We, and creation itself, actualize the possibilities of the God who sustains the world, towards becoming in the world in a fuller, more deeper way. - R.E. Slater
There is urgency in coming to see the world as a web of interrelated processes of which we are integral parts, so that all of our choices and actions have [consequential effects upon] the world around us. - Process Metaphysician Alfred North Whitehead
Kurt Gödel's Incompleteness Theorem says (i) all closed systems are unprovable within themselves and, that (ii) all open systems are rightly understood as incomplete. - R.E. Slater
The most true thing about you is what God has said to you in Christ, "You are My Beloved." - Tripp Fuller
The God among us is the God who refuses to be God without us, so great is God's Love. - Tripp Fuller
According to some Christian outlooks we were made for another world. Perhaps, rather, we were made for this world to recreate, reclaim, redeem, and renew unto God's future aspiration by the power of His Spirit. - R.E. Slater
Our eschatological ethos is to love. To stand with those who are oppressed. To stand against those who are oppressing. It is that simple. Love is our only calling and Christian Hope. - R.E. Slater
Secularization theory has been massively falsified. We don't live in an age of secularity. We live in an age of explosive, pervasive religiosity... an age of religious pluralism. - Peter L. Berger
Exploring the edge of life and faith in a post-everything world. - Todd Littleton
I don't need another reason to believe, your love is all around for me to see. – Anon
Thou art our need; and in giving us more of thyself thou givest us all. - Khalil Gibran, Prayer XXIII
Be careful what you pretend to be. You become what you pretend to be. - Kurt Vonnegut
Religious beliefs, far from being primary, are often shaped and adjusted by our social goals. - Jim Forest
We become who we are by what we believe and can justify. - R.E. Slater
People, even more than things, need to be restored, renewed, revived, reclaimed, and redeemed; never throw out anyone. – Anon
Certainly, God's love has made fools of us all. - R.E. Slater
An apocalyptic Christian faith doesn't wait for Jesus to come, but for Jesus to become in our midst. - R.E. Slater
Christian belief in God begins with the cross and resurrection of Jesus, not with rational apologetics. - Eberhard Jüngel, Jürgen Moltmann
Our knowledge of God is through the 'I-Thou' encounter, not in finding God at the end of a syllogism or argument. There is a grave danger in any Christian treatment of God as an object. The God of Jesus Christ and Scripture is irreducibly subject and never made as an object, a force, a power, or a principle that can be manipulated. - Emil Brunner
“Ehyeh Asher Ehyeh” means "I will be that who I have yet to become." - God (Ex 3.14) or, conversely, “I AM who I AM Becoming.”
Our job is to love others without stopping to inquire whether or not they are worthy. - Thomas Merton
The church is God's world-changing social experiment of bringing unlikes and differents to the Eucharist/Communion table to share life with one another as a new kind of family. When this happens, we show to the world what love, justice, peace, reconciliation, and life together is designed by God to be. The church is God's show-and-tell for the world to see how God wants us to live as a blended, global, polypluralistic family united with one will, by one Lord, and baptized by one Spirit. – Anon
The cross that is planted at the heart of the history of the world cannot be uprooted. - Jacques Ellul
The Unity in whose loving presence the universe unfolds is inside each person as a call to welcome the stranger, protect animals and the earth, respect the dignity of each person, think new thoughts, and help bring about ecological civilizations. - John Cobb & Farhan A. Shah
If you board the wrong train it is of no use running along the corridors of the train in the other direction. - Dietrich Bonhoeffer
God's justice is restorative rather than punitive; His discipline is merciful rather than punishing; His power is made perfect in weakness; and His grace is sufficient for all. – Anon
Our little [biblical] systems have their day; they have their day and cease to be. They are but broken lights of Thee, and Thou, O God art more than they. - Alfred Lord Tennyson
We can’t control God; God is uncontrollable. God can’t control us; God’s love is uncontrolling! - Thomas Jay Oord
Life in perspective but always in process... as we are relational beings in process to one another, so life events are in process in relation to each event... as God is to Self, is to world, is to us... like Father, like sons and daughters, like events... life in process yet always in perspective. - R.E. Slater
To promote societal transition to sustainable ways of living and a global society founded on a shared ethical framework which includes respect and care for the community of life, ecological integrity, universal human rights, respect for diversity, economic justice, democracy, and a culture of peace. - The Earth Charter Mission Statement
Christian humanism is the belief that human freedom, individual conscience, and unencumbered rational inquiry are compatible with the practice of Christianity or even intrinsic in its doctrine. It represents a philosophical union of Christian faith and classical humanist principles. - Scott Postma
It is never wise to have a self-appointed religious institution determine a nation's moral code. The opportunities for moral compromise and failure are high; the moral codes and creeds assuredly racist, discriminatory, or subjectively and religiously defined; and the pronouncement of inhumanitarian political objectives quite predictable. - R.E. Slater
God's love must both center and define the Christian faith and all religious or human faiths seeking human and ecological balance in worlds of subtraction, harm, tragedy, and evil. - R.E. Slater
In Whitehead’s process ontology, we can think of the experiential ground of reality as an eternal pulse whereby what is objectively public in one moment becomes subjectively prehended in the next, and whereby the subject that emerges from its feelings then perishes into public expression as an object (or “superject”) aiming for novelty. There is a rhythm of Being between object and subject, not an ontological division. This rhythm powers the creative growth of the universe from one occasion of experience to the next. This is the Whiteheadian mantra: “The many become one and are increased by one.” - Matthew Segall
Without Love there is no Truth. And True Truth is always Loving. There is no dichotomy between these terms but only seamless integration. This is the premier centering focus of a Processual Theology of Love. - R.E. Slater
-----
Note: Generally I do not respond to commentary. I may read the comments but wish to reserve my time to write (or write off the comments I read). Instead, I'd like to see our community help one another and in the helping encourage and exhort each of us towards Christian love in Christ Jesus our Lord and Savior. - re slater
Showing posts with label Commentary - Catholic. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Commentary - Catholic. Show all posts
The Stations of the Cross, sometimes called The Way of The Cross, is a meditative prayer based on the Passion, Death, and Resurrection of Jesus. This devotion grew out of the custom of Holy Land pilgrims who retraced the last steps of Jesus on his way to Calvary. These early Christians marked significant places along the way of Jesus so that others could follow. These places became the Stations of the Cross. In the 17th century, churches placed stations around the walls to commemorate these events.
When praying the Stations of the Cross we pause at each station remembering all that Jesus did for us, and we reflect prayerfully on the scene depicted. We can pray alone or as a group, use our own heartfelt prayers or prayers written by various people throughout the centuries. This meditation helps us to deepen our commitment to follow Jesus, to reflect on his Suffering, Death, and Resurrection and his amazing love for us all.
The Stations of the Cross
Jesus is condemned to death on the cross.
Jesus accepts his cross.
Jesus falls the first time.
Jesus meets his sorrowful Mother.
Simon of Cyrene helps Jesus carry his cross.
Veronica wipes the face of Jesus.
Jesus falls the second time.
Jesus meets and speaks to the women of Jerusalem.
Jesus falls the third time.
Jesus is stripped of his garments.
Jesus is nailed to the cross.
Jesus dies on the cross.
Jesus is taken down from the cross.
Jesus is placed in the tomb.
The Resurrection of the Lord.
The Stations of the Cross (Full Version)
March 13, 2012
This is the full length version of the Stations of the Cross. Thanks to youtube they have allowed this full version to be broadcast without interruption. It is the same as the broken up version showed on this network. Please send this link out for Lent for others to experience. Share the faith in a more intimate way by following Jesus Christ on the way to the cross. This version is bound to move the hardest of hearts thanks to the Most Holy Spirit.
The Stations of the Cross with Father Reed
Mar 19, 2011
The Stations of the Cross (or Way of the Cross; in Latin, Via Crucis; also called the Via Dolorosa or Way of Sorrows, or simply, The Way) refers to the depiction of the final hours (or Passion) of Jesus, and the devotion commemorating the Passion. The tradition as chapel devotion began with St. Francis of Assisi and extended throughout the Roman Catholic Church in the medieval period. It is less often observed in the Anglican and Lutheran churches. It may be done at any time, but is most commonly done during the Season of Lent, especially on Good Friday and on Friday evenings during Lent.
The Stations of the Cross originated in pilgrimages to Jerusalem. A desire to reproduce the holy places in other lands seems to have manifested itself at quite an early date.
Because by Your holy cross You have redeemed the world.
O Jesus! So meek and uncomplaining, teach me resignation in trials.
Lord Jesus, help us walk in Your steps.
Second Station
Jesus Carries His Cross
We adore You, O Christ, and we praise You.
Because by Your holy cross You have redeemed the world.
O Jesus! This Cross should be mine, not Thine! My sins crucified Thee.
Lord Jesus, help us walk in Your steps.
Third Station
Jesus Falls the First Time
We adore You, O Christ, and we praise You.
Because by Your holy cross You have redeemed the world.
O Jesus! By this first fall, never let me fall into mortal sin.
Lord Jesus, help us walk in Your steps.
Fourth Station
Jesus Meets His Mother
We adore You, O Christ, and we praise You.
Because by Your holy cross You have redeemed the world.
O Jesus! May no human tie, however dear, keep me from following the road of the Cross.
Lord Jesus, help us walk in Your steps.
Fifth Station
Simon, the Cyrenean,
Helps Jesus Carry His Cross
We adore You, O Christ, and we praise You.
Because by Your holy cross You have redeemed the world.
Simon unwillingly assisted Thee; may I with patience suffer all for Thee.
Lord Jesus, help us walk in Your steps.
Sixth Station
Veronica Wipes the Face of Jesus
We adore You, O Christ, and we praise You.
Because by Your holy cross You have redeemed the world.
O Jesus! Thou didst imprint Thy sacred features upon Veronica’s veil; stamp them also indelibly upon my heart.
Lord Jesus, help us walk in Your steps.
Seventh Station
Jesus Falls the Second Time
We adore You, O Christ, and we praise You.
Because by Your holy cross You have redeemed the world.
By Thy second fall, preserve me, dear Lord, from relapse into sin.
Lord Jesus, help us walk in Your steps.
Eighth Station
Jesus Consoles the Women of Jerusalem
We adore You, O Christ, and we praise You.
Because by Your holy cross You have redeemed the world.
My greatest consolation would be to hear Thee say: “Many sins are forgiven thee, because thou hast loved much.”
Lord Jesus, help us walk in Your steps.
Ninth Station
Jesus Falls the Third Time
We adore You, O Christ, and we praise You.
Because by Your holy cross You have redeemed the world.
O Jesus! When I am weary upon life’s long journey, be Thou my strength and my perseverance.
Lord Jesus, help us walk in Your steps.
Tenth Station
Jesus is Stripped of His Garments
We adore You, O Christ, and we praise You.
Because by Your holy cross You have redeemed the world.
My soul has been robbed of its robe of innocence; clothe me, dear Jesus, with the garb of penance and contrition.
Lord Jesus, help us walk in Your steps.
Eleventh Station
Jesus is Nailed to the Cross
We adore You, O Christ, and we praise You.
Because by Your holy cross You have redeemed the world.
Thou didst forgive Thy enemies; my God, teach me to forgive injuries and forget them.
Lord Jesus, help us walk in Your steps.
Twelfth Station
Jesus Dies on the Cross
We adore You, O Christ, and we praise You.
Because by Your holy cross You have redeemed the world.
Thou art dying, my Jesus, but Thy Sacred Heart still throbs with love for Thy sinful children.
Lord Jesus, help us walk in Your steps.
Thirteenth Station
Jesus is Taken Down from the Cross
We adore You, O Christ, and we praise You.
Because by Your holy cross You have redeemed the world.
Receive me into thy arms, O Sorrowful Mother, and obtain for me perfect contrition for my sins.
Lord Jesus, help us walk in Your steps.
Fourteenth Station
Jesus is Laid in the Tomb
We adore You, O Christ, and we praise You.
Because by Your holy cross You have redeemed the world.
When I receive Thee into my heart in Holy Communion, O Jesus, make it a fit abiding place for Thy adorable Body.
Lord Jesus, help us walk in Your steps.
Amen.
Prayers highlighted in bold in the "Short Way of the Cross" as used by The Franciscan Fathers on their Missions. The accompanying prayers are from traditional Stations of the Cross.
* * * * * * * *
“For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.” Matthew 18: 20
Even by trusted friends Still shows us charity Life for us you mend
Your power brings to serve People you call your own Condemned to death, for us A Father’s promise sown
Jesus on the cross, by your love heal us.
Station 2: Jesus bears his cross
Cross, you bear means love Almighty’s gift to the world Jesus, brother, keeper To journey with us, Lord
You became man Mercy for humanity Sky and earth unite Miracle flowing sanctity
Jesus on the Cross, by your love heal us.
Station 3: Jesus falls the first time
Lord, let us hold you Lord, let us rise with you Power in humility Shows us to be true
No man is perfect Only God - is Lord Jesus, as example If fallen, hold to peace
Jesus on the cross, by your love heals us.
Station 4: Jesus meets his mother
What grief for a mother What grief for a child What grief for a beloved Alone in sorrow, Jesus guides
Feel us Jesus In sorrow and isolation But God’s will is best Have mercy in temptation
Jesus on the cross, by your love heal us.
Station 5: Jesus is helped by Simon
Simon of Cyrene, hail to God Courage and cross you lifted Bridge to us from heaven Angel signs we’re gifted
And so we come in prayer Flesh, thoughts, and our hearts Your holy cross dear Jesus To us don’t ever part.
Jesus on the cross, by your love heal us.
Station 6: Veronica wipes the face of Jesus
Saint, Oh Saint Veronica Ring bells to God’s workers Crown of thorns on Holy face Hope and bliss, His blood carves
O, poor Face we love you Face of beauty, Face of light In suffering and brokenness Sacred Face of might
Jesus on the cross, by your love heal us.
Station 7: Jesus falls a second time
My Lord! My God! My Savior! We trust our lives in Thee You know how weak we all are We beg, we beg, we plea
My Lord! My God! Be here to servants frail Hold me, hold us O’er wind we fly, on sea we sail
Jesus on the cross, by your love heal us.
Station 8: Jesus speaks to the women
Help us to love Mother Mary You longed your parents, too The crowd, are us, your family How precious all to you
Speak to us, we long for Thee The bravest soldier frees From sin and wars Your words a bomb and keys
Jesus on the cross, by your love heal us.
Station 9: Jesus falls a third time
Race and blows The third’s the final count Your sacrifice, a painful lash Forgive our sins abound
Hold tight hold, dear Jesus Please - do not let go These eyes are full of tears Wash us white as snow
Jesus on the cross, by your love heal us.
Station 10: Jesus is stripped of his garments
When all is done for love So fair and pure the nakedness And all that Christ gave T’ was peace for all and happiness
Strip all, be all We ask You for nothing Let You alone fill us Christ, O Christ be everything!
Jesus on the cross, by your love heal us.
Station 11: Jesus is nailed to the cross
Nails piercing us First pierced on you Nations already won Sacred Cross on earth anew
Man and tides pushing rocks When life cries in pain Trials come harrowing Lord let Your Kingdom reign.
Jesus on the cross, by your love heal us.
How You loved us, Jesus; How great, You are God’s Son How You loved us, Jesus; How great, You are God’s Son:
“Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise Woman, this is your son. And this is your mother My God, my God, why have you forsaken me? I thirst It is finished.”
Then, Jesus cried out in a loud voice “Father, into your hands I commend my spirit.”
Jesus on the cross, by your love heal us.
Station 12: Jesus dies on the cross
Tomorrow’s death so scary Life today we pray Us - forever with you Jesus With Almighty Father lay
Jesus how we love you Let us see Thy face Forgive us in transgressions A Holy Cross wins grace
Jesus on the cross, by your love heal us.
Station 13: Jesus is taken from the cross
God’s justice stark in love Priests on temples pray Breath of Holy Spirit blows Forever brothers all we stay
Body whole and pure No evil can defeat The triumph of the cross For holy workers banquet
Jesus on the cross, by your love heal us.
Station 14: Jesus is laid in the tomb
Love never fails; never ends The Holy Bible writes Wake us up dear Jesus At dawn, resurrect flight
We adore you O Christ Have mercy - Your holy cross be salvation Hearts with Thee forever, have mercy.
View our organ concert online Friday, April 10 at 7pm! “The Stations of the Cross” by Marcel Dupré. Featuring organist, Ken Cowan, the poetry of Paul Claudel, and Rev. Alison L. Boden, Ph.D. as narrator. The link is available here and the program is below.
Organ Concert: “The Stations of the Cross” (Le Chemin de la Croix) by Marcel Dupré (1886-1971) with poetry of Paul Claudel, organist, Ken Cowan and reader, Rev. Alison L. Boden, Ph.D.**
Poem: “The Way of the Cross” by Paul Claudel, translated by J. Eric Swenson, and read by Rev. Alison L. Boden, Ph.D.
First Station: It’s all over. We have judged God and we have condemned him to die. We don’t want Jesus Christ with us any longer, for he exasperates us. We have no other ruler than Caesar! No other counsel than blood and gold!
Crucify him if you like, but get rid of him! Get him out of here! “Take him away! Take him away!” Since it can’t be helped, let him be sacrificed, and give us Barabbas! Pilate sits in judgement at the place called Gabbatha. “Have you nothing to say?” asks Pilate. And Jesus does not answer. “I find no wrong in this man,” declares Pilate, “but, let him die, since you insist! I give him to you. “Behold the man.” Here he is, a crown on his head and dressed in purple. One last time these eyes turn towards us, full of tears and blood! What can we do? There is no way to keep him with us any longer. As he was a scandal for the Jews, he is among us an absurdity. Besides, the sentence has been pronounced, lacking no detail, in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin. And one sees the crowd clamor and the judge wash his hands.
Second Station: They return his clothes and bring him the cross. “God be with you,” says Jesus. “O Cross that I have long desired!” And you, Christian, watch and tremble! O what a solemn moment in which Christ first accepts the eternal Cross! O day of consummation of the tree of knowledge! Look, sinner, and see what your sin has led to.
No more crosses without Christ, and no more crimes without a God upon them! Certainly man’s misery is great, yet we have nothing to say, for God is now here, come not to explain, but to fulfill. Jesus receives the Cross just as we take Holy Communion.
As prophesied by Jeremiah, “We give him wood for his bread.” How long, how ungainly, how massive weighs the cross! How hard, how stiff, how heavy the burden of a useless sinner! How long to bear, step by step, until one dies upon it! Are you going to carry that all alone, Lord Jesus?
Make me patient, in turn, with the wood you wish me to bear. For we must carry the cross before the cross carries us.
Third Station: March on! Victim and oppressors together, everything shudders toward Calvary. God led by the collar, suddenly falters and slumps to the earth. What do you say, Lord, of this first fall? Now that you know it, what do you think of this moment? When one falls, pushed by the sway of an unbalanced load! How do you find it, this earth which you created? O not only is the righteous path harsh and rough, the evil path also proves treacherous and dizzying! It is not followed quickly and easily, for one must learn stone by stone, and the foot often slips, although the heart perseveres. O Lord, by these blessed knees, these two knees which together failed you, by the sudden nausea and fall at the beginning of the gruesome Way, by the trap which succeeded, by the earth which you have known, save us from the first sin, which one commits inadvertently!
Fourth Station: O mothers, who have watched a first and only child die, remember that last night beside the moaning little being, the water not taken, the ice, and the thermometer, and death, which comes little by little, no longer to be ignored. Put on his old shoes and change his clothes. Someone is coming who will take him away from me and put him in the ground. Goodby my dear little one! Goodby, flesh of my flesh!
The Fourth Station is Mary, who has accepted everything. Here on the street corner she awaits the Treasure of absolute Poverty. There are no tears in her eyes, her throat is dry. She says not a word and watches Jesus approach. She accepts. One again she accepts. Her outcry severely repressed in her firm, strict heart. She says not a word and watches Jesus Christ. The Mother watches her Son, the Church her Redeemer, her soul goes out to him as violently as the wail of a dying soldier! She stands before God and lays bare her soul. There is nothing in her heart which protests or draws back, every fiber of her transfixed heart accepts and consents. And as God himself is there, she is also present. She accepts and watches this Son she conceived in her womb. She says not a word and watches the Saint of Saints.
Fifth Station: The moment comes when one simply cannot go on. That’s where we fit in, and you allow that we be used also, perhaps coerced, to carry your Cross. As Simon of Cyrene, who is harnessed to this piece of wood. He grasps it firmly and walks behind Jesus, so that none of the Cross may drag on the ground and be lost.
Sixth Station: All of the disciples have fled. Peter himself passionately denies all! A woman throws herself into the thick of insults, into the arms of death, finds Jesus and holds his face in her hands.
Teach us, Veronica, to defy human respect. For he who sees Christ not merely as a symbol, but as a true person, to others soon appears offensive and suspect. His way of life is inside out, his motives are no longer theirs.
Something in him always seems to escape elsewhere. A mature man who says his rosary and impudently goes to confession, who abstains from meat on Friday and is seen among women at mass, is laughable and scandalous; amusing, but also irritating. He had better watch what he is doing, for others see him. He had better watch each step, for he serves as a sign. For each Christian shapes the actual, although unworthy, image of his Christ. And the face he shows bears the trivial reflection of the abominable and triumphant face of the God in his heart!
Show it to us once again Veronica, on the cloth with which you comforted the holy countenance of the Last Sacrament. This veil of pious wool Veronica used to hide the face of the Vintager on the day of his intoxication, so that his image might cling to it forever. An image made of his blood and tears and our spit!
Seventh Station: It is not the stones under foot, nor the halter overstrained; it is the soul which suddenly fails. O in the middle of our life! O the spontaneous fall! When the magnet no longer has a pole and faith no longer a heaven, because the road is long and the end distant, because one remains alone without any consolation! How slowly time passes! Nurturing a secret hatred for the uncompromising injunction and for this wooden companion! This is why we stretch forth both arms at once like someone swimming! No longer do we fall on our knees, but on our face. The body falls, it is true and in the same moment the soul consents. Save us from the Second fall, which one takes willfully and out of boredom.
Eighth Station: Before he ascends the mountain for the last time, Jesus raises his hand and turns toward the people following him, a few poor women in tears with their children in their arms. Let’s not simply look, let’s listen to Jesus, for he is there. It is not a man who raises his hand at the center of this pitiful illumination, it is God who, for our salvation, has suffered not only in paintings. Thus was this man Almighty God! It is true then! There was a day when God truly did suffer for us! What is this danger, from which we have been spared at such a price? Is man’s salvation such a simple matter that the Son must tear himself away from the Father to attain it? If that is Paradise, what is Hell? What shall be done with the dead wood, if green wood is treated like this?
Ninth Station: “I have fallen again, and this time, it’s the end. I would like to get up again, but it’s impossible. For I have been squeezed like a fruit and the man on my shoulders weighs too much. I have done evil and the man who died in me is too heavy! So let’s die, for it is easier to lie down than to stand up, harder to live than to die, more difficult yet, on the Cross than beneath it.”
Save us from the Third sin, that of despair! Nothing is lost as long as death has not been tasted! I have finished with this piece of wood, but the nails are yet to come! Jesus falls a third time, but he is at the top of Calvary.
Tenth Station: Here is the barn floor where the grain of the holy wheat is ground. The Father stands naked, the Temple veil has been torn away. God is manhandled, the Flesh of the Flesh trembles, the Universe, attacked at its source, shudders to its very core! Now that they have taken the tunic and seamless robe. We raise our eyes and dare to look at Jesus, pure and unadorned. They have left you nothing, Lord, they have taken everything, even the clothes which cling to the flesh, for today they pull off the monk’s hood and the blessed virgin’s veil. They have taken everything, there remains nothing for him to hide in. He stands totally defenseless and stark naked. He is delivered to mankind and revealed. What! That’s your Jesus! He is ridiculous! He is beaten and covered with filth. He belongs with the psychiatrists and the police. “Gross beasts have besieged me. Deliver me, Lord, from the mouth of the dog.” He is not the Christ. He is not the Son of Man. He is not God. His teachings are false and his Father is not in heaven. He’s crazy! He’s an imposter! Make him talk! Keep him quiet! Anne’s servant slaps him and Renan kisses him. They took everything. But the scarlet blood remains. They took everything. But the open wound remains! God is hidden. But the man of sorrows remains. God is hidden. My weeping brother remains! From your humiliation Lord, from your shame, take pity on the defeated, on the weak oppressed by the strong! From the horror of that last garment taken from you, take pity on all those who are mutilated! On the child, operated on three times, encouraged by the doctor, and on the poor invalid whose bandages are changed. On the humiliated husband, on the son beside his dying mother, And on this terrifying love, which must be torn from our heart!
Eleventh Station: Now God is no longer with us. He lies on the ground. The mob has taken him by the throat as dogs take a stag.
So you did come! You are truly among us Lord! You have been sat upon, your heart has been knelt upon. This hand forced by the executioner is the right hand of the Almighty. This Lamb has been tied by the feet, the Omnipresent is bound. His height and span have been marked on the cross. When he feels our nails, we’ll watch his expression.
Eternal Son, limited only by the bounds of Infinity, Marked here among us by that narrow space which you have controlled! Here is this body Elijah stretches out in death, here lies David’s throne and Solomon’s glory, here is the bed of our cruel, powerful passion with You! It is difficult for God to assume our stature. They tug, and the half-dislocated body snaps and cries aloud. Drawn with the tension of a wine press, he is hideously quartered. So the prophecy might be fulfilled that: “They have pierced my hands and feet, they have numbered each of my bones.” You are captured Lord, and can no longer escape. You are nailed on the cross, hand and foot. Like a heretic or a lunatic, I seek nothing more from heaven. This God held by four nails is enough for me.
Twelfth Station: A moment ago he was suffering, it is true, but now he is going to die. The Great Cross sways faintly in the night to the pulse of God’s breathing. Everything is ready. One can only leave the Apparatus alone, to inexhaustibly draw from the bond of man’s double nature, from the hypostatic union of body and soul, all of his inherent potential for suffering. He is all alone as Adam was alone in Eden. For three hours he remains alone and savors the Wine, the unconquerable ignorance of man in the absence of God! Our guest grows weary and his forehead slowly droops. He no longer sees his Mother, and his Father abandons him. He tastes the cup, and the death, which slowly poisons him. Have You not had enough of this bitter wine diluted with water, to cause You to suddenly straighten up and cry: “I thirst”? Are You thirsty Lord? Are You talking to me? Do You still need me and my sins? Am I needed so that all may be consummated?
Thirteenth Station: Here the Passion ends and the Compassion continues. Christ is no longer on the Cross. He is with Mary, who has received him; as she accepted him in prophecy, she receives him consummated. Christ, who suffered before all, is again cradled at his Mother’s breast. The Church forever embraces and watches over her beloved. That from God, that from the Mother, and that which man has done, all of this is with her forever under her habit. She has taken him in; she sees, touches, prays, weeps, and admires; she is the winding sheet and the ointment, the sepulcher and the incense. Here ends the Cross and begins the Tabernacle.
Fourteenth Station: The tomb where Christ is put, having suffered and died, the hole hastily unsealed so that he might spend his night there, before the crucified revived and ascended to the Father, this is not merely a new tomb, it is my flesh, it is man, your creature, more profound than the earth! Now that his heart is open and his hands are pierced, there is no cross among us on which his body will not fit, there is no sin in us to which his wound will not correspond. So come to us, from the altar where you are hidden, Redeemer of the World!Lord, your creature is rent open and how profound he is!
Music: “The Stations of the Cross”
(Le Chemin de la Croix),
by Marcel Dupré (1886-1971)
performed by organist, Ken Cowan.
I. Jesus is condemned to death. Opening with a trumpet solo evoking Pilate’s command, “Gardes, saisissez-vous de cet homme,” (“guards, seize this man”) the music becomes increasingly tumultuous, depicting an agitated crowd shouting for the release of Barrabas, and for Jesus to be put to death. The theme for “Barrabas” is the rhythm of the name, (if pronounced BAR-ra-bas) played on trumpet stops. The crushing two-note climax, “To death,” which precipitates the quick dispersal of the mob, is heard again in station XII.
II. Jesus receives His cross. The March to Calvary begins, and the melodic theme of the Cross is heard repeatedly on reed registers; the stumbling steps of Jesus are illustrated in the accompaniment.
III. Jesus falls for the first time. The march continues. Labored sounding two-note groups describe Jesus’ weariness. The theme for Suffering is heard high in the treble. Finally Jesus’ strength fails and He falls under the weight of the cross. In the last few bars, the theme of Redemption is heard for the first time, pianissimo.
IV. Jesus meets His mother. A flute solo with string tone accompaniment depicts the Mater Dolorosa. The rather chromatic harmonies of the accompaniment might suggest her emotional turmoil. The same music will be heard again in Station XIII as she receives her son’s lifeless body. The theme of Agony is heard because Mary’s suffering is great.
V. Simon the Cyrene helps Jesus to carry the cross. Dupré evokes here a completely different atmosphere-we are in the countryside. The piece opens with pastoral sounding music played on flute stops. Simon, on his way into the city from the countryside, lends reluctant assistance bearing the cross, and does not find it easy at first. He is first depicted clumsily helping Jesus carry the cross and trying to get into step as the procession moves. A series of canons between the outside parts depict Simon’s attempts to assist. Finally the Cross theme is heard united over a range of two octaves, above and below the accompaniment. Finally he has synchronized his steps with those of Jesus. The Cross theme is inverted, and near the end there is a brief appearance of the Redemption motif.
VI. Jesus and Veronica. Veronica comes out of the crowd to wipe Jesus’ brow with a cloth, evoking the melodic theme of Compassion. The theme of the Cross is heard in the bass as Jesus pauses for a moment. As the movement ends the Redemption motif is heard again, beautifully harmonized.
VII. Jesus falls a second time. This station begins in the same slow, march-like rhythm heard at the beginning of the third station, but the accompaniment soon becomes more agitated. This is a more grotesque event than the first fall, and the horror of the scene is matched with ever more grinding dissonance.
VIII. Jesus comforts the women of Jerusalem. There are some women present who feel pity for Jesus, and the theme of Pity is a beautiful cantilena which pervades the entire movement, and will be heard again in Station XIV. The theme for Consolation is heard in the tenor register played on a reed stop, representing Jesus’ voice.
IX. Jesus falls a third time. The crowd, now exasperated by the slow pace of the procession, fervently clamors for blood, and shouts insults. The principal theme here is Persecution- three repeated notes followed by an ascending diminished triad. A busy chromatic accompaniment recalls a frenzied crowd. The third and final fall is sudden and devastating, but now the place of execution, Calvary has finally been reached, and a brief period of calm follows before the final indignities are inflicted.
X. Jesus is stripped of His clothes. The executioners strip Jesus of His clothes, and throw dice for His seamless coat. Dupré accompanies this scene with a rhythmic, sinister sounding piece played staccato on string stops. After a pause there follows the music of the Incarnation as if to remind the listener that for this purpose Jesus had come into the world. Jesus awaits His end, a pitiable figure indeed.
XI. Jesus is nailed on the Cross. Hammering fortissimo chords expressing the violent cruelty of the executioners become the theme of Crucifixion. The theme for Suffering (from Station III) is combined in longer phrases. The repetitive pedal line is an extension of the Cross motif, inverted. XII. Jesus dies upon the Cross. The agony of the slow passing hours is represented with a still sounding introduction containing a theme similar to that of Redemption. The dying Jesus speaks His seven last words. A sudden and violent crescendo by the organ represents the earthquake, and the rending of the veil of the temple. Jesus has been put to death. An uneasy stillness follows the final tremors.
XIII. Jesus’ body is taken from the cross and laid in Mary’s bosom. A fluid and unsettled sounding arabesque on flute stops evoking the whirling of ropes accompanies the descent from the cross and the slow sliding movements by which the body is brought down. The theme of the now-accomplished Redemption is present. Mary’s music from Station IV is heard again at the end of this meditation as she holds the body of Jesus in her arms.
XIV. The body of Jesus is laid in the tomb. Pity, the theme of the eighth station, is the dominant theme of the cortege preceding Jesus’ entombment. The theme of Suffering also accounts for a large portion of this final scene. The epilogue contains some subtle musical inspiration. A heavenly stillness envelops the scene. The theme of Suffering, is now transformed into the Fruits of the Redemption. Flute melodies played high above illustrate the gates of heaven opening to those who participated in the events of that first Good Friday. As pointed out by Marcel Dupré’s biographer Graham Steed, the last two notes of the flute melody in the final station, G# and B natural are the same two notes, enharmonically changed and inverted that began the first station. The work ends as if to say “As for the way of the wicked, he turneth it upside down.”
Eighteen themes or leit-motifs
employed by Dupré in his work.
Twelve are melodic and six are rhythmic.
Melodic Themes:
The Cross (Stations II, V, VI, XI): Two (sometimes three) ascending or descending leaps of perfect fourths, preceded and followed by a major second, rising or falling as the case may be.
Suffering (Stations III, IX, XIV): A conjunct, descending triplet within the interval of a diminished fifth.
Redemption (Stations III, IV, V, VI, XIII): An ascending group of four stepwise notes. Mary (Stations IV, XII): A descending major triad.
Compassion (Station VI): Two disjunct intervals of the third, the second repeated.
Pity (Stations VIII, XIV): An ascending group of four notes, preceded and followed by a dotted-note figure of repeated notes.
Consolation (Stations VIII, XII): A perfect fifth, ascending, the second note dotted; drop of a fourth, rising to the major third, sounded on a reed stop.
Persecution (Station IX): Three repeated notes followed by an ascending diminished triad. Incarnation (final section of Station X): Minor thirds ascending, 2 by 2 with repetition of each second note, the repetition conveying the idea of suffering accepted.
Crucifixion (Station XI): The Cross motif inverted, and extended to a third downward jump of a perfect fourth. Agony: Similar to Redemption theme, with the second note dotted, and with a fifth note added to the upward progression.
The Fruits of Redemption (Station XIV): Suffering theme altered, the theme rising instead of falling.
Rhythmic Themes:
The Crowd (Station I): Intervals of major and minor thirds and fourths rising chromatically by semitones.
Barrabas (Station I): The rhythm of the name. (pronounced BAR-ra-bas) Stumbling Steps or Jostling (Station II): Iambic short note on the beat followed by a dotted note.
Weariness (Stations III, VII, IX): Descending seconds, with repetition of the second note, suffering accepted.
Flagellation (Station X): Pairs of triplets made up of a descending fourth followed by a rising seventh, the second triplet starting on the last note of the first.
The Ropes (Station XIII): Four groups of triplets in a sliding chromatic outline.
Biographies:
Ken Cowan is one of North America’s finest concert organists. Praised for his dazzling artistry, impeccable technique and imaginative programming by audiences and critics alike, he maintains a rigorous performing schedule which takes him to major concert venues and churches in America, Canada, Europe, and Asia.
Recent feature performances have included appearances at Segerstrom Center for the Arts in Costa Mesa California, Philadelphia’s Verizon Hall, Spivey Hall, and Walt Disney Concert Hall, as well as concerts in Germany and Korea. In addition, Mr. Cowan has been a featured artist in recent years at the national conventions of the American Guild of Organists held in Los Angeles and Minneapolis, has performed at many regional conventions of the AGO, and has been featured at several conventions of the Organ Historical Society and the Royal Canadian College of Organists.
Ken received the Master’s degree and Artist Diploma from the Yale School of Music/Institute of Sacred Music, studying organ with Thomas Murray. Prior to attending Yale, he graduated with a Bachelor of Music degree from the Curtis Institute of Music in Philadelphia where he studied with John Weaver. His major teacher during high school years was James Bigham, Organist/Choirmaster at Holy Trinity Lutheran Church, in Buffalo, NY, which is not far from his hometown Thorold, Ontario, Canada.
In 2012 Mr. Cowan joined the keyboard faculty of the Shepherd School of Music at Rice University as Associate Professor and head of the organ program. Previous positions have included Associate Professor of Organ at Westminster Choir College of Rider University in Princeton, NJ, where he was awarded the 2008 Rider University Distinguished Teaching Award, and Associate Organist and Artist in Residence at Saint Bartholomew’s Church in New York City
The Rev. Alison L. Boden, Ph.D. has served as Dean of Religious Life and of the Chapel at Princeton University since August 2007. Dean Boden is the author of numerous articles and chapters on religion and social justice in addition to a book, Women’s Rights and Religious Practice (Palgrave 2007). Her course offerings have included such topics as religion and human rights, the rights of women, the history and phenomenology of prayer, and religion and violence. She has served in an advisory capacity to a variety of non-governmental organizations and is an ordained minister in the United Church of Christ.
I provide Dr. Olson's article today in hopes of standing in solidarity with those peaceful sects of Islam dedicated to the peace and love of their religious beliefs and principles. I think it is important to recognize that Islam is as diverse as Christianity is, as urbane as Christianity can be, and even as distraught over Western culture as Christianity has shown. The point being, Islam's "bad press" has come from terror-based fundamentalist sects described as "radical" but far removed from the teachings of Islam. Like some terror-based sects of Christianity (KKK, Jim Crow laws, and today's more radical Dominionists churches) both religions have had their share of ungodly evil shown in the wicked works of terrible acts against humanity. And when juxtaposed with Western culture in its secular or nationalistic forms, has good grounds, as would Christianity, to oppose its ungodly character. As background then, the blog below is written to a base of evangelical readers many of whom are struggling with the meaning of their faith in a world gone mad. To these readers I express my sympathies and encouragement even as I do all Muslim readers joining this post. Thank you for your consideration.
According to many news reports, Pope Francis made some off-the-cuff remarks to reporters about Islam. The “gist” of this informal talk—not a papal pronouncement—was that there is no such thing as “Islamic Terrorism” unless there is also such a thing as “Christian terrorism.” This conversation took place aboard the papal airplane on the pope’s way back to Rome after a special event in France in late 2016. (The precise date does not matter here.)
Some American conservatives are angry that the pope would deny the existence of “Islamic terrorism” and especially that he would seem to place Islam and Christianity on a plane of moral equivalence. Actually, there is much debate and dispute about exactly what the pope said and what he meant. But I will put that aside for now and tackle only one question: Is Islam itself, as a religion, inclined toward terrorism?
*Sidebar: The opinions expressed here are my own (or those of the guest writer); I do not speak for any other person, group or organization; nor do I imply that the opinions expressed here reflect those of any other person, group or organization unless I say so specifically. Before commenting read the entire post and the “Note to commenters” at its end.*
But first I need to lay out my credentials for talking about this. During my Ph.D. in Religious Studies at Rice University (Houston) I co-taught an introduction to religion course for undergraduates. I was assigned by the department chair to teach a mini-course, as part of the semester course, about Islam. I dived into the subject and read many scholarly articles and books about Islam and taught the course. I even visited the local mosque and spoke with a group of Muslim men gathered there. I invited to my classroom representatives of different kinds of Islam who I could find in Houston. Two stand out to me as especially, even extremely, different. One was a Sunni Muslim from the Middle East and the other was a Sufi Muslim from Turkey.
One thing I discovered during my studies and later learned more about is Islam’s diversity. Exactly like Christianity, there are different “denominations” of Muslims. Of course they do not call them “denominations,” but I am simply using that term for “branches,” “types,” “tribes” of the same religion. Most people in America are woefully ignorant about the diversity of Islam.
For example, how many Americans know which country in the world has the most Muslims? Wait for it….Indonesia. And Islam in Indonesia is very different from Islam in, say, Saudi Arabia.
How many Americans know anything about Sufiism—a mystical branch of Islam? (Yes, I know, many Muslims deny Sufis are real Muslims. So what? Many Christians deny Quakers are real Christians [because they don’t practice water baptism]. To sociologists of religion, Sufis are Muslims.)
My point is simply that I do have a Ph.D. in Religious Studies from a major research university and that my studies then, during my program there and then and since, I have studied Islam much more than the average America ever will.
So back to the pope and Islam. His point seems to have been that Islam itself is not inclined toward terrorism or violence but that some Muslims, like some adherents of many religions—including Christianity—distort their true heritage and misinterpret and misapply it to justify violence including terrorism. Who can really doubt that about Christians? Think of the Crusades. Then think of the event in Norway a few years ago in which a devoted Christian slaughtered many young people at a camp for his own religiously-inspired reasons?
The vast majority of so-called Muslim terrorists or Islamic terrorists come from a particular part of the Middle East and are driven by some Imams of a particular branch of Islam especially common in Saudi Arabia known as Wahabism. (I am not claiming that all Wahabi Muslims support terrorism.) Almost none come from Indonesia, for example, although some might be recruited from there and other predominantly Islamic countries.
I think the pope’s point is simply that one ought not to label a whole religion—in this case Islam—with terrorism. That is what some conservative Americans especially tend to do. That is what “Islamic terrorism” or “Muslim terrorists” tends to mean to many Americans especially.
On the other hand… It does seem to me there’s no escaping those labels. So what’s the right solution? Perhaps it is not, as the pope suggests, to abandon those phrases entirely but to teach people—in churches, in schools, through the media—that those phrases do not mean that all Muslims or even branches of Islam are inclined toward violence or terrorism and that there are many Muslims in the world who abhor terrorism.
If you disagree (and I expect even some of my best friends will disagree) please imagine something with me for a moment. Imagine that a particular sect of Christianity became a fertile ground for extreme violence and even terrorism. (This has happened in history.) Then imagine that news reached you that in some countries where Christianity is not well-known and is little understood most people began to talk about “Christian terrorism” and “Christian violence” such that all Christians living there were under suspicion of being potential terrorists—including members of Christian “peace churches” (e.g., Friend/Quakers, Mennonites, etc.). Would you not want some spokesperson for the dominant religion in those countries to speak up in support of Christians and Christianity as a whole and contradict those there who spoke without qualification about “Christian terrorism?”
Now, please, do not respond by saying “That could never happen because no sect/denomination of ‘real Christianity’ would ever become terrorists.” Perhaps so; I’m inclined to agree. But! Some Muslims say that Islamic terrorists do not represent “real Islam!” My point is not about the meaning of “real Christianity.” My point is that there are many kinds of people who claim to be Christians and it is not at all inconceivable that a group of such might someday become terrorists and people who know little about Christianity would probably equate their terrorism with Christianity. Wouldn’t you want someone among them to correct them? I would.
- RO
*Note to commenters: This blog is not a discussion board; please respond with a question or comment solely to me. If you do not share my evangelical Christian perspective (very broadly defined), feel free to ask a question for clarification, but know that this is not a space for debating incommensurate perspectives/worldviews. In any case, know that there is no guarantee that your question or comment will be posted by the moderator or answered by the writer. If you hope for your question or comment to appear here and be answered or responded to, make sure it is civil, respectful, and “on topic.” Do not comment if you have not read the entire post and do not misrepresent what it says. Keep any comment (including questions) to minimal length; do not post essays, sermons or testimonies here. Do not post links to internet sites here. This is a space for expressions of the blogger’s (or guest writers’) opinions and constructive dialogue among evangelical Christians (very broadly defined).
Some theologians are mirrors of their time. The mid-twentieth century rises from the pages of Tillich as palpably as Combray rising from Proust’s tea and madeleines. Other theologians have a more conflicted relation with their age: engaged, but cutting against the grain; in their time, but not quite of it. Wolfhart Pannenberg, one of the most gifted Protestant theologians of his generation, has never seemed quite to fit his surroundings, which may say more about his surroundings than about him. The German theological world has been far less shaken than the English-speaking world by the changes in academic culture of the last decades: feminism, the hermeneutics of suspicion, the dismissal of truth-claims as disguised assertions of power. Even by German standards, however, Pannenberg’s theology has an oddly old-fashioned air.
Pannenberg is not a man who follows fads. Postmodernity seems to have passed him by. Jean-François Lyotard famously characterized postmodernity as incredulity toward metanarratives, the comprehensive stories ”Marxist, Enlightenment liberal, religious” that make us confident that we have the Big Picture. Pannenberg is convinced that without a metanarrative, we are lost. Until you have the Big Picture, your understanding of the details will always be deficient. He seems to have self-consciously rejected postmodernism as a style of reflection. He has sought, in notable contrast to the majority of his theological peers, to address universal human reason.
Politically, Pannenberg has also stood apart. He does not belong to the academically fashionable left. He studied Marx as a philosophy student in the late 1940s in Berlin and found him wanting. He was disturbed by the sympathy for totalitarian dictators shown by fellow theologians during the 1970s and 1980s, and he made his concerns public. Though for years he was a member of the Faith and Order Commission of the World Council of Churches, he was sharply critical of the liberationist turn in the World Council as a whole.
In recent years, he has been outspoken in his opposition within the Evangelical Church in Germany to any approval of homosexual relations. He said that a church that approved homosexual relations had by that act ceased to be a true church. In 1997, he created a public stir when he returned his Federal Order of Merit after the order was bestowed on a lesbian activist. He argued that the constitution of the Federal Republic committed the state to uphold marriage and family and that by honoring a lesbian activist, the state was acting in contradiction to its own basis. This action did not increase his popularity in academic circles.
He has also stood apart ecumenically. When German Protestants were increasingly worried about an alleged loss of a distinct Protestant identity, he promoted an ecumenical opening to Catholicism. While on occasion he wrote as a Lutheran on Lutheran topics, he has never been attracted to what George Hunsinger has called “enclave theology,” theology done within strictly defined confessional limits, in which those limits are taken as given. For Pannenberg, it does not follow that because a proposition is authentically Lutheran it is therefore correct.
He was one of the most prominent academic defenders in Germany of the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification, the 1999 agreement on the doctrine of justification between the Catholic Church and the churches of the Lutheran World Federation that was violently attacked by a significant portion of his colleagues. More disturbing to many, especially in the difficult ecumenical situation in Germany, where the shrinking number of Christians is almost evenly divided between Protestant and Catholic, he has said that the unity of the church perhaps requires a papacy and that quite possibly the only churches that will survive far into the third millennium are Catholic, Orthodox, and Evangelical rather than mainline Protestant.
---
All of this may make Pannenberg attractive to readers of First Things. His close friendship with Richard John Neuhaus, who wrote an introduction to one of Pannenberg’s first books translated into English, led to his writings appearing regularly in these pages. There is much to commend in Pannenberg’s theology, but there are also some warnings and object lessons in his work, both in his difference from and in his similarity to his immediate predecessors and colleagues.
Pannenberg was born in 1928, in Stettin, Germany (now Szczecin, Poland), the son of a German civil servant. Religion played no role in his upbringing, but in autobiographical sketches, he recounts a decisive moment in his early life, an epiphany that in fact occurred on Epiphany. “On January 6, 1945, on my way home from music lessons, a long walk from one town to another, I had a visionary experience of a great light not only surrounding me, but absorbing me for an indefinite time. I did not hear any words, but it was a metaphysical awakening that prompted me to search for its meaning regarding my life during the following years.”
In this brief description can be found two foci of Pannenberg’s lifelong outlook: on the one hand, an openness to the miraculous, the supernatural, to what a reductivist natural science would dismiss, and on the other, a deep desire to understand revelation, and to understand it rationally, even “metaphysically.” The late William Placher entitled a review of the first volume of Pannenberg’s Systematic Theology “Revealed to Reason,” and that title catches the deep structure of an outlook already visible in this account of his teenage experience. As with most of the Protestant theologians who came before him, “revelation” was a central category of his theology, but unlike them, he did not share in the rejection of a rational metaphysics that so shaped (and skewed) their work.
He was drafted into the German army in the last days of World War II and was briefly a British prisoner of war. Following the war, he studied philosophy and theology at German universities, including a brief time with Karl Barth at Basel (not a happy encounter: “I learned . . . that Barth did not like criticism from his students”). His studies did not follow the standard paths trod by Protestant students. His doctoral dissertation was on Duns Scotus on predestination and his habilitation (the second dissertation required to teach in the German universities) addressed the concept of analogy from the ancient Greeks through the medieval period. Under his doctoral adviser at Heidelberg, Edmund Schlink, who had been a Protestant observer at Vatican II, he imbibed an orientation to ecumenism that was to characterize his theological work.
More immediately important for his development were the lectures at Heidelberg by the Old Testament scholar Gerhard von Rad, who emphasized how for the Old Testament God is revealed in his acts in history: the Exodus, the reception of the Promised Land, the return from exile in Babylon. God might speak to Elijah in a “still, small voice” heard only interiorly, but the great promise is that God will act publicly so that the “nations” will “know that I am the Lord.”
A group of graduate students met regularly to discuss the broader theological significance of von Rad’s approach, and in 1961 they produced a small volume of essays with the provocative title Revelation as History, with Pannenberg as the editor and the author of the systematic essay that summarized their understanding. He insists that he had no idea the book would create waves. German Protestant theology had been dominated since the early 1920s by various theologies that had stressed and interwoven the concepts of revelation as foundational to theology and of the Word of God as a concrete address calling for a radical decision of faith or unfaith, with varying emphasis on whatever the address might actually say. That Word was not open to rational investigation, and classical apologetics was not just useless, it was a betrayal of the sovereignty of the Word which allows no space for such reflection. The post-World War II struggles between the followers of Barth and of Rudolf Bultmann took place on territory marked out by these concepts.
Revelation as History questioned the tight correlation of revelation with the concept “Word.” The writers insisted that God’s Word is about something and what it is most immediately about is a historical event: the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus and the inbreaking of the kingdom he inaugurates. We may need God’s Word to understand the event, but the event is fundamental, for it reveals the agent who performs it.
But what event could definitively reveal the one God who is Lord of all? The only possibility is an event that sums up and gives meaning to all events. And that is what we find in Jesus as the one who is the final Kingdom he brings. He is himself the End, the eschaton, the event in whose light all events are rightly seen. Jesus may be a great teacher, and he may atone for our sins, but his teaching and suffering are of decisive significance only because he is the Lord who comes “to unite all things, . . . things in heaven and things on earth” (Eph 1:10).As such, he is the revelation both of God and of the meaning of history.
Such an event cannot be private; it does not have its primary home in human interiority, but “all flesh shall see it together” (Isaiah 40:5). That full publicity will only be realized when Jesus returns, but in the “between times” after the resurrection and before the return, those who receive Jesus have the key to reality. That key is not private; if it is the key to truth, it is not removed into its own sphere, immunized from rational investigation and critique. Pannenberg insisted that even the resurrection is open to historical inquiry and that the open-minded historian should conclude that the resurrection is at least plausible and perhaps probable.
Pannenberg carried this youthful commitment to both revelation and reason into his mature theology. Revelation as History vaulted him into prominence. Professorships followed at Wuppertal, Mainz, and then, for the longest span of his career, beginning in 1968 and ending with his retirement in 1994, at Munich. A constant stream of essays was punctuated by large studies of Christology (Jesus—God and Man , 1964), theology and science ( Theology and the Philosophy of Science , 1973), theological anthropology ( Anthropology in Theological Perspective, 1983), and the three volumes of hisSystematic Theology (1988 to 1993).
[Pannenberg's] Systematic Theology is certainly his crowning achievement, bringing together his staggering learning, theological and otherwise, in a unified vision of the meaning of the faith. Pannenberg has remained remarkably consistent over the years. Systematic Theology can be read as a much fuller account of the vision first put forward in Revelation as History twenty-five years before: Eschatology remains the key theological locus; Jesus continues to be understood as the anticipatory realization of the final reign of God over all things; Christianity is rational, though this claim is somewhat chastened. New perhaps is the emphasis on ecclesiology. The church is the foretaste of the future unity of humanity and of all things, the place where the future impinges visibly, sacramentally, on the present. (And hence, [why] the division of the church is so scandalous [to Pannenberg]; [his] ecumenical commitments are [on a pace] with his theology.)
---
New and more determinative for his later theology is its thoroughgoing trinitarian character. In a way similar to some other recent theologians—most notably, in their different ways, Karl Rahner and Karl Barth—Pannenberg does not begin with a discussion of God as one and of the divine attributes, both understood without reference to God as triune, but begins with God as Trinity and allows that understanding to frame both the presentation of God’s unity and the elaboration of the divine attributes. Against that background, God’s act of creation is presented as analogous to the differentiation of the Son from the Father (hence, creation is through the Word) and salvation is participation in the life of the Trinity (an idea more familiar to Catholic than to modern Protestant theology).
In most of these themes—the centrality of eschatology, a renewed interest in the church as theological locus, Trinity as determinative for all that is said about God, salvation as participation—Pannenberg is in line with much recent theology. The way he elaborates them is at times idiosyncratic (for example, his understanding of the divinity that the persons of the Trinity share as analogous to a force field), but he shares these themes with many other theologians.
Distinctive in his theology is the commitment to the claim that the Christian metanarrative, the all-encompassing, eschatologically focused story, is the key to the meaning of each and every thing. Theology backs up that claim by presenting a comprehensive, systematic account of reality in which all other knowledge can find a home. Pannenberg’s project required that his works culminate in a systematic theology. The revelation of God in Christ is either the one truth in relation to which all things makes sense, or it is false. If that revelation is true, then “[e]very single reality should prove incomprehensible (at least in its depth) without recourse to God.” The theologian’s task is to make that truth evident by showing, at least illustratively, the explanatory power of the Christian perspective.
---
Pannenberg’s project is breathtaking in its audacity. The theologian must stand ready, at least in principle, to discuss every topic. “A doctrine of God touches upon everything else. Therefore, it is necessary to explore every field of knowledge in order to speak of God reasonably.” Theology so understood seems to require a universal genius, a Leibniz or a Newton. Pannenberg’s range of knowledge is so extensive, one is tempted to believe the job possible. As Placher noted, “It’s hard to think of anything he doesn’t know.” But does the project succeed?
Doubts inevitably creep in. Perhaps because he views history as the final context of all meaning, Pannenberg tends to begin any topic in the Systematic Theology with a brief history of its discussion. These histories are a monument of learning, but even Pannenberg cannot be an expert on everything and the specialist scholar spots mistakes, small and sometimes not so small.
The greater limitation in Pannenberg’s work is its continuing orientation to the German philosophical and cultural context. When Pannenberg began his career, the German dominance of Protestant theology, dating back to Friedrich Schleiermacher at the beginning of the nineteenth century, was still firmly established. That dominance has since faded. Pannenberg has been far more open than most of his generation of German theologians to the wider world, but he engages that world from the perspective of a German tradition increasingly foreign to American readers. Pannenberg’s relation to that German Protestant tradition tells us much about how his theology does and does not point toward new possibilities.
The succession of German Protestant theology that runs from Kant through Schleiermacher and Hegel, Ritschl and Harnack, Barth and Bultmann represents a great intellectual achievement. Pannenberg seems to stand at the end of this tradition; no figures from the generation following him in Germany seem to be working at the same level. Pannenberg has not simply continued this tradition, however; he has also called it into question. His ambiguous relation to this tradition tells us much and ironically links him to his least favorite teacher, Karl Barth.
A driving force in this tradition has been the philosophical “turn to the subject,” a shift of focus from the thing known to the knower who knows it. Kant set the problem with his argument against any knowledge of the Ding an sich, the thing in itself, and Schleiermacher represents the first great attempt to accept that turn and still talk about God in a meaningful way. For Schleiermacher, theology is not directly about God, but about us, and most immediately about our faith. Faith (or, precisely, feeling) is the point where God dwells in the self, and so, it is claimed, by speaking about faith, we can in fact speak about God. In varying ways, most liberal Protestant theology after Schleiermacher followed his lead. The anthropology changed, but the path through humanity to God remained constant. The danger of a reduction of God to an aspect of humanity and its religiosity has always lurked in the background, however, and all too often taken over the foreground.
Pannenberg, like Barth, challenges the dominance of the “turn to the subject” [as established by Schleiermacher]. This challenge became explicit in a revealing interchange that occurred in 1989 between Pannenberg and Eberhard Jüngel of Tübingen, his most ponderable German Protestant contemporary. Jüngel wrote an extended essay-review of the first volume of Pannenberg’s Systematic Theology in which, while praising his achievement, he raised some fundamental objections to his program. The title of his essay points to his most basic question: “Nihil divinitatis, ubi non fides: Is Christian Dogmatics in a Purely Theoretical Perspective Possible?” (the Latin phrase, which translates as “Nothing of God where there is no faith,” is a quotation from Luther). Jüngel’s question is about the relation between the content of faith, that which is believed, and the act of faith. He agrees with Pannenberg that the content of faith is foundational for the act of faith, and not vice versa; what we believe is more important than our act of believing it.
But Jüngel also insists that in explicating the content of faith, the theologian must make clear that the content of faith can only be the content of faith (Jüngel uses just this pattern of italics). The gospel, revelation, God in Christ, are not just there for the knowing. There is a theoretical knowledge of the content of faith, but it is inseparable from a practical knowledge, a transformation of the knowing self in the very act of knowing. There can be no true knowledge of God without a radically altered human self-understanding. [This] new knowledge of God and the new knowledge of the self are, he insists, “co-original.” Quoting Luther’s commentary on Galatians, he writes that “God and faith belong together so inseparably that one cannot avoid saying: ‘Outside faith God loses his righteousness, glory, abundance, etc, and there is nothing of majesty, of divinity where there is no faith.’” It is [in] this existential dimension of the content of faith that [Jüngel] misses in Pannenberg’s dogmatics.
Pannenberg’s response, entitled “To Grasp and Understand Faith in Itself: An Answer,” grants Jüngel’s point that true knowledge of God is impossible apart from faith, but counters that when Jüngel makes knowledge of God and a new self-understanding “co-original,” he endangers the priority of God to the human response of faith, the priority of the content of faith to the act of faith.
Behind this somewhat obscure dispute lie basic questions about the character of theology.
Theology is about God, but God is not an object of investigation and knowledge simply there for human scrutiny. How does theology reflect God’s sovereignty even in being known? In the 1960s the Protestant theologian Otto Hermann Pesch characterized the theological styles of Luther and Aquinas as “existential” and “sapiential.” Luther’s theology seeks to stay close to the perspective of the self addressed by God’s words of judgment and promise; Aquinas’ theology seeks to view all things as much as possible from the viewpoint of God’s all-encompassing wisdom, in which the human mind is allowed to participate. Much German Protestant theology since the early twentieth century has, in this sense, been programmatically “existential.” [That is,] the turn to the subject influences the way theology speaks.
Since the early twentieth century, German Protestant theology has sought forms in which first-person confession and second-person address, or, in other words, witness and proclamation, can shape the exposition of Christian theology. In this way, theology can talk about God while its form of discourse shows that God is known only as he gives himself to be known by faith. Theology must not only say that, it must show it by the way it speaks. Thus, for example, the quasi-homiletical rhetoric of Barth’s Church Dogmaticsis not “mere style” but a sign of the inseparability of theology from witness and proclamation.
The “existential dimension” is what Jüngel cannot find in Pannenberg’s theology. And he is right. Pannenberg’s theology is more sapiential than existential. In turning away from the “existential” mode, however, Pannenberg has done more than choose a different style of language. His turn to a public history and a shared reason oriented to that history is the most significant attempt in his generation of German Protestant theology to break with the turn to the subject that has been so determinative for over two hundred years. He represents a sort of new objectivity. In this regard, his turn to history shares much, at least in intention, with Barth’s turn to a Word of God who creates its own conditions of being known. Barth and Pannenberg represent the two figures in the German Protestant tradition over the last century who point beyond the focus on the human that has proven so inadequate.
---
This objectivity, this strong sense that theology is about God first and foremost and only then, because of what God does, about us and our religiosity, sets Pannenberg apart from much theology as done among mainline Protestants, both in Europe and North America. This objectivity gives Pannenberg’s writing, especially his Systematic Theology, a scholastic tone, in the best sense of the word, the slightly old-fashioned air I referred to at the outset. He analyzes issues, makes distinctions, discusses the options, entertains objections. One senses that the subject matter at hand is determinative. This quality makes Pannenberg’s work attractive as a conversation partner for Catholic and Evangelical theologians.
But a certain ambiguity haunts Pannenberg’s work. While he calls the recent German Protestant tradition into question in some respects, he stands firmly within it in others. A curse of recent theology has been the cult of the virtuoso theologian, the creative mind who recasts the field, the Schleiermachers and Barths of the discipline, Promethean figures who blaze the path others are to follow. Much academic work in modern theology seems less the study of God or of the Christian message about God, and more the study of the creativity of great theologians.
When Pannenberg broke onto the scene in the 1960s, he was treated as the new candidate for these laurels, the latest thing from Germany, the land of giants. His program of a thoroughgoing interpretation of the Christian message under the rubrics of history and eschatology looked like another interpretive tour de force, another exercise in killing the Oedipal father (or fathers, in the form of Barth and Bultmann) so that the children are free to pursue their own projects. The actual shape of Pannenberg’s achievement has been somewhat different. The quasi-scholastic tone points at least to a different intent, a more humble subjection to the subject matter.
Nevertheless, the manner of the virtuoso has never quite disappeared, no more than it disappeared from the work of Barth. The unique interpretive vision rooted in eschatology continues to color all that is said. As a friend has noted, what Pannenberg will not do is outline the tradition on a theological topic and then simply conclude that the tradition got it right and move on. The subject needs to be reshaped by the unique perspective of the system, like the pianist who insists that somehow, somewhere, his/her own unique interpretation must shine through.
Are great theologians always good things? Should we bemoan that there are no giants of the field around today? Certainly, mediocrity is not to be celebrated. Theology must be more than simply cataloging the answers provided by our forebears. But the enterprise of systematic theology is inherently dubious. It necessarily elevates the theologian to systematizer, to master of a subject matter that should not be mastered.
This critique is not new. Barth himself insisted that “systematic theology” is an oxymoron on a par with “wooden iron.” More searching questions need to be asked. What are the historical, institutional, and ecclesial factors that foster the cult of the great theologian? What is the connection between the rise within Protestantism of the idea of the heroic theologian over the last two hundred years and the decline within Protestantism of a stable doctrinal tradition that could guide thought and practice? Are the unique and comprehensive perspectives of a Pannenberg or a Barth (or a Schleiermacher or a Luther) called upon to perform a function that should be performed by a normative communal sense of the faith?
What is theology called to do in the life of the Church? The vocation of the theologian does not exist in a vacuum. The needs, the strengths and deficiencies of the concrete church being served, will shape that vocation, and the individual theologian can break out of the resultant mold only with difficulty. (The Protestant theologian who broke out of the mold most thoroughly, Kierkegaard, is proof of the difficulty and the cost.) A critique of the sort of theology that fits the cult of the great theologian must inevitably be a critique of the ecclesial life that produces the cult. Theology can accomplish much, but it cannot make up for essential deficits in the life of the church it serves.
Wolfhart Pannenberg has produced an impressive range of work that is learned, intelligent, and faithful. His ambiguous relation to his time is itself instructive. It should make us think about what theology is, what it is called to do, and how theology and church inevitably reflect one another.
Pannenberg is now well into his eighties and we can expect that his theological work is complete. From the beginning of his career, he has employed his formidable intelligence and scholarship in the service of careful thought and writing about the God present in Christ and the Spirit. Lives and talents so spent are blessings.
*Michael Root is professor of theology at the Catholic University of America.
1968. Revelation As History (edited volume). New York: The Macmillan Company.
1968. Jesus: God and Man. Philadelphia: Westminster Press.
1969. Basic Questions in Theology. Westminster Press
1969. Theology and the Kingdom of God. Westminster Press.
1970. What Is Man? Philadelphia: Fortress Press.
1972. The Apostles' Creed in Light of Today's Questions. Westminster Press.
1976. Theology and the Philosophy of Science. Westminster Press.
1977. Faith and Reality. Westminster Press.
1985. Anthropology in Theological Perspective. T&T Clark
1988–1994. Systematic Theology. T & T Clark
1996. "Theologie und Philosophie. Ihr Verhältnis im Lichte ihrer gemeinsamen Geschichte". Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
Bradshaw, Timothy, 1988. Trinity and ontology: a comparative study of the theologies of Karl Barth and Wolfhart Pannenberg. Edinburgh: Rutherford House Books.
Wolfhart Pannenberg (2 October 1928 – 4 September 2014)[1] was a German theologian. He has made a number of significant contributions to modern theology, including his concept of history as a form of revelation centered on the Resurrection of Christ, which has been widely debated in both Protestant and Catholic theology, as well as by non-Christian thinkers.
Life and views
Pannenberg was born on 2 October 1928 in Stettin, Germany, now Szczecin, Poland. He was baptized as an infant into the Evangelical (Lutheran) Church, but otherwise had virtually no contact with the church in his early years. At about the age of sixteen, however, he had an intensely religious experience he later called his "light experience." Seeking to understand this experience, he began to search through the works of great philosophers and religious thinkers. A high school literature teacher who had been a part of the Confessing Church during World War II encouraged him to take a hard look at Christianity, which resulted in Pannenberg's "intellectual conversion," in which he concluded that Christianity was the best available religious option. This propelled him into his vocation as a theologian.
Pannenberg studied in Berlin, Göttingen, Heidelberg and Basel. In Basel, Pannenberg studied under Karl Barth. His doctoral thesis at Heidelberg was on Edmund Schlink's views on predestination in the works of Duns Scotus, which he submitted in 1953 and published a year later. His Habilitationsschrift in 1955 dealt with the relationship between analogy and revelation, especially the concept of analogy in the teaching of God's knowledge.
Pannenberg's epistemology, explained clearly in his shorter essays, is crucial to his theological project. It is heavily influenced by Schlink, who proposed a distinction between analogical truth, i.e. a descriptive truth or model, and doxological truth, or truth as immanent in worship. In this way of thinking, theology tries to express doxological truth. As such it is a response to God's self-revelation. Schlink was also instrumental in shaping Pannenberg's approach to theology as an ecumenical enterprise – an emphasis which has remained constant throughout his career.
Pannenberg's understanding of revelation is strongly conditioned by his reading of Karl Barth and Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, as well as by a sympathetic reading of Christian and Jewish apocalyptic literature. The Hegelian concept of history as an unfolding process in which Spirit and freedom are revealed combines with a Barthian notion of revelation occurring "vertically from above". While Pannenberg adopts a Hegelian understanding of History itself as God's self-revelation, he strongly asserts the Resurrection of Christ as a proleptic revelation of what history is unfolding. Despite its obvious Barthian reference, this approach met with a mainly hostile response from both neo-Orthodox and liberal, Bultmannian theologians in the 1960s, a response which Pannenberg claims surprised him and his associates.[2] A more nuanced, mainly implied, critique came from Jürgen Moltmann, whose philosophical roots lay in the Left Hegelians, Karl Marx and Ernst Bloch, and who proposed and elaborated a Theology of Hope, rather than of prolepsis, as a distinctively Christian response to History.
As disciple of Karl Löwith, Pannenberg has continued the debate against Hans Blumenberg in the so-called 'theorem of secularization'.[3] "Blumenberg targets Löwith's argument that progress is the secularization of Hebrew and Christian beliefs and argues to the contrary that the modern age, including its belief in progress, grew out of a new secular self-affirmation of culture against the Christian tradition."[4]
Pannenberg is perhaps best known for Jesus: God and Man in which he constructs a Christology "from below," deriving his dogmatic claims from a critical examination of the life and particularly the Resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth. This is his programmatic statement of the notion of "History as Revelation". He rejects traditional Chalcedonian "two-natures" Christology, preferring to view the person of Christ dynamically in light of the resurrection. This focus on the resurrection as the key to Christ's identity has led Pannenberg to defend its historicity, stressing the experience of the risen Christ in the history of the early Church rather than the empty tomb.
Central to Pannenberg's theological career was his defence of theology as a rigorous academic discipline, one capable of critical interaction with philosophy, history, and most of all, the natural sciences. Pannenberg has also defended the theology of American mathematical physicistFrank J. Tipler's Omega Point Theory[5][6][7].
Pannenberg was an outspoken critic of the approval of homosexual relations by the Evangelical Church in Germany, going so far as to say that a church which approves of homosexual practice is no longer a true church. He returned his Federal Order of Merit after the decoration was awarded to a lesbian activist.[8]
Pannenberg speaking at a CDUconference in Bonn, 1983
Career
Pannenberg was a professor on the faculties of several universities consistently, after 1958. Between the years of 1958 and 1961 he was the Professor of Systematic Theology at theKirchliche Hochschule Wuppertal. Between 1961 and 1968 he was a professor in Mainz. He has had several visiting professorships at the University of Chicago (1963), Harvard (1966), and at the Claremont School of Theology (1967), and since 1968 had been Professor of Systematic Theology at the University of Munich.[9] He retired in 1993, and died at age 85 in 2014.[10]
