Bennett begins the book noting how the ironic it is that we have completely lost the scandal of the cross. Atonement metaphors began as an attempt to make sense of the scandal. Now, the metaphors have become so worn that they no longer make sense of the atonement, they have anesthetized the cross of its power. Bennett seeks to reinvigorate our theology, "to more faithfully reckon God's agency in the death of an innocent prophet...to rereckon its violence, to reinvestigate its purpose, to see it in a new logic, even a new telos" (p. 2 emphasis mine). The problem is that the atonement metaphors have stopped being understood as metaphors. They have come to be seen as definite descriptions exactly describing the mechanics of the atonement. Therein lies the problem, as we can never talk in any way but metaphorically about God and how we relate to him. Given the misleading familiarity of the existing metaphors, time has come for a new metaphor, but can a new metaphor come from the pages of Scripture? The rest of the first chapter lays the groundwork for understanding the cross as the labor of God exploring the Scriptural basis and pointing to theologians past and present who have picked up on the theme. Key to his argument is taking the language of being 'born again/from above' seriously. Through the cross a fundamental change happens whereby we are born anew into God's family. The cross is divine labor. Bennett also points out, that he has not been the first one to pick up on this metaphor, even if it has only ever existed in the periphery. He cites Anselm of Canterbury, Julian of Norwich, and modern feminist theologians like Tania Oldenhage. In the remaining five chapters, Bennett sharpens his critique of traditional atonement theology, explicates his own view more fully, and brings it in conversation with other theological topics.
The second chapter is a highly theoretical discussion covering the nature of metaphors, how they work, and why we need them both generally and specifically in the area of theology. Key to a proper understanding of a metaphor is that it is just that, a metaphor, not an allegory, so it is not an exhaustive explanation for the reality it points to, but holds something back and communicates something that we may not have seen via an allegory or definite description. Again he repeats that all theological language must be metaphorical since it concerns the ineffable God. Metaphors work in a network, and Jesus sacrifice is one part of a larger story of God's activity. Building on that, Bennett analyzes the points of contact with childbirth and Jesus death intimated by the metaphor 'labor of God.' They include pain, blood, and resulting children. This observation spawns interesting questions, like, e.g., 'What might a healthy "spiritual child" look like?' (p. 27).
Now that the ground has been cleared, the work of unpacking the metaphor of the labor of God begins in earnest in chapter 3. The main concern of the chapter is violence. This is not surprising as Jesus death on the cross was a very violent event. Bennett embraces the violence of the atonement but sees God, not as the perpetrator of violence, but instead the transformer of it. God transforms horrible violence into the joyful pain of childbirth. In the process he transforms violence into non-violence. "...suffering is the cost of newness, and God does not excuse Godself from this experience" (p. 49).
Bennett tackles how the labor of God deals with sin in the fourth chapter. Sin not only causes problems in our relationship with God because of offenses, but also because it dements us. Theories like penal substitution do nothing to address that problem. If we are still demented how can we become one with God, which is the point of the atonement? The metaphor of the labor of God is directly concerned with transformation. Through the cross we are born anew and have new life in us. This new life effects a suite of changes that span new affections and perspectives, to changes in the neural networks of our brains that change the way we live. And if we are born from above then we are God's children and learn our patterns of behavior from what we see in him and inherit from him. The new life is not one of sin, which Bennett defines as a life of self-determination (even if not always rationally based), but of determination and influence stemming from life in a new family.
In the fifth chapter he continues his attack on traditional atonement theologies, especially penal substitution. He notes their patchwork nature trying to meld together courtroom aspects of the metaphor with sacrificial notions taken from the Hebrew Bible. The weakness of all objective models is their reliance on economies of exchange that fall apart when analyzed conceptually. At the same time, Bennett is aware that subjective models of the atonement struggle to make sense of why the cross was necessary. The labor of God metaphor avoids that problem, as the pain of the cross yielded new birth entailing covenant membership and rescue from sin, not by exchange but by a free gift. In fact it is the perfect gift, as Jesus died to be able to give it. Bennett finds this much more satisfying because it solves problems, which transactional models of the atonement fail to do. 'God is not "granting justification" or "inspiring sanctification" so much as beginning the end of a world dominated by just these sorts of mundane, pedestrian, and wholly powers-owned economic practices' (p. 86).
The book concludes by bringing the metaphor into contact with other theological themes to see what new vistas open up. Bennett briefly touches on the election of Israel, the Song of Moses, the role of the Spirit in bringing new life in Paul, the new birth in 1 Peter, and the Filoque. Each of these discussions is fairly high level and at most only a few pages long. To provide a feel for how he approaches these topics I will briefly touch on his treatment of the Song of Moses. In the Song of Moses, God is pictured as the complete divine parent, encompassing both the role of Father and Mother (on the latter see e.g., 32:18). God's child Israel is not faithful to God, so God will judge his child but God remains committed to him. She undergoes labor to birth a child "...in anticipation of lifelong commitment to her offspring" (p. 91). God in fact expects Israel to rebel, that is part of the labor pain of vs. 18 and that labor pain will continue with "...frustration and loss of the son and various rescues..." (p. 92). The election of Israel is a painful divine birth. Choosing people to be God's children is "painful travail" whether it be via Israel's election or Jesus' death.
There is much to appreciate in Bennett's book. His argumentation is clear, sound, and logically ordered. It's also very clear why we need a new metaphor for the atonement. Modern atonement theories are in shambles, especially penal substitution and he puts his finger on why in a very precise and economical way. This leaves us with the following questions. Is there warrant for the Labor of God? And if so, will it prove fruitful? The Scriptural basis is there for the theory, but then one wonders what to do with the language that seems oriented towards sacrificial interpretations of Jesus' death. What do we do this imagery? Ignore it? Or is there some way to weave it into the labor of God? There seems to be more to our change of status than simply a change of family and even of transformation. But perhaps I'm not understanding clearly how Jesus' travail on the cross bears our sins or is in some sense a substitution (even if we stop short of modern penal substitution). I don't think Bennett has been clear enough here. While interesting and Scriptural it appears to me that its a complementary metaphor and so we still need some other metaphors to pair with it. The question is then, which ones?
To me the big payoff in the theory, as Bennett emphasizes, is that it makes clear how the cross ties to new birth and our new place in God's family. Even this leaves me wondering how to make sense of Paul's adoption metaphor. Is there a way to get them to mesh or are they at odds with each other? Or are they trying to illuminate the same thing from different angles? I have no clear solution to the question at this point, but it is one that comes to mind. If anything that proves the necessity of the book as it has brought me to juxtapose two key scriptural metaphors that I would not have otherwise. The Labor of God is a short book, and given its brevity it is not surprising that there are questions, even key ones in my mind, that are left unanswered. However, the book is a gem and advances the discussion on the atonement forward, which is something most books fail to do. I heartily recommend it!
Comments
Post a Comment