woh Woh preacher. What are you talking about? Jesus raised her son from the grave not her. Right but she also received a death sentence once her son died. She was poor, an outcast, uncleaned and Jesus restores her righteousness. Literally, Luke points the entire story to the widow. As one commentary shows, “the dead man (remember males were dominate) was his mother’s only son.” That statement shows ownership of the man by a woman. Woman were not allow to own anything. Further, “the focus of attention is on her: she was a widow, the crowd was with HER, Jesus saw HER, had compassion on her HER, spoke to HER, and finally, gave the dead man brought back to life to HER. She who is husbandless and sonless and in mourning, she who epitomizes the “poor” to whom Jesus has come to bring good news, is the real recipient of Jesus’s compassionate ministry.”

So now 2000 years later, we are left with this story in a time when we, as a community, is supposed to be strengthen physically, mentally, and spiritually. We are left to continue preaching this story of resurrection to a world where these stories seem strange and, at times, even outdated. But there is so much more we can learn from this story. It was here, through this healing, that Luke now begins to refer to Jesus as κύριος. It is through the raising of the young man (the widow’s son), in a village known to very few people, Jesus restores the boy’s life, his mother’s life and even the town. More importantly, Jesus always goes to the last, lost, least, outcast, and weeping and restores them--restores the weeping mother. A man, of great knowledge and importance, who attracts crowds through his words and his miracles, stoops down to the last, lost, least, outcast, and weeping. That is the mission Jesus is calling us to follow. That is at the center of Jesus ministry. Jesus does not start at the top but works his way through the bottom of society, through people who never expected the power of God (the kingdom of God) to come upon them, to come upon people like you and me. That is who Jesus wants us to minister too. That is mission we are all called to be in. Jesus went to the bottom and so shall we. It is here, at the bottom, that Jesus finds us. It is here that God will bless the works of our hands because we are following the example of the κύριος, of our Lord and savior, Jesus the Christ who now lives and reigns with the Father and Holy Spirit amidst the weeping widows of our world. Amen.

Second Sunday after Easter

I preached this sermon at St. Thomas Lutheran Church in WV. I tried to combat Decision Theology. I welcome your comments.

In the name Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Amen.

Let us pray, “Let the words of my mouth and the meditation of my heart be acceptable to you, O Lord, my rock and my redeemer. Psalm 19:14”

Alleluia. Christ is Risen. He has risen indeed. Alleluia. Christ is Risen. He has risen indeed. Alleluia.

That does not get old. Christ has certainly risen and we continue to proclaim that message--My Lord and my God has risen. And today we continue in this Easter season with the very famous story of a man named Thomas whose awe-inspiring faith inspires us each and every day.

Now I love the look on some of your faces. “I thought this was called Doubting Thomas.” Thomas’s faith is awe-inspiring? Actually his concept of faith is at the heart and center of our Lutheran Confessions:
“I believe that I cannot by my own reason or strength believe in Jesus Christ, my Lord, or come to Him; but the Holy Spirit has called me by the Gospel, enlightened me with the Spirit’s gifts, sanctified and kept me in the true faith; even as the Spirit calls, gathers, enlightens, and sanctifies the whole Christian Church on earth, and keeps it with Jesus Christ in the one true faith...”

A number of years ago, I was working as a Patient Transporter at St Joe’s right outside Baltimore. One day, I was taking a patient and her family down to have a heart cauterization. This particular patient was in her mid-forties and had a number of different family members there with her. One of them was a nurse and asked if she could walk with the patient down operating room. I didn’t see a problem with that so I dropped the family off at the waiting room and we keep walking down the hallway to the operating room. Now I am the first to admit that the walk to the lab is a very interesting walk. Patients usually would make a confession to me or ask me to say a prayer. This particular patient was very different. As we are walking, the patient’s friend says, “No matter the outcome, Jannie is not afraid because she is saved. Have you found Jesus? Have you accepted Jesus Christ as your personal Lord and Savior?” The conversation stopped as I wheeled the patient into the operating room and I do not remember how I answered. I was more dumbfounded that both the patient and her friend tried to convert me while being wheeled in to an operating room for a heart operation.

But those two questions have remained with me for several months (years even). Some days I could say yes but other days I could not. I mean, I really try hard to believe, to do everything that a Christian is “suppose” to do. But I fail and when people ask me that question I feel ashamed answering Yes.

It is amazing that this very simple, closed-ended question, who intent is to strengthen an individual’s faith, can ruin the faith of so many. This has become a issue in the Christian church and we need break down these two question for a minute and compare them the text so that we all have a better idea of what the true Christian message is here.

“Have you found Jesus?” Last week, my GPS broke on my way to preach in DC. It was not the best place to break and for a time, I was a bit lost trying to find the nursing home. And I happened to giggle a little when I thought about Jesus getting lost. Have you found Jesus? OMG he is missing?!?! Alert the hounds. The King of the Universe, the Prince of Peace, Lord of Lords is MISSING! No that is not the case. In fact, our Gospel text disproves this idea that we need to find Jesus:
-When it was evening on that day, the first day of the week, and the doors of the house where the disciples had met were locked for fear of the Jews, Jesus CAME and STOOD among them and said, “Peace be with you.”
-A week later his disciples were again in the house, and Thomas was with them. Although the doors were shut, Jesus CAME and STOOD among them and said, “Peace be with you.”
Jesus entered into the house. Jesus entered into the locked house. Jesus entered into their locked and fearing hearts and said, “Peace be with you.” The disciples were the one who were lost. They saw Jesus crucified, tortured, laid in the tomb and now the women of their group come running back saying, “They have seen the Lord.” Jesus found Mary in the garden, Jesus called her name and she recognized them. Jesus entered into the Lock room and found his chosen followers--his friend.

“Personal savior.” Now that is an interesting idea. Jesus is my personal Savior. I feel kind of privileged now. “Just keep on bullying me, I am going to sick my friend Jesus on you and he is going to mess you up. He is going take his sword and his shield and just go ballistic on you.” But is that case? Is that the Christian message? Jesus used violence to beat down Satan and death? How quickly some forget the scripture, “At noon, they Crucified Jesus with one criminal on his left and one on his right.” Talk about going ballistic. Jesus won the battle by becoming a victim, by dying on the cross. We are not privileged but rather we are promised that Jesus has conquered death and the grave.

Jesus’ death was not a private act but very public. Jesus ministry was not just for the individuals he touched or the individuals he taught but rather for the entire community, for the entire church both the past, present, and future. Yes, Jesus speaks to us but we are still a part of the church, we are still a part of the community. Notice, it was a week later that Jesus appeared to Thomas. Jesus didn’t find Thomas in a market the next day but he waited till the group was all together. If Jesus was just his personal Savior, why didn’t Jesus just find Thomas alone at night? That is why there isn’t just a personal savior because Jesus never just appeared to one individual but to the entire community just as he appears to us today. There is no personal savior but a Crucified Savior for all--There is a God who so loved the world (THE ENTIRE WORLD).

John Hoffymer wrote an amazing article about the theology of the cross. In this article, he shows Jesus as not just Crucified but a victim of torture and it is through this torture that we Jesus revealed. He writes:
Jesus is raised from the dead with the marks of his torture very much present. When the resurrected Jesus appears to the gathered disciples for the first time in John, he shows them his wounded hands and side. In seeing Jesus with his wounds, the disciples are able to rejoice in “seeing the Lord” (Jn 20:20).
Those marks on his hands, those visible signs of torture and pain--of the Cross--reveal Jesus to us. It is in those signs of torture and victimization that Jesus’ power and grace is revealed. It was here, when Jesus came into the midst of the community, Thomas sees the wounds (not even need to touch them) and proclaims, MY LORD AND MY GOD! Thomas is the first to proclaim Jesus as θεος. The first to proclaim Jesus as God because of the wounds bore on the cross.

So when someone asks you “Have you found Jesus?” I want you to boldly proclaim, “No I have not but he has found me.” When someone asks, “Have you accepted Jesus as your personal Lord and Savior?” I want you to say, “No but he has accepted me as broken and sinful--not deserving his love but receiving it all the more.” When someone asks if you have ever seen Jesus I want you to boldly and triumphantly say, “YES, by the wounds on his hands and in side, in the pain and suffering of the world, in the joy and amazement of a young child--There is Jesus. Jesus is always in our midst.” Amen.

Easter Day Sermon

I preached at the National Lutheran Home on Easter. Below is my sermon. I will tell you that I did add to my sermon as I was preaching. You just had to be there.

In the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Amen

Let us pray, “Let the words of my mouth and the meditation of my heart be acceptable to you, O Lord, my rock and my redeemer. Psalm 19:14”

Alleluia. Christ is Risen. He has risen indeed. Alleluia. Christ is Risen. He has risen indeed. Alleluia.

A Sunday School teacher asked her class on the Sunday before Easter if they knew what happened on Easter and why it was so important. One little girl spoke up saying: "Easter is when the whole family gets together, and you eat turkey and sing about the pilgrims and all that." "No, that's not it," said the teacher.

"I know what Easter is," a second student responded. "Easter is when you get a tree and decorate it and give gifts to everybody and sing lots of songs." "Nope, that's not it either," replied the teacher.

Finally a third student spoke up, "Easter is when Jesus was killed, and put in a tomb and left for three days." "Ah, thank goodness somebody knows" the teacher thought to herself.

But then the student went on: "Then everybody gathers at the tomb and waits to see if Jesus comes out, and if he sees his shadow he has to go back inside and we have six more weeks of winter."

After 46 days of wondering and waiting, we see the culmination of despair disappear by those three simple words disappear: Christ is Risen. Death did not win, Satan lost, and Jesus’ stands as a revelation of God’s coming Kingdom (and that is a crazy revelation) but why did this all have to take place?

I mean, think about it. Why did Jesus have to die? What does it mean that Jesus is the revelation of God’s coming Kingdom? Jesus--crucified, tortured, kill and risen--is the revelation of God’s coming kingdom? Could there have been a better way to do it?

When we think of God, we think of power, prestige, king of all kings, lord of all lords, knower of everything, maker of heaven and earth. But these past few days have not shown our traditional view of God. We have not see Jesus perched high his throne with a spear in one hand, a shield in the next, defeating Pilate and Herod, and becoming the ruler of the whole world. But that is not the case, Jesus was not that glorious hero but rather broken, scorned and killed. Pilate and Herod gained their power by defeating their enemies, Jesus received his power by wearing a crown of thorns and stretching out his arms to die.

But that isn’t the end of the story. Good Friday is good because not only what happened that day but what comes next. The disciples have just spent three long years walking with Jesus and heard Jesus say God’s kingdom is coming. But their kingdom and their king died or so they thought. There is a theme throughout the entire New Testament: God takes the ordinary and makes it extraordinary. God took a Cross and crown Jesus King on it; God took the grave and burst the bonds of death; God takes you and me and promises not to abandon us to the grave. "If we don't know WHAT is beyond the grave we do know WHO is beyond the grave.”

Today, this day, in the very words of this Holy and Blessed Gospel, we heard Death will never, never win because of this Resurrection. In Jesus’ resurrection, we find life, salvation, and a crucified, tortured, and risen Christ. But yet for so many of us, myself included, we still want to know how it all seemed to happen.

We live in an age when we want to explain everything but this cannot be explain with science but only with our faith. We do not know how or why all of this had to take place but do know that in the end, Christ is not dead in a tomb. Every other prophet lies dead in their graves but Jesus lives and we are all witnesses to this very fact. Jesus was not forsaken, denied, finished but rather is the beginning and risen--here with us.

Lent is time went we wondered and looked for what this all means. We wondered if our love was a hopeless march or if our alleluias were cold and broken. But today, today my brothers and sisters, our songs do not read, “Christ died” but “Christ our Lord is risen today!” We are not in despair, we are not forsaken, we are not abandoned at the foot of the cross but we live because Christ lives in us. We have been clothed in Christ through our baptism and we shall be reunited in a resurrection that we celebrate today. As that beautiful Easter Carol says:
“Christ is risen! Hence forth never death or hell shall us enthrall. We are Christ’s in him forever we have triumphed over all. All the doubting and dejection of our trembling hearts have ceased’ hail the day of resurrection! Let us rise and keep the feast. Christ is risen! Alleluia! Risen our victorious head! Sing his praises! Alleluia! Christ is risen from the dead!
That is our victory march--Today, Christ lives. Today Jesus is no longer ordinary but extraordinary. Today, HE LIVES! Amen.

Differences between a Theology of Glory and a Theology of the Cross

Gerhard Forde, author of On Being a Theologian of the Cross, begins his book by saying “the cross is in the first instance God’s attack on human sin.”1 Lutheran piety has always been rooted in the power of the cross. It was this theology that separated Martin Luther from the other reformers and the Roman Catholic Church. For Martin Luther, there were only two ways of view God: either through a theology of the cross or through a theology of glory. It is necessary that the distinctions between these two theologies be studied more deeply so that the differences may be brought out.

Before one can note the differences between the two theologies one must first identify the key factors in each of the theologies beginning with the key distinctions in a theology of glory. In Martin Luther’s Heidelberg Disputation, the document that defined Martin Luther’s theology of the cross, Luther does not make any mention between a theology of the cross and a theology of glory till later on in his disputation. In theses 19-24, particularly in theses 19-21, Luther begins to define the two different theologies and outright names the two theologies in Thesis 21. What is interesting to note is that Luther did not believe a theologian of glory deserved even the title of “theologian.” They miss the mark by only concentrating on a particular part of the story--i.e. solely concentrating on the resurrection. They are driven by earthly ideas of success rather than looking to God for the true answer of success--the way of the cross.

There are four distinguishing characters in a theology of glory. A theology of glory concentrates heavily on the works of human rather than on the works of God. They do not to take into account sin’s existence in the world and that “human beings are intrinsically and radically sinful, incapable of doing good or truly knowing God.”2 They believe that God needs to be sought out in mystical experiences, speculation, or merit. One must encounter God rather than let God encounter us. Moreover, one of the best distinguishing factor that sets a part theologian of glory is described in thesis 21 of Luther’s Heidelberg Disputation: “A theology of glory calls evil good and good evil.” Forde uses the example of suffering to best describe Luther’s point here. In the understanding of this particular theology “suffering is called evil and works good.”3 One should work to avoid suffering because it is seen as a weakness. It is seen as if we have failed and are, therefore, suffering the consequences of our work rather than the notion that bad things can just happen for no particular reason.

The theology of the cross has a completely different idea of God’s work in the world. The theology of the cross begins with the notion that humanity is sinful and is “incapable of doing good or truly knowing God.”4 Frederick Niedner, author of the article Precious, Inevitable Scandal, points out that in every single gospel, all roads lead to the cross: Mark’s gospel begins with the phrase “the beginning of the good news” with Mark describing a “rapid descent into tragedy” leaving readers with an ending that shows the disciples running away in fear rather than spreading the news of Jesus’ resurrection; Matthew’s gospel “finds a way to show how Jesus’ death worked forgiveness;” John’s gospel “from the moment John the Baptist identifies Jesus as ‘the lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world...Jesus maintains tight control over everything and everyone involved in his dying;’” In Luke’s gospel “Jesus proceeds very purposefully...refusing to be dissuaded from setting his face toward Jerusalem” and teaches a “‘daily cross-bearing’ to a disciple who walks in his footsteps.”5 A theology of the cross takes into account that even though all of our actions may have good intentions, the resulting consequences of our actions are never positive.

It is through divine action, God’s direct action in humanity, that good does exist in the world and not by any kind of human interaction. The scandal of the cross, though evil in appearance, gives us the ability to know God. God can only been seen and sought through the Cross of Christ. Thesis 20 of the Heidelberg Disputation says that a theologian of the cross “comprehends the visible and manifest things of God through suffering and the cross.”6 The good works that a theology of glory promote are the same works that put Jesus on the cross. Jesus’ death was not because he committed a crime, but because he promoted such ideals such as caring for the poor, economic and social sustainability for all, and the pouring out of one soul so that all might know and experience God in a new way separate from the law.

To interpret Forde here, the ideals and norms that Jesus promoted in his teachings (and through his actions) were made known to us only through his suffering on the cross. Thusly, a theologian of the cross is someone “whose eyes have been turned away from the quest for glory by the cross, who have eyes only for what is visible, what is actually there to be seen of God, the suffering and despised crucified Jesus.”7 Namely, those who seek Christ in the Cross and not solely in his resurrection.

One final distinction here is that a “theology of the cross calls the thing what it actually is.”8 As mentioned above, Forde uses the example of suffering to explain this thesis of Luther. Forde argues that when one views suffering through the lenses of a theology of the cross, suffering is no longer seen as a failing of our work but rather “suffering is from God and it is good.”9 Further, we suffer because we are no longer in control and are “rendered totally passive by the divine operation through the cross and resurrection of Jesus.”10 When suffering is viewed in this matter, one can no longer call it evil but rather divine action. John Hoffmeyer, author of the article Torture and Theology of the Cross, makes the point that unlike the typical human response of desiring revenge “the resurrection of the crucified Jesus is God’s full identification with the victim who says no to continuing the cycle of victimization.”11 Jesus commits no acts of revenge but rather bears the marks of his torture for all to see. It was in bearing these marks and showing his disciples that they, particularly Thomas, are able to proclaim Jesus as Lord and God. Essentially, the act of victimization stops with Jesus because the cross bears the ultimate victim known to us as as the crucified Christ. It does not make sense in our human perspective to think that God is the reason for our suffering, but that is the scandal of the cross. In this scandal and suffering “God made use of our terrible practice of sacrificial victimization ‘so that victims of such acts would never be invisible--they look too much like Jesus.’”12 It is in this suffering that we are able to turn “away from ourselves, forsaking our own good works and spiritual experiences and [cling] to Christ’s blood and righteousness.”13 Suffering is no longer something to avoid, but is crucial for understanding God as not just resurrected, but rather crucified and resurrected.

This idea of understanding God deserves attention here. It is through the theology of the cross that we are able to have a clear sense of understanding God’s role in our world and in our lives. Understanding God through the cross does not simply mean to be plainly inform. Rather, Forde argues that it is more of like God attacking and afflicting us.14 As mentioned above, Forde believes in the divine passive model. We do not obtain knowledge of God but “knowledge of God comes when God happens to us, when God does [God’s self] to us.”15 It is by the cross that God does all these things.

There are notable distinctions that should be made between the two theologies. The first being to works of humanity and the works of God. For a theology of the cross, everything always begins and ends with God and the cross. Therefore, our action have no direct meaning in our existence, but God’s actions do. Secondly, as previously mentioned, Forde argues for a divine passive model where anything good in the world comes from God alone. This leads to the next distinction of sin’s true reality in the world. It is because we are sinful, no good can come from us. Our own works are not needed because God is in control. For example, if the world depended on humanity, Forde would argue, the world would have fallen a part a long time ago. It is because of God working through us, that good can and is obtained. Now how we know what is good comes from the cross and knowledge of God passed down to us by God. Thirdly, keeping the model of a divine passive, the cross seeks us out rather than we seeking out the cross.

The final notable distinction, and the main emphasis of this paper, involves thesis 21 of the Heidelberg Disputation:
“A theology of glory calls evil good and good evil. A theology of the cross calls the thing what it actually is.”16
It is here that Luther makes draws a clear line between the two theologies. A theology of glory takes joy in only living out the resurrection and leaping over the events that lead up to the resurrection. However, when one takes into the account the notion that the cross, once seen as evil, is now the key to knowing God, our entire system of norms is thrown out the window. A theology of the cross does not find glory in the cross, but rather finds the salvation of the world hanging there for all to see. Because of this fact, the cross is not the end but the beginning. It is here that “only through suffering and the cross that sinners see and come to know God.”17 The suffering experienced on the cross is good and shows us all the true reality that God wants. The scandal is no longer a scandal but a way of life.

The underlining distinction, then, is that throughout everything the cross needs to remain at the center. It is through the cross that we come to know God as the crucified God. We are not Easter Christians. If we solely concentrate on the resurrection we forget why Jesus was resurrected. To understand why the resurrection happened, we must always look at Jesus’ death first. It is here that “a new life can begin, and with it a new sense of self-worth can blossom.” Out of God’s love, God creates “anew out of nothing”18 and with that we can proclaimed with the entire church “Amen. Come Lord Jesus.”

_____________________
1 Forde, Gerhard O., and Martin Luther. On Being a Theologian of the Cross: Reflections on Luther's Heidelberg Disputation, 1518 (Theology) (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1997), 1.

2 H, John. "Glory vs. the Cross." Confessing Evangelical, 14 June 2004, available from www.confessingevangelical.com /?p=1086; internet; accessed 12 March 2010.

3 Forde and Luther, On Being a Theologian of the Cross, 83.

4 H, John, “Glory vs. the Cross,” www.confessingevangelical.com /?p=1086.

5 Niedner, Frederick A. "Precious, inevitable scandal: theology of the cross in Mark." Currents in Theology and Mission 32, no. 6 (December 1, 2005): 417-419.

6 Forde and Luther, On Being a Theologian of the Cross, 77.

7 Forde and Luther, On Being a Theologian of the Cross, 79.

8 Forde and Luther, On Being a Theologian of the Cross, 81.

9 Forde and Luther, On Being a Theologian of the Cross, 86.

10 Forde and Luther, On Being a Theologian of the Cross, 87.

11 Hoffmeyer, John F. "Torture and theology of the cross." Dialog 47, no. 3 (September 1, 2008): 244.

12 Hoffmeyer, “Torture and Theology of the cross, 246.

13 H, John, “Glory vs. the Cross,” www.confessingevangelical.com /?p=1086.

14 Phrase is taken from Forde and Luther, On Being a Theologian of the Cross, 90.

15 Forde and Luther, On Being a Theologian of the Cross, 90.

16 Forde and Luther, On Being a Theologian of the Cross, 81.

17 Forde and Luther, On Being a Theologian of the Cross, 86.

18 Forde and Luther, On Being a Theologian of the Cross, 19.

Palm Sunday Sermon from Preaching Luke

In the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Amen.

Who is this King of Glory, O blessed Prince of Peace
Revealing things of Heaven and all its mysteries
Our spirits ever longing for His grace in which to stand
Who's this King of glory, Son of God and son of man

Who is this King of Glory? Palm Sunday is interesting day in the church year. I have always been fascinated with this triumphant entry into Jerusalem and then quickly hearing our King of Glory laid in the tomb. Now the story itself did not happen as quick for the disciples but I am sure that it was one of the fastest and slowest week of their lives. In the span of five days, they saw their beloved teacher and friend captured, convicted, tortured, and killed with two other insurrectionist. In this time, Jesus said and did many things that left questions for them, and for us, of who is this man?

And the week started just as our service started today with a triumphant procession into Jerusalem. We heard in the processional gospel was the recalling of Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem on the back of the colt while people chanted “Blessed is He who comes in the name of Lord.” They held palm branches in their hands and laid there coats and palms onto the path. Today we had our own procession, lead by our cross, as we marched our way into the sanctuary sing:

All glory, laud, and honor, to thee, Redeemer, King,
to whom the lips of children made sweet hosannas ring.
You are the King of Israel, and David's royal Son,
now in the Lord’s Name cometh, our King and Blessed One.

But the singing quickly fades. The music ends and the true identity of Christ begins to be unveiled. What is going to be unveiled is essentially “who Jesus really is” and “what his teachings, ministry, and work mean for you and me.” The cross that Jesus bore holds the answers to our questions. It was Gerhard Forde, a famous Lutheran Theologian from Luther Seminary, that said the ideals and norms that Jesus promoted in his teachings (and through his actions) were made known to us only through his suffering on the cross. A theologian of the cross, the entire Christian church (you and I), is someone “whose eyes have been turned away from the quest for glory by the cross, who have eyes only for what is visible, what is actually there to be seen of God, the suffering and despised crucified Jesus.”

That image of a suffering and despised crucified Jesus is not something that sits well for us. We think of a power savior, a power God, THE KING OF THE UNIVERSE, to be strong and mighty and not suffering, despised and dead on a cross. It is not a comfortable image we have of anyone in power. We do not want our president or any elected official humiliated while in office. Power holds beauty but this is not a pretty picture here. For Jesus, his authority, his title as King did not come till he was nailed to the cross. I recently read an article written by John Hoffmeyer on the torture and theology of the Cross. In the beginning part of his article, he describes an experience while working El Salvador that led to a new way of viewing the meaning of the cross:

"I notice in the back of the chapel...hung fourteen very large drawings. They were outline sketches, black on a white background. Each depicts a victim of torture or execution (or both). My initial reaction was mixed. I appreciated the value of drawing public attention to the grave abuse of human rights that had gone on for years in El Salvador...Yet I also felt at first that such gruesome scenes were in dubious taste in a church. They were true, but they were shocking, even offensive. I turned back for another look at the front of the church. There over the altar stood the cross. Suddenly the obvious broke through and redefined the setting around me. Jesus bore gruesome wounds just like the figures in the drawings across the back of the chapel. The cross was an instrument of torture. Like the persons represented in the drawings that had shocked me, I realized then that Jesus was tortured." (silence)

It is in knowing the cross that we know Jesus--Crucified and torture. All of Jesus’ teachings and actions come into focus on the cross. Before this event, passages like “‘If any want to become my followers, let them deny themselves and take up their cross daily and follow me” and “take and eat,” take and drink” mean nothing to the disciples or to us till we are met at the cross event.

On that cross held the salvation of the world and a sign that read, “(ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν Ἰουδαίων οὗτος) The King of the Jews. To claim political authority such as King, in the Roman Society led to a very dismal future. In the eyes of the Roman Government, to be crucified meant you were a insurrectionist, a terrorist, a revolutionist. This is what got Jesus killed--he was a threat to sovereignty of the empire. However, both Pilate and Herod both found Jesus not guilty of this claim. Back in verses 3-4 and verse 11. Pilate and Herod did not see him as a King but rather a man who stole the show away from the Jewish Leadership. It is strange then that this placard would stand above Jesus identifying his “crime” (a tradition at the time so that people walking by would see the crime that man or woman committed and deter them from committing the same crime). One commentary writes, “The inscription is thus, from the Roman perspective, false, yet it constitutes for Luke and his audience an ironic affirmation of truth of Jesus’s regal identity.”

That is the scandal of the cross. It is no surprise to me how the cross is used here to identity Jesus. Every single gospel points us to this image of Jesus--Torture and Crucified--King of us all. Today and this week we will live out the retelling of this story. We will stand from a distant just as the followers of Jesus stood from a distance wondering what is next, what is to come of all these actions:

Beneath the cross of Jesus I long to take my stand;
the shadow of a mighty rock within a weary land,
a home within a within a wilderness, a rest upon the way,
my sinful self my only shame, my glory all, the cross.

Beneath the cross looking up Jesus is where we will see our glory, our faith, our savior hanging there for us all. This is our king and this is where he is crowned. Even the centurion, a gentile (a non-believer) realizes Jesus’ identity at the end of the story. As one commentator writes it is not clear whether or not this centurion had access to who Jesus was is but nevertheless, “in his response to Jesus’ death, recognizes the salvific hand of God at work in Jesus.” The scandal of the cross is that we have a God so loving and brilliant to spare Jesus for the world--Our King. Pilate and Herod played the game and won their power but Jesus hung on a cross to receive his:

This is our King of Glory, Salvation of the World.
Bruised and Bloody Body, stretched out for all to see.
This is our King of Glory, the scandal of his death.
Found Glory on the Cross, and grants us liberty.

This week, we will relive this story: through the washing of our feet, the celebration of the Eucharist, the stripping of the altar, and finally in the last words of Jesus. Today is the just the beginning as we walk the way of the Cross--the way we know Jesus as King. In the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Amen.

Sermon from the First Wednesday in Lent

I preached this sermon at my former parish in Randallstown, MD. It was a pleasure returning back "home" and see family. Enjoy reading it. I consider this one of my most controversial sermons that I have ever preached emphasizing that it is okay to be angry at God but know God is always with us.

In the Name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Amen.

Let us pray, “Let the words of my mouth and the meditation of my heart be acceptable to you, O Lord, my rock and my redeemer. Psalm 19:14”

I’ve had it. You have despised me for the last time. I worked day in and day out taking care of everything you provided me with. I made sure my children, who you just took away from me, had everything they could possibly need in life. All my servants and workers were fed and well taken care of. I AM RIGHTEOUS. RIGHTEOUS I SAY!!!! Why have you abandoned me?

Well that is what I would have said if I was in Job’s position. Everything Job had is gone and now he is left with only his wife, who also lost everything she had, and the clothes on his back. Everything, and I mean EVERYTHING is gone--Social Status and possessions. My question is why doesn’t Job turn his back on God? Why didn’t Job get angry at God? One idea is that Job felt he was being tested or punished. As one author wrote, “In the Old Testament and in subsequent Jewish tradition, fidelity to God was proven in the midst of testing--whether by the direct action of God, through difficult circumstances, or by the direct activity of the devil.” At first, Job’s reaction is that he has offended God. "Naked I came from my mother's womb, and naked shall I return there; the LORD gave, and the LORD has taken away; blessed be the name of the LORD." (Job 1:21 NRS)

This will be the last time we will read in this book where Job has something nice to say about God. Throughout the book, Job’s anger grows while holds to the idea that he is righteous before God--that he has done nothing wrong to deserve this punishment. His friends will come to his aid but they will only hinder Job in his grieving and defense before God. We, the readers, know that Job is righteous in God’s eyes. It says it in the text. God says, "Have you considered my servant Job? There is no one like him on the earth, a blameless and upright man who fears God and turns away from evil." (Job 1:8 NRS) God does not see Job as a bad guy, as a man who deserves the wrath of God, of the YHWH, of the GREAT I AM. Job is just the unfortunate pawn in a great game of chess between God and the Ha-Satan, the adversary, the prosecutor. God has made a bet with the devil. Now will God win?

Job’s anger towards God will grow throughout the book and Job will even get to the point where he denies that God is even with him. Job 23: 2-9 says “Today also my complaint is bitter; his hand is heavy despite my groaning. Oh, that I knew where I might find him, that I might come even to his dwelling! I would lay my case before him, and fill my mouth with arguments. I would learn what he would answer me, and understand what he would say to me. Would he contend with me in the greatness of his power? No; but he would give heed to me. There an upright person could reason with him, and I should be acquitted forever by my judge. “If I go forward, he is not there; or backward, I cannot perceive him; on the left he hides, and I cannot behold him; I turn to the right, but I cannot see him.” Job feels abandoned. Job cannot turn to his friends or his possessions. He has nobody and not even God can fill that void for him.

This past summer I spent 13 weeks at The Reading Hospital and Medical Center doing CPE. I was assigned to Medical Intensive Care Unit along with the other heart floors in the hospital. On top of that, I had my normal duties in the trauma bay. Every single day I was confronted with families and my own self asking essentially the same question that Job is asking God, “Why do bad things happen to good people?” “Why did my son have to die?” “Why me?” “Why Alex? He was such a great brother.” I can remember many sleepless nights staying up with families who were in the same situation Job was in. Sometimes we need to ask why. Sometimes we need to demand, yell, scream at God and ask “Why me?” But after that, we need to remember its not “why do bad things happen to good people?” but rather “When bad things happen to good people...” This world can be a wonderful place and at other times can be a horrible and hurtful place. I can remember one trauma case where a 21 year old male decided to ride down a hill on his skateboard drunk with no helmet. I remember sitting in the room with the young man’s mother and sister when the doctor came in and told her the prognosis was not good. His mother broke down in tears and his sister nearly passed out. The whole time they kept saying “He is a good kid but just made a bad decision.” A few days later, his mother had to make the decision of whether or not to pull him off life support. His friends, only being in their 20’s, had to say goodbye to their friend. Grief like this should never happen to anyone. It was a heartbreaking case that I hope nobody has to ever face. A mother deciding the fate of her child, a sister having to say goodbye to her older brother, a father wishing he could have done something different. I learn this summer that bad things will always happen to good people. There is a great quote from the show M*A*S*H, "Look, all I know is what they taught me at command school. There are certain rules about a war and rule number one is young men die. And rule number two is doctors can't change rule number one." In the end, it is not so much as we need to know why bad things happen but rather we need to “when whatever happens to you, I will be there.”

Job lost everything and still gives God praise. But what if he didn’t? What if he would have said “You are a horrible, horrible God who cruses the righteous and rewards the wicked?” What would have happened? Yes God would have lost his bet with Satan but what would have happened to Job? Would God punish Job? What else could God do to Job? Job lost everything. Throughout the Hebrew bible, God tells us that God will reward the righteous and punish the wicked. We do not need to always sing praise to God. I cannot tell you how many times I sat in the trauma bay and watched as patients and family members would defend God. God does not need to be defended and God can take your anger. But what we must always remember is God is not the one doing the actions. God allows Ha-Satan to destroy Job self but never participates in the actual event. Ha-Satan still had the option to say no and walk away.

Tragedies will always happen to us. We will always have to make the hard decisions that we never thought we would have to make. But the key into making those decisions is knowing that God is always with us. When bad things happen, God will be there. That is what we need to say. That is what we need to think. Jesus even warns us of this. Jesus calls us to be on guard because even the evil of this world will take his life. Satan entered the heart of Judas to hand over Jesus to be crucified. But even in tragedies, good can come about. The tragedy of Jesus’ death on a cross lead to the victory over sin and death. The tragedies in our life can certainly have a good ending as long as we know we are not alone. We are not alone because God is always with us. There is no logic in tragedy or death but there is logic in the cross. By the cross, all things are possible because on that old rugged cross hung the salvation of the world. And the man who hung on that old rugged cross remains for us always as the CRUCIFIED and risen Lord. That is our faith and that is our prayer this evening. Dear Lord, please Abide with Us in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Amen.