Theology of the Cross

[NonNobisDomine]

In Moltmann’s “The Crucifed God,” he articulates what Luther must have meant when he describes all theology as a theology of the Cross. This is in contrast to the “theology of glory,” which he claims that the Roman Catholic tradition holds. At the heart of it all seems to be the difference between the extent to which man’s nature has fallen. Protestant theologies generally seem to view man as completely corrupted, so that no real certainity about God can be known outside of revelation. For Catholicism on the other hand, man’s human reason has been darkened, but not completely destroyed. Because of this, man can attain some knowledge about God–with certainity–using the faculty of reason alone. As an example, Vatican I taught that man can know that God exists by the light of human reason alone.

My question is, can there by any real attempt at bringing these two types of theologies together?

 

[RebeccaJ]

Vatican I, in the dogmatic decree, “Constitution of the Catholic Faith”, did not declare that God can be known by reason alone.

It does say that God can be known by the faculty of reason, especially in understanding divine revelation.

A main point of the decree is that rationalism is in opposition to Christianity, more specifically, the Church.

 

[NonNobisDomine]

Let me explain.

Luther talked about a theology of the cross, as opposed to the theology of glory. Moltmann explains how the theology of the cross is a theology which shows that God is on the side of those who seem to be abandoned by Him. Jesus says “My god, why have you forsaken me?” God is not on the side of the Pharisees and Saducees, but on the one outside of the “Church.” An authentic theology of cross is to foster “creative love for the abandoned.” Can this be reconciled with Catholicism?

 

[Guidissimo]

“Justification thus means that Christ himself is our righteousness, in which we share through the Holy Spirit in accord with the will of the Father. Together we confess: By grace alone, in faith in Christ’s saving work and not because of any merit on our part, we are accepted by God and receive the Holy Spirit, who renews our hearts while equipping and calling us to good works.” - Joint Declaration

“By grace alone, in faith in Christ’s saving work and not because of any merit on our part, we are accepted by God.” Period. That is the essence of Luther’s theology of the cross, and what made the Pharisees so upset that he dined with the tax collectors and sinners.

Reconciling that message with a God that also pulls up upward and onward, so that “we will all be changed (and not simply covered), in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye,” is a theological marathon. But the essence of justification is that by grace, in faith, not because of merit or change, we are accepted by God, because of Christ’s saving work, and his work alone.

In the notes it says that where faith means ‘trust in the promises,’ indeed faith alone is sufficient.

John

 

[fhansen]

Let me explain.

Luther talked about a theology of the cross, as opposed to the theology of glory. Moltmann explains how the theology of the cross is a theology which shows that God is on the side of those who seem to be abandoned by Him. Jesus says “My god, why have you forsaken me?” God is not on the side of the Pharisees and Saducees, but on the one outside of the “Church.” An authentic theology of cross is to foster “creative love for the abandoned.” Can this be reconciled with Catholicism?

Sounds like he starts with a false premise-popular mythology really-that Catholics or their leaders are more likely to be Pharisaical. But I see a broad cross-spectrum in our pews and on our altars of outcasts, ne’er-do-wells, rich, poor, and just plain folk. And I think the CC does the best job of teaching the “theology of love”.

 

[Guidissimo]

Here is an interesting article: Thoughts?

Why Luther is not quite Protestant

I’m fascinated by this:

“According to Luther’s account of baptism Christ speaks to me in particular, which is
possible only with an external word, not a universal principle. Thus the major premise of
Luther’s syllogism, which refers to me in particular, differs subtly but profoundly from the major premise of the standard Protestant syllogism, which is a universal principle applying to me only as a member of a whole class of people, i.e., all who believe in Christ.In the Lutheran syllogism, “you” means me; in the Protestant syllogism, “you” could only mean whoever meets the stated condition of belief in Christ.”

"Faith in its proper function has no other object than Jesus Christ…It does not look at its love and say: “what have I done?Where have I sinned? What have I deserved?'But it says,'What has Christ done? What has He deserved?'And here the truth of the Gospel gives you the answer: ‘He has redeemed you from sin, from the devil and from eternal death’” (1535 Commentary on Galatians, LW 26:88).

 

[awatkins69]

Well, while we may be able to come to belief and understanding of God by reason alone, we cannot achieve salvation by any human effort of our own. In the Catholic Church, we essentially believe in “sola gratia”. That is, we believe we are saved totally by God’s grace, that the work of salvation is a total act of God within His total providence, and that man can only choose to not refuse His help. And ultimately, even God is working in that. So really, without God’s help, we are totally helpless. Even if we know God exists, which we can by natural reason, without His grace we’re doomed.