12
THE NONVIOLENT CROSS
Luke 19:36-40; 23:32-46
Rev. Paul Wrightman 3/24/24
TODAY, OF COURSE, IS PALM SUNDAY,
WHEN WE CELEBRATE
WHAT IS IRONICALLY KNOWN AS
JESUS’ “TRIUMPHAL” ENTRY INTO JERUSALEM.
STRIPPING OFF PALM BRANCHES
AND LAYING THEM IN JESUS’ APPROACHING PATH
WAS THE KIND OF WELCOME RESERVED
FOR WARRIOR-KINGS WHEN THEY RETURNED
VICTORIOUS FROM BATTLE.
AS WE KNOW, JESUS REPUDIATES
THIS DESIGNATION OF WARRRIOR-KING
WHEN HE CHOOSES TO ENTER THE CITY
RIDING ON A LOWLY DONKEY
INSTEAD OF A MAGNIFICENT WAR HORSE.
HE DOES THIS IN CONSCIOUS FULFILLMENT
OF A PROPHECY FROM
THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET ZECHARIAH,
WHERE THE MESSIAH
IS DESCRIBED AS ENTERING JERUSALEM
IN THIS WAY PRECISELY AS THE PRINCE OF PEACE
WHO HAS COME TO DEFINITIVELY ABOLISH WAR.
THIS SUNDAY IS THE BEGINNING
OF WHAT NEARLY TWO BILLION CHRISTIANS
TRADITIONALLY DESIGNATE AS “HOLY WEEK,”
THE LAST WEEK OF JESUS’ LIFE,
CULMINATING WITH HIS DEATH ON GOOD FRIDAY
AND RESURRECTION ON EASTER SUNDAY.
TODAY IS THE ONE SUNDAY OF THE YEAR
WHEN I PREACH ON THE MEANING OF JESUS’ DEATH,
WHICH THE MAJORITY OF CHRISTIANS
CALL THE DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT,
AND SEE AS A BLOOD SACRIFICE ON THE PART
OF JESUS THAT WAS NECESSARY FOR US
TO BE RECONCILED TO GOD.
AS YOU CAN TELL BY THE TITLE OF THIS SERMON,
“THE NONVIOLENT CROSS,”
I’M GOING TO CHALLENGE
THE MAJORITY UNDERSTANDING.
THIS SERMON MAY BE A BIT OF A STRETCH
FOR SOME, WHO CONTINUE TO SEE
THE BLOOD OF JESUS
AS THE NECESSARY PRICE TO PAY FOR OUR SINS.
THE THEOLOGICAL TRADITION
HERE AT COMMUNITY CHURCH
MAKES A VIRTUE OUT OF AGREEING TO DISAGREE,
AND ENCOURAGES DISCUSSION AND DEBATE.
YOU DON’T HAVE TO AGREE WITH ME
FOR US TO BE ABLE TO DIALOGUE
AROUND THE SAME TABLE.
WE ALL, MYSELF VERY MUCH INCLUDED,
NEED TO REMIND OURSELVES
THAT OUR SALVATION IS BASED ON
GOD’S UNQUENCHABLE LOVE,
AND NOT ON OUR HAVING FIGURED OUT
THE WAYS OF GOD MORE OR LESS CORRECTLY.
THEOLOGY DOESN’T SAVE, GOD DOES.
UNFORTUNATELY, FOR THE GREATER PART
OF ITS TWO THOUSAND YEAR HISTORY,
CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY HAS BEEN
OVERWHELMINGLY COMMITTED
TO VARIOUS BLOODY APPROACHES
TO THE MEANING OF THE CROSS.
MOST OF US HAVE HEARD THE PHRASE
"WE'RE SAVED BY THE BLOOD OF JESUS,"
MEANING THE BLOOD OF JESUS
THAT WAS SPILLED ON THE CROSS
AND OUR ACCEPTANCE OF THAT BLOOD
AS COVERING OUR SINS,
MAKES US ACCEPTABLE TO GOD.
THIS UNDERSTANDING
HAS BECOME OFFICIAL DOCTINE
IN MANY CHURCHES,
AND IS KNOWN AS THE DOCTRINE
OF THE ATONEMENT.
IF WE TAKE THAT WORD APART,
WE SEE THAT IT SPELLS OUT AT-ONE-MENT.
THE QUESTION ASKED BY
THE DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT IS:
"WHAT DOES IT TAKE TO MAKE SINFUL HUMANKIND
AT-ONE WITH GOD?"
THE ANSWER GIVEN BY
THE DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT IS:
THE BLOODY DEATH OF JESUS ON THE CROSS
SATISFIES GOD'S OFFENDED HONOR AND JUSTICE
AND BRIDGES THE GAP
BETWEEN SINFUL HUMANITY AND HOLY GOD.
MANY OF US HAVE SEEN PICTURES
OF THE CROSS AS A LITERAL BRIDGE
BETWEEN GOD AND HUMANITY,
THE ONLY BRIDGE WHICH WILL CARRY US
SAFELY OVER THE FIRES OF HELL.
ROB BELL, AT THE BEGINNING OF HIS BOOK
LOVE WINS, DESCRIBES IN DETAIL SUCH A PICTURE
SHOWN TO HIM AND HIS SISTER
BY HIS GRANDMOTHER.
HE TELLS US THAT THIS PICTURE
DEEPLY DISTURBED HIM AS A CHILD.
IT PROVOKED HIM TO ASK THE QUESTION
"WHAT KIND OF GOD
WOULD DEMAND THE DEATH OF HIS SON
TO MAKE PEACE WITH HIS ENEMIES?"
OVER THE LAST FORTY YEARS OR SO,
QUITE A FEW THEOLOGIANS
AND BIBLICAL SCHOLARS --
NOT TO MENTION MANY PEOPLE IN THE PEWS --
HAVE BEEN ASKING THIS VERY QUESTION.
"WHAT KIND OF GOD
WOULD DEMAND THE DEATH OF HIS SON
TO MAKE PEACE WITH HIS ENEMIES?"
AND IN ORDER TO GET TO THE
ROOT OF THIS QUESTION,
THEY HAVE BEEN ASKING
TWO RELATED QUESTIONS:
"WHERE DID THIS DOCTRINE COME FROM?"
AND "IS THIS WHAT JESUS HIMSELF TAUGHT?"
I WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR
THAT I AM NOT QUESTIONING
THE UNIQUE STATUS OF JESUS.
I AM, ALONG WITH PLENTY OF OTHERS,
QUESTIONING THE VALIDITY
OF A DEEPLY ENTRENCHED DOCTINE
THAT I BELIEVE DISTORTS JESUS' OWN TEACHING
AND GIVES US A FALSE IDEA OF GOD.
SO… WHERE DID THIS DOCTRINE COME FROM?
THE HEBREW SCRIPTURES,
THE JUDAISM OF JESUS' DAY,
AND THE TEACHINGS OF JESUS HIMSELF,
WHILE ACKNOWLEDGING
THE DEEP-SEATED BROKENNESS OF HUMANKIND,
MAKE NO MENTION OF THE FALL
OR OF ORIGINAL SIN.
IN HIS LETTER TO THE ROMANS,
THE APOSTLE PAUL
INTRODUCED THESE CONCEPTS.
GIVEN THE INCREDIBLE --
AND I BELIEVE MISTAKEN --
AUTHORITY ACCORDED TO PAUL
AS SPOKESPERSON
FOR THE NEW CHRISTIAN RELIGION,
PAUL'S IDEAS WERE SOON GIVEN MORE WEIGHT
THAN THOSE OF JESUS HIMSELF.
PAUL ACHIEVED THIS IN HIS OWN LIFETIME
AND HIS IDEAS ARE STILL MORE PREACHED ABOUT
THAN THOSE OF JESUS.
PAUL UNDERSTOOD THE STORY
OF ADAM, EVE, THE SNAKE, AND THE TREE
OF THE KNOWLEDGE OF GOOD AND EVIL
DESCRIBED IN GENESIS, CHAPTER THREE,
IN A LITERAL WAY,
AND DEDUCED FROM IT THE THEORY
THAT ALL OF HUMANITY
WAS CAUGHT UP IN THE SIN
OF THE FIRST HUMAN COUPLE.
THE MOST GRIEVIOUS CONSEQUENCES
OF THIS FALL FROM GOD'S GRACE
WERE DEATH AND DAMNATION.
I NEED TO SAY HERE
THAT FOR JESUS HIMSELF
THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTION
OF HOW HUMANKIND CAN RECONNECT WITH GOD
WAS BY PARTICIPATING
IN WHAT HE CALLED THE “KINGDOM OF GOD.”
WE KNOW FROM JESUS’ OWN TEACHINGS
THAT THIS IS A KINGDOM --
NOT OF CHURCH DOCTRINES --
BUT OF VERY CONCRETE TEACHINGS
ABOUT HOW WE RELATE TO GOD, OURSELVES,
OTHERS, AND THOSE OTHERS WE CALL ENEMIES.
THE GREAT DISSERVICE THAT PAUL
DID TO THE NEW CHRISTIAN FAITH
WAS TO ASK ABSTRACT QUESTIONS,
PROVIDE ABSTRACT ANSWERS
TO THESE ABSTRACT QUESTIONS,
AND THUS TO SET IN MOTION
WHAT SOON BECAME
AN OUT-OF-CONTROL EMPHASIS ON DOCTRINE.
THIS EMPHASIS ON DOCTRINE
WAS IN DIRECT OPPOSITION
TO JESUS' OWN EMPHASIS ON RIGHT LIVING.
SO NOW WE HAVE IN PAUL
THE BEGINNINGS OF A DOCTINE
OF THE FALL
AND THE ORIGINAL SIN
CONNECTED TO THAT FALL.
AS HAS BEEN NOTED BY, AMONG OTHERS,
AFRICAN AMERICAN AND FEMINIST THINKERS,
WHITE, UPPER-CRUST, MALE THEOLOGIANS
LIKE NOTHING BETTER
THAN TO ELABORATE ON DOCTRINE,
AND ELABORATE THEY DID.
SADLY, THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT
BY THE EARLY CHURCH FATHER TERTULLIAN --
COMPLETELY OUT OF SYNC
WITH JESUS' OWN ATTITUDE TOWARD WOMEN --
IS NOT A MEAN EXCEPTION,
BUT IS INDICATIVE OF THE ATTITUDE
OF THE CHURCH FATHERS AS A WHOLE.
TERTULLIAN, ELABORATING
ON PAUL'S DOCTRINE OF THE FALL,
TAKES IT UPON HIMSELF TO PREACH
TO THE WOMEN IN HIS CONGREGATION.
HE DECIDES TO ADDRESS THEM PERSONALLY:
"YOU ARE THE DEVIL'S GATEWAY:
YOU ARE THE UNSEALER
OF THAT [FORBIDDEN] TREE:
YOU ARE THE FIRST DESERTER
OF THE DIVINE LAW:
YOU ARE SHE WHO PERSUADED HIM
WHOM THE DEVIL WAS NOT VALIANT ENOUGH
TO ATTACK.
YOU DESTROYED SO EASILY GOD'S IMAGE, MAN.
ON ACCOUNT OF YOU
EVEN THE SON OF MAN HAD TO DIE."
WHEW!
IT SEEMS IMPOSSIBLE
THAT IN THE SPAN OF JUST A FEW YEARS
THE EARLY CHURCH HAD MOVED FROM
JESUS' CLEAR AFFIRMATION
OF THE EQUALITY OF WOMEN WITH MEN
TO THE FATHERS OF THE CHURCH
MAKING SUCH VICIOUS STATEMENTS
AGAINST WOMEN.
HOW DID THIS HAPPEN?
IT HAPPENED, I SUGGEST,
THROUGH THE BRIDGE OF ABSTRACT DOCTRINE.
WHAT BEGAN IN PAUL AS A THEORY
ABOUT THE ORIGINS OF HUMAN BROKENNESS
SOON ENOUGH BECAME FOR THE WESTERN CHURCH
THE DOUBLE-DOCTRINE
OF THE FALL AND OF ORIGINAL SIN,
BELIEF STATEMENTS WHICH ONE
HAD TO ASSENT TO
IN ORDER TO BE CONSIDERED
A "REAL" CHRISTIAN.
HOW TRAGICALLY IRONIC
THAT EVENTUALLY THIS EMPHASIS
ON RIGHT DOCTRINE --
STUFF NOT EVEN MENTIONED
IN THE TEACHINGS OF JESUS –
LED TO THE CHURCH EVENTUALLY
ELIMINATING THOSE
-- AND ELIMINATING THEM IN THE NAME OF JESUS! –
WHO REFUSED TO AFFIRM THESE DOCTRINES
AS THE VERY TRUTH OF GOD.
ONE OF THE MAJOR CHARACTERISTICS
OF ABSTRACT DOCTRINE
IS THAT IT IS HIGHLY PROLIFIC.
ABSTRACT DOCTRINE
PRODUCES MORE ABSTRACT DOCTRINE.
IN TERTULLIAN, WE HAVE AN AUTHORITATIVE TEACHER IN THE EARLY CHURCH
EMPHASIZING THE INFINTE DISTANCE
BETWEEN BROKEN HUMANITY AND GOD,
INFLUENCING LIKE-MINDED OTHERS,
AND SPAWNING A MOUNTAIN OF SPECULATION
ON JESUS HAVING TO DIE
TO REMOVE THE EFFECTS
OF THE FALL AND ORIGINAL SIN.
WE GET VARIOUS STRANGE THEORIES,
STRANGE THEORIES WITH THE WEIGHT OF DOCTRINE,
BEGINNING WITH JESUS HAVING TO DIE
TO PAY OFF HUMANKIND'S DEBT TO THE DEVIL,
MOVING THROUGH THE
SUBSTITUTIONARY ATONEMENT THEORY
OF ANSELM,
IN WHICH JESUS HAD TO DIE IN OUR PLACE
IN ORDER TO SATISFY THE INJURY
WHICH OUR FALL AND CONTINUING SINFULNESS
HAD DONE TO GOD'S HONOR,
AND ENDING UP WITH A VARIATION
ON THIS THEME BY LUTHER AND CALVIN
IN WHICH JESUS HAD TO DIE IN OUR STEAD
TO SATISFY GOD'S LAW,
WHICH WE HAD DEFILED.
CHRISTIAN HISTORY HAS PRODUCED
A FEW EXCEPTIONS TO THE NECESSITY
OF GOD’S DEMANDING THE BLOOD OF JESUS
IN ORDER TO BE RECONCILED TO HUMANKIND.
THE MOST NOTABLE OF THESE
ARE THOSE OF THE FRANSCISCAN SCHOLAR
JOHN DUNS SCOTUS
WHO EMPHASIZED THE FACT
THAT GOD’S LOVE IS WHAT RECONCILES,
NOT THE SPILLING OF BLOOD,
AND THE SMALL GROUP OF CHRISTIANS
KNOWN AS ANABAPTISTS --
WE KNOW THEM AS MENNONITES AND AMISH --
WHO HELD THAT THE GOD
WHO INSPIRED JESUS' TEACHINGS ON NONVIOLENCE
WOULD NEVER DEMAND HIS OWN SON'S
VIOLENT DEATH.
WITH THESE FEW EXCEPTIONS,
THIS EMPHASIS ON THE NECESSITY
OF JESUS' VIOLENT DEATH
IN ORDER APPEASE THE HONOR OR JUSTICE
OF GOD THE FATHER
HAS BEEN THE KEY UNDERSTANDING
OF THE VAST MAJORITY OF CHRISTIAN CHURCHES.
THAT IS, UNTIL AFRICAN AMERICAN,
NATIVE AMERICAN, THIRD WORLD, GAY,
AND FEMINIST THEOLOGIANS
AND BIBLICAL SCHOLARS
STARTED QUESTIONING THIS KEY UNDERSTANDING
IN THE 1960'S.
THEY POINTED OUT HOW MANY
OF THE SO-CALLED KEY DOCTRINES
OF THE CHRISTIAN FAITH
HAD BEEN AUTHORED BY WHITE MALES
IN POWER DETERMINED TO STAY IN POWER.
THEY POINTED OUT HOW
ANSELM'S SATISFACTION THEORY
OF ATONEMENT
WAS PREDICATED ON GOD'S HONOR
BEING OFFENDED,
AND HOW THE WHOLE NOTION
OF OFFENDED HONOR
AND ITS SATISFACTION
WAS CRUCIAL FOR THE CONTINUANCE
OF THE FEUDAL SYSTEM,
IN WHICH THERE WERE SEVERE PENALTIES
FOR OFFENDING THE HONOR
OF KING, LORD, BISHOP, AND POPE.
THEY POINTED OUT HOW
LUTHER AND CALVIN,
REFLECTING THEIR OWN TIME IN HISTORY,
CHANGED OFFENDING GOD'S HONOR
TO OFFENDING GOD'S LAW,
WITH -- YOU GUESSED IT --
THE DEATH OF GOD'S SON
BEING THE ONLY SACRIFICE
CAPABLE OF RESTORING
THE INTEGRITY OF GOD'S LAW.
FINALLY, AND I THINK MOST IMPORTANTLY,
THESE CONTRARIAN THEOLOGIANS POINTED OUT
HOW THE DOCTRINES OF THE FALL
AND ORIGINAL SIN HAD NO PLACE IN THE TEACHINGS OF JESUS.
WHY DID JESUS DIE?
ONE ANSWER IS THAT
JESUS DIED BECAUSE THE POWERS-THAT-BE,
BOTH RELIGIOUS AND POLITICAL,
COULD NOT STOMACH
HIS ALTERNATIVE VISION OF REALITY
IN HIS PREACHING THE GOOD NEWS
OF THE KINGDOM OF GOD,
A KINGDOM WHICH, IF LIVED OUT,
WOULD RESULT IN NO MASSIVE UNDERCLASS
SUPPORTING A TINY UPPER CRUST,
A KINGDOM WHICH, IF LIVED OUT,
WOULD RESULT IN EQUALITY
BETEEN WOMEN AND MEN,
THE DEMISE OF SLAVERY,
AND THE PRACTICE OF CREATIVE NONVIOLENCE
IN ALL AREAS OF LIFE.
THE POWERS-THAT-BE COULD NOT HANDLE
THE RADICALNESS OF JESUS
AND SO TOOK HIM OUT.
ANOTHER ANSWER IS THAT GOD BECAME
SO INCREDIBLY SICK-AND-TIRED
OF ALL THE VIOLENCE
THAT WE HUMANS PROJECT ONTO THE DEITY,
THAT GOD DECIDED TO COME IN PERSON,
LIVING A LIFE OF UNCONDITIONAL LOVE,
LIMITLESS FORGIVENESS, AND ABSOLUTE NONVIOLENCE
TO SHOW US ONCE-AND-FOR-ALL
THAT HUMANKIND HAS NOTHING TO FEAR
FROM GOD.
SOMETHING OF INFINITE IMPORTANCE
HAPPENED ON THE CROSS.
IF IT WASN’T GOD’S DEMANDING
THE BLOODY SACRIFICE OF HIS SON
TO LET US OFF THE HOOK,
WHAT WAS IT?
IF GOD REALLY BECAME A PERSON
IN THE PERSON OF JESUS,
JESUS’ DEATH ON THE CROSS
SHOWS US THE EXTENT TO WHICH
GOD’S LOVE WAS WILLING TO GO FOR US.
THE CROSS IS GOD’S DEFINITIVE REVELATION
THAT GOD MEETS US, FORGIVES US,
AND ACCEPTS US EVEN AT OUR ABSOLUTE WORST.
HOW DOES GOD CONVINCE US
OF GOD’S LOVE FOR US?
BY GOING SO FAR AS TO DIE FOR US.
JESUS’ WORDS FROM THE CROSS –
“FATHER, FORGIVE THEM;
FOR THEY DO NOT KNOW WHAT THEY ARE DOING” –
IS THE EXTREME EXAMPLE
OF GOD GIVING US FORGIVENESS
BEFORE WE EVEN ASK FOR IT;
OF GOD GIVING US FORGIVENESS
BEFORE REPENTANCE OR TURNING.
WHAT IS THE APPROPRIATE AND GRACIOUS
RESPONSE TO GOD’S ALWAYS-PRIOR ACT OF LOVE?
JESUS WOULD SAY
THAT THE APPROPRIATE AND GRACIOUS
HUMAN RESPONSE WOULD BE TO
JOIN HIM ON “THE WAY,”
“THE WAY” BEING THE VERY FIRST NAME
THAT EARLY FOLLOWERS OF JESUS
USES TO DESCRIBE THEMSELVES,
“THE WAY” DESIGNATING THE WAY-OF-LIFE
OF JESUS HIMSELF.
TO CONCLUDE,
I WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST THAT
CHOOSING SOLIDARITY WITH JESUS
BY PARTICIPATING IN HIS VISION
OF THE KINGDOM OF GOD
IS THE ATONEMENT,
IS, SIMPLY, WHAT MAKES AT-ONE-MENT WITH GOD
AN ALREADY-PRESENT REALITY FOR US.
AMEN.