Sacrifice
the present-day Christian addiction to the
Calvary cross has replaced Jesus' entire
ministry ... with a single act of sacrifice
Left unchecked, an evangelical focus on Christ’s sacrificial death could be the death of the Church. It’s skewed our theology, messed up many of our relationships, and created a culture that thrives on guilt and judgment. But it’s not Jesus’ fault. He tried to warn us.
Here’s the deal: Jesus lived his message, and it was a message of love. But the present-day Christian addiction to the Calvary cross has replaced Jesus' entire ministry -- both before his death and after his resurrection -- with a single act of sacrifice, making that willingness to die for a belief and a people the proof of Jesus’ love.
It doesn’t work that way. Sacrifice -- of anything for anyone -- is powerful because of its selflessness. But sacrifice has some problems as well.
1) Sacrifice, to be effective, requires the misfortune of others. I cannot save someone unless he needs saving, hence the Church’s reputation for passing judgment. 2) If the act of sacrificial death teaches us the value of someone we previously took for granted, it remains powerless to heal that relationship. There is no reconciliation without life. 3) The pursuit of sacrifice in the form of hoped-for martyrdom is to give up living altogether. What is the value of a life that was never lived? 4) Sacrifice, as we understand it, involves a completely selfless giving without any hope of receiving in return. It is not a contract. This makes death the end of all sacrifice. Except for one thing -- Christians have the hope of resurrection. Unbelievers have no such hope. Logically, this would make the sacrificial death of an atheist more powerful (and more ethical) than the death of a believer.
I could go on.
But I’ll end with this, instead. When Jesus preached that “The Kingdom of Heaven is here” or that God desires “mercy and not sacrifice,” when he offered rest for our souls and spoke of a banquet to which all those found along the highways were invited, when he healed the lame and the blind and the bleeding, he was pointing to a wedding, not a funeral. And the wedding is here. Now.
It’s time to change our focus.
And our tone.
Here’s the deal: Jesus lived his message, and it was a message of love. But the present-day Christian addiction to the Calvary cross has replaced Jesus' entire ministry -- both before his death and after his resurrection -- with a single act of sacrifice, making that willingness to die for a belief and a people the proof of Jesus’ love.
It doesn’t work that way. Sacrifice -- of anything for anyone -- is powerful because of its selflessness. But sacrifice has some problems as well.
1) Sacrifice, to be effective, requires the misfortune of others. I cannot save someone unless he needs saving, hence the Church’s reputation for passing judgment. 2) If the act of sacrificial death teaches us the value of someone we previously took for granted, it remains powerless to heal that relationship. There is no reconciliation without life. 3) The pursuit of sacrifice in the form of hoped-for martyrdom is to give up living altogether. What is the value of a life that was never lived? 4) Sacrifice, as we understand it, involves a completely selfless giving without any hope of receiving in return. It is not a contract. This makes death the end of all sacrifice. Except for one thing -- Christians have the hope of resurrection. Unbelievers have no such hope. Logically, this would make the sacrificial death of an atheist more powerful (and more ethical) than the death of a believer.
I could go on.
But I’ll end with this, instead. When Jesus preached that “The Kingdom of Heaven is here” or that God desires “mercy and not sacrifice,” when he offered rest for our souls and spoke of a banquet to which all those found along the highways were invited, when he healed the lame and the blind and the bleeding, he was pointing to a wedding, not a funeral. And the wedding is here. Now.
It’s time to change our focus.
And our tone.
4 comments:
SPOILER ALERT! At the end of the movie, Earthquake, Charlton Heston leaps into a raging floodwater in order to die heroically with his estranged wife. They don't even like each other!
Over the years, this scene has become an iconic image for me. It illustrates how a single, grand sacrifice is easier than maintaining a healthy relationship over time. Heston couldn't live with his wife, but he could die for her. Even as a ten-year-old child, I found this troubling.
I am grateful for your caution about the limits of sacrifice.
By the way, if you doubt the spiritual heft of disaster movies from the 1970's, let me inform you that Earthquake was written by Mario Puzo and GEORGE FOX (look it up!).
This is a very brave and truthful post. Thank you.
I looked it up. Indeed, it seems that George Fox was also winner of the coveted Kirkus Star. With three exclamation points.
Thank you, Peggy. High praise.
My mom calls that kind of theology, "grovelling at the foot of the cross." which is opposed to taking up your cross daily and following Christ.
I'm learning to see Christianity as a both/and religion -- judgment AND grace, love AND limits, rules AND freedom, selfishness (of a sort -- "work out your own salvation") AND sacrifice.
But the way you frame it is especially helpful for the evangelical church at large. showing clearly how we can live up to ALL of Jesus' teachings and all of God's desires.
Post a Comment