This year leading up to Holy Week I have been thinking quite a bit about the cross. Why is the cross symbolic of Christianity? What does it mean? Is there just one meaning to be learned and accepted? While I don’t have any answers, I do have some thoughts to share.
Historically, there are at least four slightly different theologies of the cross, all having a central theme of atonement (reconciliation). The oldest is the ransom theology expressed in Mark’s gospel, parroted verbatim in Matthew. Jesus lectured his disciples, “The Son of Man did not come to be served but to serve and to give his life as a ransom for many” Mk.10:45; Mt. 20:28. God’s amazing steadfast love offered Jesus’ life as a ransom payment for the sins of the world, thus reconciling God to the human condition with a fresh beginning. Does this work for you? Frankly, I have never been able to figure out how Jesus’ death by crucifixion is the ransom payment offered by God to cover the sins of the world, including mine.
A second theology of the cross is the substitutional sacrificial victim model first mentioned by Paul in his letter to the Romans ( Ro. 3:25) and advocated by Anselm of Canterbury and John Calvin. This theology fits with the Passover event (blood of the lamb on the door frame Ex. 12:21-22) and Jewish theology of substitutional sacrifice spelled out in Leviticus Chapters 1-7. Christ’s sacrifice was necessary to atone for (reconcile God to) human sin. Predictions of this fate abound in the Psalms and the prophetic literature of the OT. Does this explanation work any better for you? It doesn’t help me much.
A third theology is attributed to Peter Abelard, an early 12th Century philosopher and theologian. Jesus presented the human model of moral behavior even unto death, thereby demonstrating how one might mimic the love of God. This “moral influence” theory might have influenced C.S. Lewis’ thinking when he wrote in Mere Christianity, “But supposing God became a man…then that person could help us. He could surrender His will, and suffer and die, because He was man; and He could do it perfectly because He was God.” Christ could show us the way, not just in daily behavior, but unto death even under torture. Does this work any better? Seems to help me some.
The fourth theology picks up on the third, but adds an important wrinkle. The journey to the cross is not just a lamb to the slaughter, victim of a sinful world. Rather, the reconciliation God seeks is a new relationship with humanity through the incarnation, life, ministry and death of the Son of Man. Try reading closely John 12: 23-36. The grain must die to seed in order to bear much fruit. When lifted up from the earth, the Son of Man would draw all people to Him. Eternal life begins at death. A public death, rejected by rulers of the age, lifted on a cross for all to see, is the path to glory. ‘Follow me and be reconciled to God the Father forever in eternal life. God and I are about to show you. Just watch.’ Now, here is the important wrinkle. This reconciliation is not a free gift. Grace is not cheap. According to this fourth theology of the cross, each of us has to choose to accept Grace by believing (faith) and acting consistent with that belief (faithfulness). The faith community (the children of light Jn. 12:36) is the fruit of Jesus’ death.1 Do we have to suffer? Maybe. This fourth theology of the cross seems to work best for me.
Yet it remains complicated. Jesus did sacrifice himself to show the way. And most of Christendom has concluded that this sacrifice atoned for the sins of the world. Even John, his gospel notwithstanding, wrote in 1Jn. 4:10, “In this is love, not that we loved God but that he loved us and sent his Son to be the atoning sacrifice for our sins.” Perhaps I can think that God determined out of love for humanity that an intervention was necessary to show us a way to break from the Law and death to sin. And God knew that this intervention would be disruptive and go very badly for the disruptor. Perhaps only God’s Son was suitable for the task. Thanks be to God.
Question: Which cross is the more appropriate or meaningful symbol: Christ crucified depicting the sacrifice of God’s Son, or a clean cross stripped of its power by God? Happy Easter.
- Though I used several references for this little blog, I am indebted to the brilliant commentary on John written by Gail Radcliffe O’Day and published in New Interpreters Bible Commentary, Vol. VIII, Nashville, Abington Press, 2015. Ms. O’Day earned her BA from Brown, her Masters from Harvard and her PhD from Emory, with a career focus on the Gospel of John. She was afflicted with glioblastoma in 2015 and passed away in 2018 before her 64th birthday.