*Dr.Ivo da Conceição Souza
Can we speak of the “agony” of God? When Man is in turmoil, when life is threatened, when society has lost basic values of respect for life and for human dignity, when respect for women, children and old folks has gone down, can we speak of the “agony of God”? If the glory of God is the living Man, and it is a common place to say that the situation of Man is at stake, cannot we speak of the “agony of God”? These questions crop up to our mind when we have the daily papers in one hand and the Gospel in the other, thus reading the daily news in the light of the Gospel values and the Gospel shedding light on the daily chores of life. Let us briefly reflect on these existential issues in the light of the Death and Resurrection of Jesus. The Paschal Mystery is the kernel of Christian religion, it is the mystique of our human-Christian existence. In short, it is our participation in the “agony of the triumphant God”. Whenever we speak of the revolution brought up by Christianity into the world, we praise the Cross. The Cross brought renewal to the world. It has brought ‘civilization of love’ for the Barbarians. It was the sealing of the “movement of Jesus” in Judea. It is the epitome of Love. The starting-point for Theology is its historical context. One cannot interpret theologically Jesus’ death without explaining it historically. Crucifixion was a death inflicted on a slave. The crucifixion of Jesus was one of the most unequivocally political events recorded in the New Testament. Early theological interpretation of Jesus’ crucifixion as a death “for our sins” has overlooked the horrendous, non-religious feature of the Gospel. Cross was an instrument of imperial terror. In the Roman Empire, crucifixion was supreme penalty, instrument of terror and horror. The Roman Empire could not succeed without terror and violence. Pax Romana was rooted on power–peace secured through coercion and terror: terror of gladiatorial games, terror of human sacrifices. Jesus, on the contrary, has rooted his message on peace and love. This was certainly a threat for the Roman Empire. To understand the “word of the cross” is to understand the quintessence of Christianity, as found in the Pauline letters. In the First Letter to the Corinthians Paul stated: “When I first came to you, brothers and sisters, I decided to know nothing except Jesus Christ, and him crucified” (1 Cor 2:2). What was the meaning of the Cross of Jesus Christ for Paul? His conversion was the result of his encounter with Jesus as the Crucified. It generated a revolution in his conviction and action. It energized his entire apostolic endeavour. The Apostle has to partake in the suffering of Jesus, to order life in love (that is, crucified love), to pull everything into the tremendous gravitational field of the Cross (cf.Col 1:24). His proclamation was the “public portrayal of Jesus Christ Crucified” (Gal 3:1). In this context, he could boast himself in the Lord: “Far be it from me to glory except in the Cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, and him crucified” (Ga 6:14). Christian life is co-crucifixion with Christ (cf.Rm 6:1-5). Baptism means to die to sin and live for God (cf.Rm 6:3-11). The common sacred meal, the “Lord’s supper” was a solemn, public proclamation of the Lord’s death (1 Cor 11:26). Theologically interpreted, Christ died for us, for our sins, for our liberation (Rm 14:15;1Cor 8:11). We have to recognize the centrality of the Cross of Christ for Paul’s theologizing. Jesus of Nazareth was a “revolutionary” in the true sense of the word, as can be seen from his manifesto (cf.Lk 4:16-21). Jesus came to the world to proclaim the “good news” to the poor, freedom to the oppressed, to announce the “acceptable year” of the Lord. He was to usher in a new era of renewal, a new social order, God’s Kingdom/Reign/Lordship on earth. Jesus sharply criticized the rich oppressors and political rulers of his day. But he never supported the use of physical violence against his fellowmen. Rather, Jesus consistently rejected the urges of some of his followers to employ such methods of violence (Jn 18:10-11). Jesus was familiar with the violent means and measures employed by the political rulers to accomplish their purposes (cf.Lk 13:1; Mk 13:31). One of his twelve apostles, Simon, had a Zealot background. Jesus was, therefore, familiar with the Zealots’ programme to overthrow Roman rule by force of weapons, arms and daggers. But his stance was one of non-resistance and non-violence. He presents his injunction, “To him who strikes you on the right cheek, offer the other also” (Mt 5:39), within the context of love for one’s enemies. It requires a high dosage of self-transcendence and loving forgiveness. But there is no suffering and death without Resurrection (cf.Rm 4:25; 1 Cor 15:14). His agony is triumphant, it is victorious struggle against sin and evil, its individual and societal consequences. In the history of the Church, we see how the truth prevails. In our history, in spite of all persecutions, riots and oppression of human rights, the truth will prevail, justice will triumph, peace will abound…
Scribbling 