abstract

Christology, Violence and Resurrection

    Joseph A. Bracken
Xavier University

 
In Suffering: A Test of Theological Method, Arthur McGill, Professor of Theology at Harvard in the 1960's, claimed that a culture of violence was all-pervasive in contemporary society. People were exposed to scenes of violence every day in and through newspapers, radio and television. Yet they failed to demand any changes in the casual acceptance of violence either out of indolence or fear of criticism. In response , McGill proposed a new reading of the Gospel narratives, focusing on the life and death of Jesus as one who refused to use violence even to defend himself but instead took on the self-sacrificing role of Good Samaritan to humanity. Christians, accordingly, must choose to which power they will in the end submit: the demonic power of control through domination of others or the divine power of self-giving love and service to others. In this paper, combining insights from McGill and my own recent book Christianity and Process Thought, I will argue that the demonic powers of which McGill speaks are a manifestation of a collective power of evil at work in the world which can only be effectively resisted by a collective power of good. The Incarnation, accordingly, took place to give new focus and impetus to this collective power of good. The passion of Jesus reveals the intensity of the struggle between inordinate self-interest and self-giving love at both individual and institutional levels of society. The Resurrection is the guarantee that self-giving love paradoxically prevails only after it has been apparently vanquished by the collective power of evil.