Project topics and materials
Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »
The passion of Jesus
Christ’s voluntary surrender to the weakness of being born and dying on the cross was the calculated break-through of God in the history of humanity (Nouwen 2001:31-35). Jesus’ story of passion began with the incarnation, his birth (Bosch 2012:525). But ‘Jesus’ death on the cross should not, however, be isolated from his life’ (Bosch 2012:525; cf. Gregersen 2015b:249; Moltmann 2015:1, 124). Jesus’ life did not only start in a manger and end on the cross. God’s love, which was revealed with the birth of Jesus, continued throughout Jesus’ earthly journey, reaching its climax on the cross at Gethsemane and resulted in Jesus’ dynamic resurrection. We have a more or less detailed account of Jesus’ bodily existence, both as a biological and as a social being, thanks to the Evangelists (Gregersen 2012:234). And the reason why little attention was paid to the body of Jesus (as opposed to that paid to the church as the body of Christ), according to Gregerson (2012:234), was because Paul was less interested in the ‘earthly Jesus’. Instead, it was the Evangelists who provided the detailed account of the bodily life of Jesus on earth – biologically and socially, Jesus’ actions, travels, meetings and sayings – from the beginning, to the end of suffering on the cross (Gregersen 2012:234).
The deep incarnation of Christ is not complete without a deep cross and resurrection (cf. Deane-Drummond 2015:196; Gregersen 2015b:248; Guðmundsdóttir 2011; Johnson 2011). Johnson (2011; cf. Johnson 2015:145-146) writes about the crucified God in loving solidarity with the suffering of people:
The end of Jesus’ life in death and resurrection provides yet another chapter in the astonishing narrative of God’s immersion in matter. No exception to perhaps the only ironclad rule in all of nature, Jesus died, his life bleeding out in a spasm of state violence. Theology has always seen in the cross the love of God writ large: the Son of God entered into suffering ‘for us.’ Contemporary theology is replete with the idea that in Christ God suffered not just once on a certain Good Friday, but suffers continuously through history, in solidarity with the ongoing agony of the human race. Crosses keep on being set up in history. Ecce homo: behold the human being, with tear-stained, starving, tormented faces. The crucified God suffers with human beings, and will continue to do so until we take all the crucified peoples down from the cross.
Unlike Johnson, not all feminist theologians find Jesus’ suffering and crucifixion to be redemptive, and according to them it could simply justify abuse against women as ‘their cross to bear’ (E.A. Webb 2012:199). Their emphasis is on Jesus’ life, in which women, the poor and oppressed were embraced; and on Jesus, who embodies inclusive justice (E.A. Webb 2012:199).
For obvious reasons, the ‘abusive use of the cross’ (Brown & Parker 1989) serves as fuel in the justification of oppression and marginalisation of victims of the abuse of power (cf. E.A. Webb 2012:201). But by reclaiming the cross as a deed of hope, it becomes a source of empowerment to sufferers (cf. E.A. Webb 2012:201).
Recently, a number of feminist theologians have said that they found ‘in Christ’s suffering real solidarity with their own suffering’ (E.A. Webb 2012:199). This is like Anna Mercedes (2011), who refers to the cross not only as the passion of Christ, but to incarnation itself (E.A. Webb 2012:200). Mercedes views the incarnation as kenotic, in revealing God’s fundamental nature of self-giving (E.A. Webb 2012:200). Theologically speaking, the act of kenosis describes the renunciation of power and privilege – with the ‘self-emptying of God’ being expressed in both the incarnation and crucifixation, e.g. Phil 2:1-11 (Rollins 2011:168; cf. Maximus in Tataryn & Truchan-Tataryn 2013:65). Like Bonhoeffer, Mercedes also believes when a person meets the self-giving Christ, her or his identity is completed by self-giving (E.A. Webb 2012:200; cf. Volf 1996:24-25, 47; Van Niekerk 2018:184). Paradoxically, her or his power lies in the weak, powerless and selfless love depicted by the cross of Golgotha.
Jesus is the ‘pathway to liberation’, according to the liberation theologian Jon Sobrino (Speidell 1987:251), in that ‘he is the one who becomes the Son of God’ to show us ‘the way of the Son, the way one becomes Son of God’. It follows from this that the primary test Jesus puts to his followers is to duplicate his way of being in themselves and in their lives. Leonardo Boff pictures believers to be the followers of Christ who has already reached that goal. The ‘imitation of Christ … connects us to Christ and allows him to act in us’ (Boff in Speidell 1987:251).
The feminist theologian Wendy Farley, in contemplating the suffering of Christ, employs the metaphor of a door (E.A. Webb 2012:203). Her reference to suffering as being ‘a door to Christ’ should not be seen as an instruction to imitate Christ’s suffering, but rather as an announcement of the involvement of Christ in the agony of human life (E.A. Webb 2012:203). ‘Christ does not invite us through this door so we can be like him. He stands at this door so he can be like us’, according to Farley (E.A. Webb 2012:203; cf. Van Niekerk 2018:185).
The cross reveals the character of God as the ‘Compassionate One’ (E.A. Webb 2012:201), the ‘suffering God’ (Guðmundsdóttir 2011:155). It is on the cross that God identifies with those who are suffering; the cross discloses God’s weakness and vulnerability (Louw 2008:99, 441). Because of love, God volunteers to suffer with other suffering people, giving them hope and strength (Louw 2008:99, 441; see Southgate 2015:208). ‘On the cross, Christ becomes the absolute outsider’, in being ‘left naked, alone, dying’ (Rollins 2011:27). It is this which indicates God’s complete self-suffering and self-giving love, through Christ, for the sake of people, especially those suffering, the outsiders and marginalised. God discloses Godself as the God of ‘compassion’ in the cross of Jesus Christ (Koopman 2013:48). ‘Some theologians would even go further and state that in Jesus Christ we meet God as the vulnerable God, even the disabled God’ (Koopman 2013:48). Coming from a different angle, of a person living with a disability, Nancy Eiesland (1994:102), contends that Jesus Christ is neither the suffering servant, nor the conquering Lord, but the disabled God.
The divine Spirit is both life-giver and vulnerable
Luke is the only synoptic gospel writer who describes the ascension, linking Easter with Pentecost (Gregersen 2012:235). Luke, also the writer of the Book of Acts, anticipates the outpouring of the Spirit ‘upon all flesh’ (see Greek text of Acts 2:17), with the last words of Jesus to his disciples being: “’And see, I am sending upon you what my Father promised; so stay here in the city until you have been clothed with power from on high’ (Lk 24:49)” (Gregersen 2012:235). According to Paul’s encounter in Acts 2:33, Jesus’ exalted body is totally non-objectifiable and ‘is the source from which flowed the Spirit of Pentecost’ (Davies 2014:171). With the presupposition of the resurrection of Christ in the suffering of Jesus, the ‘life-giving energy of the Spirit’ (Gregersen 2015c:371) is anticipated in the process. After the crucifixion and burial of Jesus, Jesus was raised to life by the power of the Holy Spirit (cf. Keum 2013:8).
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Prologue
1.2 The researcher’s story
1.3 Need for the study
1.4 Research questions
1.5 Structure of thesis
CHAPTER 2 THOUGHTS AND EXPERIENCES OF GOD
2.1 Prolegomena
2.2 Who is God?
2.3 Symbolic language
2.4 The hiddenness of God
2.5 Where is God?
2.6 God is relational
2.7 The acts of God
2.8 Conclusion
CHAPTER 3 THE EMBODIMENT OF GOD
3.1 Bridging the gap
3.2 Incarnation
3.3 Deep incarnation
3.4 Jesus’ powerlessness and vulnerability
3.5 The passion of Jesus
3.6 The divine Spirit is both life-giver and vulnerable
3.7 Imago Trinitatis
3.8 Conclusion
CHAPTER 4 EMBODIED SPIRITUALITY
4.1 What to expect
4.2 The phenomenon of spirituality
4.3 Christian spirituality
4.4 Relational spirituality
4.5 A spiritual journey of imperfection
4.6 Conclusion
CHAPTER 5 QUALITATIVE RESEARCH: A PHENOMENOLOGICAL APPROACH
5.1 Research design
5.2 Method
CHAPTER 6 STORIES ABOUT DISABILITY AND SPIRITUALITY
6.1 Introduction
6.2 Participant interviews
6.3 General and unique themes
6.4 Composite summary
6.5 Conclusion
CHAPTER 7 THE EMBODIMENT OF IMPERFECTION
7.1 Bridging the gap
7.2 Theology, spirituality and disability
7.3 Dis/abled language
7.4 Disability on South African soil
7.5 Theologies and/or spiritualities of disability
7.6 ‘Is God disabled?’ – A case study
7.7 ‘We are all imperfect’
7.8 Prosperity theology
7.9 Jesus and perfectionism
7.10 Conclusion
CHAPTER 8 ON BEING SPIRITUALLY MISSIONAL
8.1 A paradigm shift
8.2 What on earth does ‘missional’ mean?
8.3 Authentic spirituality
8.4 A missional spirituality is transformative and liberative
8.5 The symbiosis of the Divine Spirit and Christ
8.6 Mission from the margins
8.7 Healing and (broken) wholeness
8.8 Embracing Jesus’ hospitality
8.9 Summary
8.10 Epilogue
BIBLIOGRAPHY
