"Knight of Faith?" NOT!

Jarvis Streeter, author of newly published Human Nature, Human Evil and Religion: Ernest Becker and Christian Theology, extols Becker's choice of the heroic as Kierkegaard's "Knight of Faith." To my mind, though, there are significant problems with such a "hero." Even though Kierkegaard sees the KofF operating "outside" of the moral continuum (good), the KofF still expresses an obedience to the Absolute by virtue of which the KofF's actions don't fall under any judgment. Secondly, Kierkegaard (and Becker) acknowledge the rarity of any Knights of Faith but what Becker and Streeter don't acknowledge in their admiration of such heroics is this:

Only God is in a position to judge whether a person's actions are divinely inspired or demoniacal; to the rest of us, they may appear identical.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knight_of_faith

Thirdly, as I read it the Knight of Faith is still trapped by the in curvatus in se. So convinced of the "rightness" of his/her own actions by virtue of their own faith, the KofF can act without regard to the consequences which befall the neighbor.

Fourth, Kirkegaard's reading of the Abraham story is not from a "faith in Christ" perspective. Instead it flows from the generic religious pretention of "obedience and submission to the law." The postulate that Abraham was a "Knight of Faith" preserves the illusion of Abraham's "obedience" by his submission to a "higher law" than that which is expressed as service to the neighbor. From a "faith in Christ" perspective Abraham would have considered Isaac as a most intimate and innocent neighbor and refused to act on the tyrannical command of an absolute authority (God), being willing to take the consequences of such refusal upon himself rather than visit the consequences of obedience upon Isaac. The "Knight of Faith" then would not have resulted in perfect obedience to a command but in perfect confidence that God does indeed forgive sins (disobedience). Thus, God's "rescue" of Isaac is not a reward for Abraham's submission but a rescue of Abraham from his folly of thinking according to the law and not according to faith.

A "Cruciform" Vocabulary: Law

In theological conversations one quickly discovers that--like Jesus and Nicodemus--theologians of the cross and practitioners of theologies of glory talk past one another because the vocabulary they use does not carry the same meaning for the "cruciform"--those shaped by the cross--as it does for glory-seekers. While each one uses the same words, the meanings are not the same or even similar. "Law," "Repentance," "Gospel," etc. and other terms, while common to both the cruciform and the glory-seekers, are invested with particular definitions suited to their respective theologies. This series of posts--A "Cruciform" Vocabulary" will lay out some of the common terms and their distinctive use for theologians of the cross.

THE LAW

This difference in meaning is particular apparent when considering "Law." Both the cruciform and the glory-seekers invest the law according to the direction of their theologies. Consequently, they come to very different understandings of the law's character, content, function, and user. Today, I'll take up the contrast in the character of the law between theologians of the cross and practitioners of theologies of glory.

The Law's Character:

for the glory-seeker, the law is eternal

In theologies of glory the law has an "ontology;" that is, a "being-ness" of its very own. It is the "entity" of God's will. As such, the law is divine and and transcends the boundary between earth and heaven. Glory-seekers are confident that they will indeed "glorify" God and "advance" in righteousness by submitting their wills to God's will as it is expressed in the law. Usually, this advance is considered to "higher" as in "toward" heaven or getting "closer" to God. In some theologies of glory the law becomes a "ladder" by which glory-seekers demonstrate their righteousness and worthiness to enter heaven once they've achieved some certain level along the way; or, the glory-seeker uses obedience to the law as visual proof of their salvation in Christ.

Theologies of glory are always trying to get "beyond" the cross and to its meaning, to peer "behind" it in order to see its purpose, and/or to get "past" the cross and on to the really important stuff. Because of all this talk "about" the cross, glory-seekers have all sorts of theories about what Jesus "really" did when he died on it. Practitioners of glory theology are confident that the real work of the cross was done--not on it--but somewhere else. Of course, they can cite scripture as "proof" of all of their "theories" but--because theologies of glory can't hold Christ as the "living heart" of the scripture--these citations only demonstrate a distortion of scripture to suit their respective theologies. So for them, the real work of the cross gets done in heaven where God lives or in hell where the Devil lives because Jesus' death on the cross either satisfies God's wrath against sin so He can now show mercy upon humanity or Jesus' death was paid as a ransom to the Devil so that all humanity would be set free from the Devil's rightful claim upon them as sinners. Either way, humanity's disobedience to the law must be "atoned" for and by his death Jesus accomplishes our "atonement."

Do you see what this does? It makes the law supreme over Jesus. In these theologies of glory our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ is NOT the way, the truth, and the life--the law IS. For glory-seekers Jesus must die so that the law will finally work.

for the cruciform, the law has an end

Theologians of the cross know that the law has its end in Jesus Christ. For the cruciform the law has no ontology or being-ness of its own. While it is indeed an expression of God's will, it is incorporated within the very "being" of God's creatures. However, because this creation is now broken by sin and humans are in bondage to sin, the law--for now--is no longer incorporated within their being. For now, the law is "instantiated," that is, it is given expression in the demands made upon sinners. These demands come as creation expresses its need for a "lord." They come as our neighbor expresses a need for a "good" neighbor. And, they come from our God who would have us be co-workers in establishing the trustworthiness of creation even in the midst of its disorder and broken-ness. The law is NOT eternal, nor is it necessarily divine, nor does it transcend the boundary between earth and heaven. The cruciform know that the law is not a measure of righteousness and that obedience to the law does not advance one upon the ladder to heaven, nor does it make visible their salvation in Christ.

Theologians of the cross do not try to get beyond the cross to discover some sort of meaning hidden there. To the cruciform the cross is to them just what is was to Jesus: an instrument of death, their death like it was his death. The "work" of the cross is not accomplished in Heaven or in Hell; the work of the cross is to put sinners to death so that God can raise up saints to walk in newness of life. Sinners die because the cross exposes them for who they are--inveterate theologians of glory who put the law above Christ and the only "cure" for this bondage is their death. Saints walk in newness of life--a life hidden for the time being with Christ in God--a newness of life only seen by the eyes of faith as the new creation breaks in upon the old in the person of its Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. This "death of sinners" and "saints raised to new life" is accomplished by God's Word at the pulpit, the baptismal font, and the altar of the Lord's Table.