Jurgen Moltmann's Theological Positions by demandside

Jürgen Moltmann’s Theological Positions: A Model for the Foundation of Equality, Rights, and Democracy

Gianluigi Segalerba

1 Introduction

Faith originating from hope in the renewal of the world is the living force of any theological movement which aims to establish and protect conditions of social justice and democratic equality. Hope in the new creation has, as such, an incomparable revolutionary potential. My paper will show that faith with hope is the liberation of the mind of believers: Faith with hope is constant criticism of the evil in the world and is the foundation of equality. Without faith connected to hope, democratic life and democratic institutions would and will lose their value dimension: they would and will be reduced to valueless institutional and procedural correctness. Furthermore, to consider the dimension of faith with hope as a dimension extraneous to everything which politics should be, as a dimension which should be expelled from political life, means to reduce democracy to a form of institution in which values –religious values too – should be forgotten. There may not be a separation of the mental disposition of the believers consisting in faith with hope from the public life: on the contrary, faith with hope is, as such, for the believers having it, a mental disposition constitutively regarding public life.

In this analysis, we shall first see the connection among God’s promise, eschatological tension of the believers, and incompatibility between the world as it is and contents of the Promise. The dimension of faith with hope will prove to be the very origin of the disposition of believers to transform reality: faith with hope will therefore turn out to be the foundation and defence of the values of equality, rights, and democracy. Faith with hope constitutes the very life disposition of the believers: it is a living principle which continuously acts within political institutions and transmits living values to civil life. Believers, independent of the institutions in which they live, are not neutral to values; believers are neither ethically neutral nor ethically indifferent towards the society in which they live. Hope entails a precise ethical and political programme. The eschatological tension is the very possibility of establishing a democracy founded on values, and it represents, within already established democratic institutions, a

steady impulse to defend and strengthen the principles of justice: faith with hope is, within the common life of democratic institutions, the irreplaceable and indispensable instrument for the existence of democratic institutions which are not only founded on procedural correctness, but which have as their primary goal to establish and develop social justice, too.

Moreover, faith with hope represents, for believers, a form of psychological and mental liberation. The awareness obtained through God’s promise that God will make a new creation, is an antidote against the feeling of despair which could arise in individuals from the false conviction that the reality of injustice, oppression, and inequality in which they are living is the only possible reality, and that no change is possible The spiritual liberation precedes any further form of liberation: the believer, knowing that God promised to change reality, becomes immediately aware that the reality in which he is living is not given once and for all. As a consequence, believers acquire the capability of seeing that structures of powers, which strategies of indoctrination and of oppression try to present as immutable, as eternal, as natural, as given by God, are, actually, only transitory. They acquire therewith the capability of demasking these structures. Hence, hope arising from God’s promise of a new creation is primarily the mental liberation from the enslavement of the time in which the believer lives. Faith with hope communicates the very possibility of an alternative reality: an alternative world, an alternative society, and an alternative life are possible; they will be realised, since God has promised it. This is the main point in the liberation of individuals. Without hope, there can be no authentic future.

Eschatological tension is for the believers the driving force of the purpose of preparing and working on the new Kingdom of God within history. Hence, eschatology, within the theology of hope is, for today’s believers and for believers of the future, the foundation of a social, civil, and political programme of transformation of society: institutions should be built and modified in keeping with a programme of affirmation of justice and of fighting against oppression. In particular, democracy, since it is a political system founded on equality of members, is the only form of political order which can be compatible with the principles of the anticipation of God’s new creation. Anticipating the conditions of the new Kingdom means building democratic institutions and organisations promoting social justice. The Theology of Hope makes, therefore, a fundamental contribution to the foundation and the protection of democracy, equality, and social justice.

Throughout my analysis, I shall refer mainly to Moltmann’s books Theologie der Hoffnung. Untersuchungen zur Begründung und zu den Konsequenzen einer christlichen Eschatologie1 (München: Chr. Kaiser Verlag, 1977 [1964]) and Der gekreuzigte Gott. Das Kreuz Christi als Grund und Kritik christlicher Theologie2 (München: Chr. Kaiser Verlag 1972).

2 Hope and transformative eschatology

Faith with hope endows believers with a precise programme to promote values and transform society. For the believers faith with hope is the way of knowing that change is possible, that injustice is not naturally given, and that another world is possible. Reality is not given once and for all; history is not complete. God is not a God of an immutable, eternal present: God is the God of history; history has a precise development and goes towards its own fulfilment established by God’s promise. God’s promise of the new Kingdom is a precise political message expressed against all those who want to make believe that reality will not change and cannot be changed. Hope in the new Kingdom of God creates in believers a desire to refuse any form of injustice: hope in the new Kingdom is for the believers, among other things, purpose of anticipating the new Kingdom. Therefore, any form of inequality, oppression, and injustice is condemned as being incompatible with the new Kingdom.

Moltmann’s book Theologie der Hoffnung. Untersuchungen zur Begründung und zu den Konsequenzen einer christlichen Eschatologie opens with a clear statement on eschatology. Eschatology, which for Christianity means the return of Jesus, the Last Judgment, the

1 The title of the English translation is: Theology of Hope. On the Ground and the Implications of a Christian Eschatology. New York: Harper & Row, 1991 [1967]. Throughout my paper, I shall refer to Moltmann’s original German text. I shall mention the English translations exclusively for the quotations.

2 The title of the English translation is: The Crucified God. The Cross of Christ as the Foundation and Criticism of Christian Theology. London: SCM Press, 2001 [1974].

Other works of Jürgen Moltmann which I analysed and to which I shall refer in my analysis are: Das Experiment Hoffnung. Einführungen (München: Chr. Kaiser Verlag, 1974; Engl. transl: The Experiment Hope. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1975); Trinität und Reich Gottes. Zur Gotteslehre. München: Chr. Kaiser Verlag, 1980 (Engl. transl.: The Trinity and the Kingdom. San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1981); Gott in der Schöpfung. Ökologische Schöpfungslehre (München: Chr. Kaiser Verlag, 1985; Engl. transl.: God in Creation. An Ecological Doctrine of Creation. London: SCM Press, 1985); Der Weg Jesu Christi. Christologie in messianischen Dimensionen. München: Chr. Kaiser Verlag, 1989 (Engl. transl.: The Way of Jesus Christ. Christology in Messianic Dimension. London: SCM Press, 1990); Das Kommen Gottes. Christliche Eschatologie (Gütersloh: Chr. Kaiser/Gütersloher Verlagshaus, 1995; Engl. transl.: The Coming of God. Christian Eschatology. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996); Ethik der Hoffnung. Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus, 2010 (Engl. transl.: Ethics of Hope, London: SCM Press, 2012).

fulfilment of the realm of God, the universal resurrection of the dead, and the new creation3 , has lost its central position in Christianity in Moltmann’s view and has been relegated to a minor role as regards the principles of Christianity4

The reason for the relegation of eschatology and the relegation of all of the contents associated with eschatology has been, according to Moltmann, the transformation of Christianity into the religious organisation substituting the Roman state religion. As a result of this transformation, which saw Christianity take power in the Roman Empire as the official religion, the revolutionary contents present in the concept of eschatology were abandoned to minority groups. The concept of eschatological tension no longer belonged and could no longer belong to the official church, to the church of power5: Christianity was therefore domesticated, tamed, normalised, and the dangers for the stability of society represented by the eschatological contents were eliminated, or at least relegated to a minor relevance, so that Christianity no longer posed a threat to the existing order and status quo. The object of hope was transformed from the hope in the complete renewal of the world and earthen life into the hope in a new dimension concerning exclusively the afterlife. The revolutionary potential of faith with hope was therewith annulled.

The transformation of Christianity into the official religion brought about, as its due price, the elimination of all the traits of Christianity threatening the preservation of the existing order and the preservation of the interests of the dominant classes. Hence, the first victim of this transformation had to be the concept of eschatology with its potential revolutionary contents originating in its expectation of a different world, of a different society, of a different order, and of a different organisation of reality. The expectation of an alternative order was and is the first and worst enemy of whichever defence of the status quo. The expectation of a

3 For the concept of the new creation, the promise of the new creation, and the consequent expectation of the new creation from the Christian believers, Moltmann refers to Revelation 21:5: “Behold, I am making all things new.” (Der Weg Jesu Christi. Christologie in messianischen Dimensionen, p. 262, pp. 349–350; Das Kommen Gottes. Christliche Eschatologie, p. 12, p. 221, p. 270, pp. 291–294, pp. 298–299; Ethik der Hoffnung, p. 54, pp. 140–141).

4 Theologie der Hoffnung. Untersuchungen zur Begründung und zu den Konsequenzen einer christlichen Eschatologie, pp. 12–13.

5 Throughout paragraph 2, ‘Politische Religion’ and 3, ‘Politische Kreuzestheologie’ of chapter VIII, ‘Wege zur politischen Befreiung des Menschen’, pp. 298–306, Moltmann describes the attempt made by the Roman authorities to transform Christianity into a state religion. Among other things, the attempt to completely normalise Christianity failed because of the eschatological contents of Christianity, since these were and are not compatible with any normalisation.

complete renewal of the world which regards the here and now would have displeased the official power and the dominant classes. In general, any established power could not be very satisfied with a religious disposition directed to the expectation of change: the expectation of change as the realisation of God’s promise demythologises and relativises whichever established power. If the dimension of the Christian believer is the dimension of the expectation of the future as the renewal of the world, if the present is only a dimension preparing the future but not having an eternal value, the established power can neither have nor acquire an absolute value. Everything which belongs to the present is relativised in comparison with the coming future. The current social order and the present institutions have no natural, no eternal legitimation; they are only transitory structures in comparison with the coming future. God’s promise of the new Kingdom is an assurance of a global change of reality, hence the present time is only a preparation of, or a passage towards the authentic fulfilment of reality. No established power can claim to be eternal if the eschatological contents already state that this power will come to an end as a consequence of God’s promise of a completely new future. The revolutionary implications and potential of this thought are evident.

The main intent of Moltmann’s meditation on hope and eschatology consists in recovering the centrality of eschatology for Christianity and for the Christian faith: an eschatological Christianity will have the transformation of the world as its central programme. Hence, Moltmann often states in his works that eschatology and hope are not marginal concepts within Christianity6; on the contrary, they are the very core of Christianity and of the Christian faith. Christian faith implies, as such, a tension and an expectation of the future; it is faith in the future here and now, a faith which reads the present on the basis of the promise of the future. The future is here and now since it represents the already actual orientation for the modification of the present: it is a future that exists here and now since it is a future which modifies the mind of the believer. The centrality of eschatology and of hope towards the accomplishment of God’s promise implies a dissatisfaction with the present condition of the world: faith in the resurrection of Christ and hope in the new coming of Christ is hope against death, against evil, and against oppression. Hope in the new creation means being enlightened about the absolute negativity of death, of evil, and of the forms of oppression in the world:

6 On this subject, see Theologie der Hoffnung. Untersuchungen zur Begründung und zu den Konsequenzen einer christlichen Eschatologie

through this hope in a new creation and in the orders of the new creation, the Christian believer can see the shortcomings of present society Hope opens the eyes of the believers: Trust in a new creation gives rise to the emergence in the believer of the awareness that reality does not coincide with the (actually, only temporarily) given order of things. Hope in the transformation of the world means liberation from the chains of the present and gives believers confidence that change is possible.

God’s promise radically modifies the whole interpretation and condition of human beings, of history, and of reality: for Moltmann, eschatological tension implies the wish to modify reality. Moltmann pleads for a transformative eschatology; the hope in and the expectation of the new creation made by God have as a result the act of anticipation by men with regard to the contents of societal transformation foreseen and established by God’s promise. Hope in the new creation implies anticipation of the new Kingdom: the believer hopes in the new Kingdom of God and finds, in this hope, the motivation for the modification of the world. Hope in the new Kingdom therefore means the will to anticipate the new Kingdom with one’s own action. The eschatological tension of the believers is for Moltmann an active expectation of the new creation: it is a transformative eschatology. The transformative eschatology programme promotes peace and social justice, and protects creation7. Therefore, the believer immediately exercises an influence within the institutions in which he lives; the fulfilment of times is being anticipated by the believers.

The contents of God’s promise are the compass of history and reality. History and reality move towards a determined direction; they are not static, but dynamic dimensions. Both reality and history are incomplete: they are waiting their fulfilment from God and are going in the direction of their fulfilment from God. At the same time, Moltmann points out that God’s promise as such produces a condition in the individual which he defines as inadaequatio intellectus et rei8. Through faith with hope, believers understand reality; they see reality in a completely different way from the way they looked at reality before being enlightened by faith with hope. Believers can see gradually and with a growing impact that the world, as it is, is not functioning very well: they used to be blind, but now they see. The possibility of the coming

7 Ethik der Hoffnung, pp. 53–60.

8 For Moltmann’s use of the expression inadaequatio intellectus et rei, I refer to Theologie der Hoffnung. Untersuchungen zur Begründung und zu den Konsequenzen einer christlichen Eschatologie, p. 91 and p. 107.

of a completely different future gives them sight: conditions in the world which could seem neutral and unavoidable, irremediably and immutably given, now appear in their contingency and in their wrongness.

Faith with hope is a form of enlightenment and of complete renewal of the mind of the believer. The believer acquires sight through his faith with hope and he sees that the world does not function well morally. Through faith with hope, the believer has the instruments to refuse the world as it is: he can see that it is not a natural law if the world does not function.

Until God’s promise is realised, the human intellect sees the contrast between the contents of God’s promise and the reality as it is. Disquietude emerges in believers as a result of God’s promise: Christianity is not a religion of apathy or of calmness. If Christianity’s fundamental disposition is faith with hope, Christians cannot be satisfied with the reality as it is. Faith and hope9 in the new creation are constitutively an instrument of enlightenment for the Christian believer to let the Christian believer see that the condition of the world in which the Christian believer lives is not perfect. Hence, the core of Christian faith when it is connected with this kind of hope, contains, among other things, an attention for the structure of the society: it is not a faith that turns the Christian believer away from the existing world. Hope in the new creation means dissatisfaction with the world as it is and a desire to anticipate the new Kingdom of God. The Theology of Hope is a theology representing the very foundation of civil and social rights, of equality, and of democracy. Since hope is hope in the coming Kingdom of God, the attitude of the believer is refusal of any position of injustice. The believer will therefore oppose any form of oppression.

3 ‘Behold, I am making all things new ’ : cor inquietum, promissio inquieta, inadaequatio intellectus et rei10

9 Moltmann gives an interesting interpretation of the relationships between faith and hope. Faith represents the priority, but hope represents the primacy. Without faith, there is no possibility to reach God, but without hope there is no possibility for faith to remain really a living faith: faith as such is not sufficient. Faith with hope is faith in God together with hope in the complete renewal of the world. (Theologie der Hoffnung. Untersuchungen zur Begründung und zu den Konsequenzen einer christlichen Eschatologie, p. 16).

10 For Moltmann’s use of the expression cor inquietum I refer to Theologie der Hoffnung. Untersuchungen zur Begründung und zu den Konsequenzen einer christlichen Eschatologie, p. 178. For Moltmann’s use of the expression promissio inquieta see Theologie der Hoffnung. Untersuchungen zur Begründung und zu den Konsequenzen einer christlichen Eschatologie, p. 178.

Faith with hope in a new creation constitutes the origin of a precise political position. Faith with hope, independently of the political institutions in which believers live, becomes a disposition which will orientate and direct the political action. Hence, faith with hope does not only constitute a theological position, it is also an ethical principle which represents a fundamental, invaluable instrument for the foundation of a value democracy. This kind of faith gives the motivation for the transformation of the society. It is, therefore, immediately a faith involving a political programme founded on precise ethical values. Faith in the new creation opens the perspective of the conflict between the reality which will come as a result of God’s promise and the reality which exists before God’s new creation.

The promise of the new creation enables human beings to become aware of the limitations of the present world. Hence, faith and hope in the resurrection promote a strong inclination to a critical examination of the world in the individuals. In individuals, faith and hope in a different future lead to the emergence of impatience and the refusal of a dimension in which evil is still present. The following quotation is an example of Moltmann’s interpretation:

To believe means to cross in hope and anticipation the bounds that have been penetrated by the raising of the crucified. If we bear that in mind, then this faith can have nothing to do with fleeing the world, with resignation and with escapism. In this hope the soul does not soar above our vale of tears to some imagined heavenly bliss, nor does it sever itself from the earth. For, in the words of Ludwig Feuerbach, it puts ‘in place of the beyond that lies above our grave in heaven the beyond that lies above our grave on earth, the historic future, the future of mankind’. It sees in the resurrection of Christ not the eternity of heaven, but the future of the very earth on which his cross stands. It sees in him the future of the very humanity for which he died. That is why it finds the cross the hope of the earth. This hope struggles for the obedience of the body, because it awaits the quickening of the body. It espouses in all meekness the cause of the devastated earth and of harassed humanity, because it is promised possession of the earth. Ave crux – unica spes!

But on the other hand, all this must inevitably mean that the man who thus hopes will never be able to reconcile himself with the laws and constrains of this earth, neither with the inevitability of death nor with the evil that constantly bears further evil. The raising of Christ is not merely a consolation to him in a life that is full of distress and doomed to die, but it is also God’s contradiction of suffering and death, of humiliation and offence, and of the wickedness of evil. Hope finds in Christ not only a consolation in suffering, but also the

protest of the divine Promise against suffering. If Paul calls death the ‘last enemy’ (I Cor. 15.26), then the opposite is also true: that the risen Christ, and with him the resurrection hope, must be declared to be the enemy of death and of a world that puts up with death. Faith takes up this contradiction and thus becomes itself a contradiction to the world of death. That is why faith, wherever it develops into hope, causes not rest but unrest, not patience but impatience. It does not calm the unquiet heart but is itself this unquiet heart in man. Those who hope in Christ can no longer put up with reality as it is, but begin to suffer under it, to contradict it. Peace with God means conflict with the world, for the goad of the Promised future stabs inexorably into the flesh of every unfulfilled present.11

The relationship between faith with hope and opposition to the present condition of the world is evident. Christianity is not a religion of consolation in the acceptance of the evil nor is it a religion of conciliation or of reconciliation with the existing world. Faith with hope is, therefore, as such, already a form or rebellion. Hope is a theological-political virtue, since it is a theological virtue with precise consequences for the believer’s disposition towards life in general, towards the political institutions, and towards the social dimension. Faith in Christ is opposition to the world of death and to all that leads to death. The fundaments of Christianity are seen by Moltmann as consisting in the promise made by God of a different future12. The promise of a different future means, for the Christian believer, the expectation of, the turning to, and the tension for something which is to come, for something which will come. The present life is thus being organised on the basis of the expected renewal which the future will bring. The present conditions of the world should be modified looking at the expected future as a form of orientation for action. To understand, through the hope in the resurrection and in the renewal of the whole world, that the present world does not function, is the first fundamental step toward the awareness that the world as it is must be changed. An eschatological outlook, an eschatological way of seeing the world is already a precise and

11 Theology of Hope. On the Ground and the Implications of a Christian Eschatology, pp. 20-21. For Moltmann’s original text see Theologie der Hoffnung. Untersuchungen zur Begründung und zu den Konsequenzen einer christlichen Eschatologie, pp. 16-17. I chose this passage since it seems to contain many fundamental concepts such as hope, faith, resurrection, contradiction to the world of death, unquiet heart, and conflict with the world in just a few lines.

12 On this subject see paragraph 2, ‘Das Verheißungswort’ in chapter II, ‘Verheißung und Geschichte’ of Theologie der Hoffnung. Untersuchungen zur Begründung und zu den Konsequenzen einer christlichen Eschatologie, pp. 92–95.

practical attitude towards the present world: this outlook is a precise and political position13 . God’s promise is the origin of a precise political programme. The promise of a different future is the programme for the present; the key for the transformation of the present is God’s promise.

The resurrection of Christ in Moltmann’s interpretation is God’s opposition to all forms of evil: Christ’s resurrection is the symbol of God’s promise against evil; it is opposition to death and every system of death dominating the world. Faith in the resurrection means, therefore, not only hope in a coming dimension, but faith in opposition to the dimensions of death and evil in the earthly dimension, too. Both the Christian believer and the community of believers gain by their faith values an element of insurrection against evil components of reality: through faith in the resurrection and the resulting opposition to evil, the Christian community becomes the centre of the creation of the dimension of human rights, freedom, and equality14. Faith with hope cannot be consequently separated from the political orientation; on the contrary, faith with hope entails, among other things, a precise political direction: faith with hope promotes and should promote justice. Applied to the dimension of democracy, the dimension of faith with hope is attractive for all those who want to find models for democratic systems which are not limited just to the impartiality of the institutions and to the correctness of the political procedures. Faith with hope is a system of values; faith entails values which constitute the lifeblood itself for any democracy.

The new Kingdom is, as such, a criterion for judging reality. The act of God giving resurrection to Christ and His promising resurrection to human beings is God’s expression of His refusal of death and evil. With that, the Christian believer finds an orientation for what he should do: he should refuse the forms of oppression which led, for instance to Christ’s death. To refuse the world’s conditions of injustice means for the believer to be part of God’s project. Furthermore, God’s promise that the complete reality is to come frees the Christian believer from the prison in which the Christian believer would otherwise find himself if he did not have the expectation of a different reality. Within an interpretation of reality in which reality were characterised

13 For Moltmann, hope is connected to a multiplicity of events which are hoped for. If hope were limited only to the dimension of the afterlife, it would have no relevance for the expectation of a renewal of the society in which we live.

14 On this topic see paragraph 2, ‘Die Hoffnung des Glaubens’, and paragraph 3, ‘Die Sünde der Verzweiflung’, of the ‘Einleitung’, in Theologie der Hoffnung. Untersuchungen zur Begründung und zu den Konsequenzen einer christlichen Eschatologie pp. 15–21.

and regulated by immutable laws, the Christian believer would have no way of imagining a different reality; he would have no way of imagining a change or modification of the present condition. The present would not represent a simple transitory structure, but a kind of inescapable prison God’s promise opens the perspective of the Christian believer. Above all, God’s promise is a liberation of the very possibility of thinking, of the very possibility of having a perspective which is not limited to the present: hope given to human beings through God’s promise is the very beginning of the liberation of human beings. A hopeful person is a free person; the first form of liberation of the person consists in enabling the person to think that change is possible. God’s promise of a new creation is therefore primarily a message of mental liberation for the believer15 .

4. Theology of the Cross: The Crucified God

In Moltmann’s interpretation, the Theology of the Cross is a political theology giving to believers the motivation for fighting against any form of injustice. Faith immediately becomes the psychological disposition to change reality. The Theology of the Cross shows that God is for the oppressed. God becomes the neighbour of all human beings through the incarnation of the Son. The aspect in which God becomes the neighbour of human beings is also essential: through the incarnation, God becomes the neighbour of human beings in their suffering. God does not only decide to become neighbour of human beings, he also decides the aspect of the life of human beings in which He actually becomes their neighbour: God makes His own nature known by deciding to be a God of pathos and of sympathy through the pain of the Son. Sending the Son is God’s decision to be the neighbour of men. Sending the Son, Christ’s pain, and Christ’s resurrection are the testimony of God’s siding with the oppressed and of God’s refusal of injustice16. In particular, sending the Son means that God decided to become the neighbour of the oppressed: God, in His sympathy for the oppressed and in His refusal of oppression, has become the neighbour of the oppressed through the life and pain of the Son.

15 Moltmann strongly distinguishes God’s promise from anticipations of the future like those of Cassandra (see Theologie der Hoffnung. Untersuchungen zur Begründung und zu den Konsequenzen einer christlichen Eschatologie, p. 93, and Das Experiment Hoffnung. Einführungen”, p. 69). God’s promise does not mean that human beings may remain passive in a state of expectation. God’s promise of the new Kingdom is a promise which makes Christian believers anticipate, with their own actions, the coming new Kingdom of God. 16 On this topic see paragraph 3, ‘Die Offenbarung im Widerspruch und das dialektische Erkennen’ in Chapter I, ‘Identität und Relevanz des Glaubens’ in Der gekreuzigte Gott. Das Kreuz Christi als Grund und Kritik christlicher Theologie, pp. 30–33. See also paragraph 3, ‘Kreuzesmystik’, in chapter I, ‘Der Widerstand des Kreuzes gegen seine Deutungen’ in Der gekreuzigte Gott. Das Kreuz Christi als Grund und Kritik christlicher Theologie, pp. 47–55

For Moltmann the Theology of the Cross is not a theology contending that Christ’s torment is an archetype of all humanity’s torment: Moltmann does not accept the interpretation of the Theology of the Cross as a conformitas crucis17. Christ actively accepts death as a consequence of his preaching and of the consequences of the hostility provoked by this preaching: the preaching is the announcement of the coming Kingdom of God. Christ’s death is a consequence of this preaching. The death of Christ is due to the hate and hostility of specific political groups in reaction to the message of His preaching: the Passion of Christ cannot be isolated from Christ’s actions and preaching; it does not have a significance as such, if isolated from the whole mission of Christ.

For believers, to be successors of Christ does not consist in accepting earthly pain as a kind of imitation of Christ’s passion. Acceptance of pain is not, for Moltmann, a kind of redemption. The purpose of sending the Son is the Son’s message, not His passion. Moreover, the acceptance of the passion by Christ is not an acceptance of passion as such: the acceptance of passion is an acceptance of the consequences deriving from Christ’s own preaching. Christ actively accepts passion as a consequence present in his own message, which is a message of liberation (of social liberation, too), for the oppressed and the humiliated.

For Moltmann, the Theology of the Cross is not an instrument used in order to justify passion, oppression, and humiliation as ways of imitating Christ: Christ’s imitation and Christ’s succession do not consist in generically accepting the experience of suffering as though suffering as such were a value. Christ’s imitation and Christ’s succession take place when individuals spread the message of Christ and actively accept the risks entailed with spreading this message. Christ’s message is a message for the oppressed, the emarginated, and the humiliated: Christ’s message, not His sufferance, is the centre of Christianity. This message is not a message that aims to let the oppressed, the emarginated, and the humiliated accept their own conditions; on the contrary, the message of the coming of the Kingdom of God is a message of condemnation and refusal of any form of oppression, humiliation, and marginalisation of individuals. Christ’s message is never a message exhorting to resignation, forbearance, acceptance, passive endurance with the expectation of afterlife18. The

17 For these observations, I mainly refer to the paragraph ‘Kreuzesmystik’, in Der gekreuzigte Gott. Das Kreuz Christi als Grund und Kritik christlicher Theologie, pp. 47–55.

18 I refer to paragraph 8, ‘Endzeiten menschlicher Geschichte: Exterminismus’, pp. 227–244, of chapter III ‘Reich Gottes. Geschichtliche Eschatologie’ of the book Das Kommen Gottes. Christliche Eschatologie In this paragraph,

resurrection of Christ means God’s siding with Christ as an oppressed person for the liberation of the oppressed in the life dimension. Furthermore, to be successors of Christ consists in trying to modify the world, not in accepting sufferance as a form of redemption. God’s siding with the oppressed is not a message which aims to glorify the oppressed in their being oppressed: being-oppressed is, as such, no value for redemption.

God’s promise of the resurrection against evil and death is what gives Christian believers courage to live; it is the key to live. It opens the perspective on the future, and it ensures Christian believers that evil and death will not have the last word. It frees human beings from the apathy which comes from the acceptance of evil and injustice, that is, from the psychological condition of hopelessness which arises when the conviction prevails in individuals that nothing can be done against evil. Hope in the resurrection renders one active: acceptance of injustice and apathy towards injustice would be the exact opposite to what God aims to communicate through Christ’s incarnation. Through the incarnation, God manifests that He is not indifferent to the suffering of human beings. God is not indifferent to injustice. God sides with the oppressed. The resurrection of Christ is the promise of resurrection for the oppressed: God’s action cancels out and compensates for oppression. The resurrection of Christ is compensation for the injustice of earthly life: it is the first type of message against oppression, the first kind of God’s manifestation of refusal of oppression19. Faith with hope gives the believers the assurance that God will act against evil and that the believer can collaborate with God. Faith with hope means that death and injustice will not have the last word, and that God will work against them: Evil forces will not prevail.

Moltmann points out that both the Hebrew apocalypse and the Christian apocalypse give rise to the resistance of the faith and to the patience of hope. Both traditions of apocalyptic thought teach believers not to accept the dominance of destructive tendencies of the world such as those represented nowadays by nuclear weapons, pollution, and the pauperisation of the Third World. Hebrew and Christian apocalyptic thought are warnings that call for resistance against destructive forces, not lessons for resignation and acceptance of the destructive forces of the contemporary world. The tradition of the apocalypse has, therefore, immediate political and social relevance for Christian believers.

19 Moltmann’s line of interpretation could be synthesised in a scheme: Christ’s message of the coming Kingdom of God → Hostility of part of the society towards this message → Christ’s active acceptance of the risks connected to the spreading of the message → Death of Christ → Resurrection of Christ as God’s manifestation that death does not have the last word and as God’s opposition to death → Christ’s resurrection as a promise of the resurrection for everybody.

Actually, the very sending of the Son for the oppressed is God’s expression of sympathy for the oppressed. Moltmann interprets the Trinity as the manifestation that God is for the oppressed, since the earthly life of the Son is a life for the oppressed; it is a life in which Christ steadily sides with the oppressed (see for this subject Trinität und Reich Gottes. Zur Gotteslehre, in particular pp. 36–143).

Moltmann strongly criticises all of the interpretations of the Theology of the Cross which aim to convince oppressed people to accept their own oppression as Christ accepted his own pain. Moltmann mentions, for instance, the cases of the peasants during the Peasants’ Revolt, of the indigenous people of the Americas, of the black slaves, whom representatives of the dominant religion indoctrinated with the goal of persuading them to accept their sufferance as their own cross in order to reach the dimension of conformitas crucis. The aim of this indoctrination was to prevent any attempt of rebellion against injustice20 . Conformitas crucis is not the interpretation of the Theology of the Cross given by Moltmann. The Theology of the Cross is the awareness of God’s option for the oppressed, of God’s choice to side with the oppressed, of God’s condemnation of any form of oppression, and of God’s opposition to it through the resurrection of the dead. For Christian believers, the Theology of the Cross is and should always be encouragement to fight against every form of oppression; it is not, and should not be a theology exhorting believers to imitate Christ in the acceptance of pain as a form of redemption. The acceptance of sufferance is not a form of redemption. The change of interpretation of the Theology of the Cross entails a political change; oppression is not to be accepted and must be combatted.

5 Political Theology

Faith with hope in the social and political life is motivation to fight against injustice. It is not a neutral disposition towards the world; faith with hope gives the believer precise ethical contents which should be realised in society. According to Moltmann, the Theology of Hope and the Theology of the Cross have constitutively a social and political relevance. They cannot be separated from the practical dimension. Faith with hope is action: there is no point in distinguishing or separating the sphere of faith from the sphere of practical action. Practical action is the consequence of a kind of faith expecting and anticipating the coming of the new Kingdom of God. The believer is, as such, a centre for societal change: his hope in the new creation gives him the confidence to prepare and to anticipate the new creation. Faith with

20 For this criticism see Der gekreuzigte Gott. Das Kreuz Christi als Grund und Kritik christlicher Theologie, pp. 47–55. Moltmann does not exclude Luther from his criticism directed against Luther’s siding with the princes and against peasants during the Peasants’ Revolt; Moltmann severely criticises Luther’s statements. Luther should not have invited peasants to bear their oppression as their own cross, as though in this way peasants imitated Christ’s passion and, in doing so, redeemed themselves, since peasants were already sufficiently oppressed by their masters. Corresponding to the interpretation which Moltmann gives of the Theology of the Cross, the princes, not the peasants, should have been subjected to Luther’s criticism

hope is the origin of activity for justice and equality: it is a disposition which promotes equality and democracy where they do not exist, and which defends equality and democracy where they already exist.

For Moltmann, separating the dimensions of faith, on the one hand, and charity and political change, on the other hand21, is not possible. Moltmann opposes both the position of those who consider the core of Christianity to be evangelism, that is, to be the spread of the Christian message and the salvation of the souls, and the position of those who see the core of Christianity as social action and liberation from oppressive social and political conditions. In Moltmann’s opinion, no theological position is authorised to separate the vertical dimension of faith from the horizontal dimension of political love. The unity of the dimension of faith, which is directed to God, and the dimension of charity, which is directed to the neighbour, was founded by Christ. The incarnation of the Son unifies God and man: through Christ and in Christ, God and the neighbour have become a unit. Therefore, the dimension of faith and the dimension of charity may not be separated by any theological position. There may not be a faith which refuses social and political implications, such as the criticism of worldly conditions; charity for the neighbour may not be without faith as a mainspring of the vision of the reality22. Within the social life, faith constitutively gives the impulse to fight against injustice. Faith is never a purely contemplative disposition:

The church of the crucified was at first, and basically remains, the church of the oppressed and insulted, the poor and wretched, the church of the people. On the other hand, it is also the church of those who have turned away from their inward and external forms of domination and oppression. But it is not the church of those who inwardly are selfrighteous and outwardly exercise domination. If it truly remembers the crucified Christ, it cannot allow a bland, religious indifference to prevail towards everyone. As the crucified Messiah, it is the church of liberation for all men, whether Jews or Gentiles, Greeks or barbarians, masters or servants, men or women, but not for everyone in the same way. As the people of the crucified Christ, the church originated in the particular earthly events of the oppression and liberation of Jesus, and exists in the midst of a divided and mutually hostile world of inhuman people on one side and dehumanized people on the other. Its

21 Der gekreuzigte Gott. Das Kreuz Christi als Grund und Kritik christlicher Theologie, p. 26.

22 I refer for this argument to paragraph 2, ‘Die Identitätskrise des christlichen Glaubens’ in Der gekreuzigte Gott. Das Kreuz Christi als Grund und Kritik christlicher Theologie, pp. 23–30.

concrete language must therefore take this difference into account, and its action must be that of commitment. The liberation of the poor from the vicious circle of poverty is different in form from the liberation of the rich from the vicious circle of riches, although both vicious circles are interlinked. The justification of godless sinners is different from that of sinful devout. The liberation of slaves who have been deprived of human life is different from the liberation of the slave owners, who in a double sense of the word themselves ‘take life’. Thus to save all men, and in accordance with the contradiction of the cross, the church of the crucified Christ must take sides in the concrete social and political conflicts going on about it and in which it is involved, and must be prepared to join and form parties. It must not ally itself with the existing parties, but in a partisan fashion intervene on behalf of betrayed humanity and suppressed freedom.23

The Theology of the Cross implies that any Christian church should be on the side of the oppressed. As Christ was for the oppressed, so ought the believer to be for the oppressed. God’s choice to become the neighbour of all the oppressed people is a precise choice for the oppressed. Christ’s resurrection and the promise of the resurrection are a precise choice for the compensation of the injustice suffered by all oppressed and against oppression.

The crucified God is the symbol of God’s siding with the oppressed and, at the same time, of the condemnation of oppression: the crucified God is the guide for the Christian believer so that just and unjust conditions in the world are understood and differentiated from each other. The Theology of the Cross represents, as such, the ethical orientation for the life of any Christian believer24: the implication of the Theology of the Cross being a practical theory is that it is not, for instance, a speculative theory which should bring the Christian believer to accept sufferance, pain, and injustice as a kind of imitation of Christ. The Theology of Hope as the theology of the promise in the resurrection and of the hope in the resurrection, and the Theology of the Cross as the approaching of Christ to mankind’s sufferance, mean God taking

23 The Crucified God. The Cross of Christ as the Foundation and Criticism of Christian Theology, pp. 48–49. For the original text see Der gekreuzigte Gott. Das Kreuz Christi als Grund und Kritik christlicher Theologie, pp. 54–55. Of course, the analysis of the whole book is necessary in order that the foundation of the political theology in the Theology of the Cross can become clear.

24 For Moltmann’s description of implication and connection of the Theology of Hope with forms of progressive theology, see the preface to the 1977 edition of Theologie der Hoffnung. Untersuchungen zur Begründung und zu den Konsequenzen einer christlichen Eschatologie. In this preface, Moltmann refers to the Christian-Marxist dialogue, to the black theology of hope, to the Latin American theology of liberation, and to feminist theology. Moltmann clearly states, among other things, that the duty of the Christian believers is the liberation of the oppressed.

the side of the suffering people. The Theology of the Cross as a critical-liberating theory of God implies immediately, as such, a criticism of injustice and a mainspring for change in the world.

For Moltmann, Christianity has been characterised, as a result of the Theology of the Cross, by the desacralisation, by the relativisation, and by the democratisation of the power. Christianity has been founded on the demythologisation and desacralisation of power from above, since power from above condemns Christ to death, and on the creation of equal relationships from below, since Christ sides with the oppressed. Christianity has, therefore, represented the beginning of a society of equal person: the core of equality and of the affirmation of equality will always be present in Christianity25. Moltmann considers as the birth of democracy the faith in the sovereignty of God: the notion that all power belongs to the divinity implies that no man may claim absolute power for himself. The assertion of God’s sovereignty is the origin of the equalitarian consideration of all men: sovereignty of God implies that all forms of power of men are limited and should remain limited. God’s sovereignty means men’s limitation: therefore, any form of power exercised by men may not present itself as absolute26. All which contravenes the equality of men contravenes Christianity. Those who administer power are responsible for their own administration of power before the whole community of believers and before God. Faith in God is, therefore, the origin of equality between men and of democratic institutions: no form of authoritarianism from men is allowed. The only admissible form for believers is democracy. Faith in God is within democracies the antidote to any form of absolute power. Faith does not imply a retirement from politics; on the contrary, the notion of God possessing all power implies that believers should have an interest in and pay attention to the administration of power and the way in which power is being administered. The fact that God possesses all power means, among other things, that believers are responsible both for the administration and for the control of power. They may not retire from civil life: faith is responsibility towards the social events of the world.

As a consequence, no political system based on domination is compatible with Christianity. At the same time, Christianity has the duty to stand by human beings who have fallen in apathy

25 Der gekreuzigte Gott. Das Kreuz Christi als Grund und Kritik christlicher Theologie, p. 304-305.

26 Ethik der Hoffnung, p. 42.

because of the political systems dominating them. Christianity should awaken people who do not have any more hope and make them hopeful. Christ’s Kingdom can be spread only through liberation from oppressing forms of dominations. Christians anticipate the coming of the Kingdom of Christ by their attempts to eliminate any form of oppression27. The political programme of the Theology of the Cross consists therefore in the liberation from any form of evil. Liberation means liberation from poverty, exploitation, racism, violence and despair. The promotion of social justice, of the correct distribution of goods, of democracy, of human rights, of mutual tolerance, of environmental policies28 are the starting points for the political strategy that Christians should follow.

6. Conclusion

Moltmann’s interpretation of the Theology of Hope and of the Theology of the Cross are the foundation of a profound renewal of the church and of Christianity. Hope should be put at the centre of the Christian dimension: hope will thus be the mainspring for action to modify the present, both for individual actions and for those of Christian communities. The Christian God is primarily a God of promise, of renewal of the world, and of resurrection: Hope in the resurrection and in the new creation is the fundamental disposition of Christian believers. Hope in the new creation implies dissatisfaction with the present world and an intent to modify the present world in anticipation of the promise of renewal. The resurrection and the promise of resurrection are the enemy of death, oppression, and of humiliation; they entail a precise practical programme of refusal of any form of injustice. The Theology of the Cross is not a theology of acceptance of oppression; on the contrary, it is a theology which opposes oppression.

27 God’s option for the oppressed is incompatible with the conception of an apathetic God, of a God that is indifferent to the pain of men. God does not exist in a dimension separated from the dimension of men. The Theology of the Cross, by showing that God sides with the oppressed for the liberation of the oppressed, is incompatible with any conception of an indifferent, apathetic, far-existing God. I refer to Moltmann’s essay ‘Der gekreuzigte Gott und der apathische Mensch’ in Das Experiment Hoffnung. Einführungen, pp. 93–111, for his criticism of the conception of the apathetic God. On this subject, see also Trinität und Reich Gottes. Zur Gotteslehre, pp. 36-111.

28 The whole volume Gott in der Schöpfung. Ökologische Schöpfungslehre is relevant for Moltmann’s interpretation of the connection between ecological thought and God’s presence in the creation through the Holy Ghost. Moltmann develops in the book, among other things, the idea of a theological ecology: creation is not a field in which men may exercise their activities without any respect for creation itself. No domination over nature has been given to men by God. See for this subject also the chapter III, Ethik der Erde, of Ethik der Hoffnung, pp. 127–183.

Moltmann’s interpretations of the Theology of Hope and of the Theology of the Cross can be regarded as founding equalitarianism, democracy, and the affirmation of rights. Since the Theology of Hope and the Theology of the Cross express God’s position in favour of the oppressed, they indicate that every form of oppression should be banned, that any lack of equality should not be accepted, and that any form of authoritarianism should be refused. The Theology of Hope and the Theology of Cross, therefore, clearly explain the structure and organisation which an authentically Christian society should have and, at the same time, clearly express the structure and the organisation which an authentically Christian society should not have.