In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

127 u u CONCLUSION Fifteen Christologies Later . . . Coming to the conclusion of this pilgrimage through fifteen contemporary Christologies from four continents, it is time to reflect on what can be gleaned from them. This can be divided into traditional issues in Christology of continuing relevance and new issues arising from contemporary contexts and developments. Traditional Issues of Continuing Relevance Almost all the Christologies studied here developed in theological contexts that became significantly more ecumenical after World War II, but most of them continue to reflect denominational traits. John B. Cobb Jr. does not present his Christology as Methodist in outlook; but, in his emphasis on the experience of Christ, Christ as creative transformation , and the importance of communal worship for sustaining faith, one can hear echoes of a Methodist emphasis on the experience of salvation, ongoing sanctification, and the importance of gathering for worship and study. Mark Lewis Taylor does not advertise himself as a Reformed theologian, yet his continually evolving Christology reflects a Reformed emphasis on the need to continually rethink doctrine in light of the witness of the Word and Spirit, and a Reformed concern for the reformation of society. Denominational background continues to be an influence on contemporary Christologies. The issues debated at the Councils of Nicaea and Chalcedon continue to be discussed in most contemporary Christologies. Theologians who claim that Jesus has a saving significance beyond that of his moral influence generally have to explain how this is so. This means that questions debated at these councils of how Jesus is related to God, what enables him to save, and how the divine is related to his human nature in his one person continue to be wrestled with. Most of the Christologies studied here affirm that in Jesus Christ God acted in a new and decisive way in history. All emphasize the genuine humanity of Jesus. None portray 128 Contemporary Christologies him, for instance, as enjoying omniscience all his life, as Anselm did. Those who affirm an understanding of Jesus as fully human and fully divine, the two natures united in his one person, emphasize that the Gospels portray him as experiencing spiritual struggle and needing to learn. The genuine humanity of Jesus is a basic assumption of contemporary Christologies. Anselm taught that Christ became incarnate to save humanity from the penalty of sin. But the Christologies studied here that understand Jesus in a trinitarian perspective and that take up speculative questions tend to follow Duns Scotus, who argued that Christ would have become incarnate even if there had been no sin. According to Scotus, the world was created and Christ became incarnate to express God’s goodness, so that there might be others to share in God’s joy.1 Contemporary Christologies following this line of thought see creation as existing for the further expression, communication, and celebration of God’s love. This Franciscan innovation in the understanding of the incarnation and its use in contemporary Christology can provide a moral framework that understands creation as having intrinsic value apart from its use by humanity, without falling into antihumanism.2 Christologies developed on a trinitarian basis can thus make an important contribution to thinking about creation in the context of the environmental crisis. Contemporary Christologies continue to draw on the three models of atonement that Gustaf Aulén identified to articulate how Jesus provides hope for an end to suffering and death, a beauty and example that move people to love, or comfort that comes from a sense of God’s nearness , acceptance, and forgiveness. Some use only one or two of Aulén’s models. This study has shown that each of Aulén’s models addresses a different form of sin, evil, or suffering, and each sees Christ exercising a different kind of power to overcome it. Abelard’s moral influence understanding of the atonement recognizes the basic truth that Christ came to make a difference in the way people live. Christ makes this difference through the power of the beauty of his example, which evokes love and a passion for justice. But how can these be sustained in the face of structural evils like racism, economic oppression, or genocidal violence? The moral influence of Jesus cannot sustain moral concern alone. It strengthens and directs the individual and perhaps the group, but it does not address the root causes of these evils, the cosmic powers of sin and death. Without the hope that in the end God’s love is greater [3.145...

Share