Kierkegaard's Kenotic Christology
Lead Research Organisation:
University of Manchester
Department Name: Arts Languages and Cultures
Abstract
Orthodox Christianity claims that Jesus of Nazareth is both truly divine and truly human. In Jesus of Nazareth, it is claimed, the omnipresent, omnipotent, and omniscient Son of God has become a human being situated in a specific time and place. Since the Enlightenment this claim has been subject to vigorous attack and has frequently been rejected as incoherent. In addition to this, the rise of historical criticism of the Bible has made us aware that Jesus was a man of his times and has highlighted his humanness. The rise of psychology as a distinct discipline has raised further questions concerning the self-consciousness and personality of Jesus. Kenotic Christology is an attempt to take seriously developments in biblical criticism and psychology, and to address criticisms of orthodox Christianity, while at the same time defending the traditional view that Christ was both truly divine and truly human. Kenotic theologians attempt to reconcile the apparently contradictory claim that Jesus was both human and divine by developing the notion of 'kenosis'.
The term 'kenosis' is derived from 'ekenosen', which Paul uses in his letter to the Philippians to describe Christ's action or attitude towards his equality with God. In the first stanza of this text we read of 'Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not regard equality with God as something to be exploited, but emptied (ekenosen) himself, taking the form of a servant, being born in human likeness. And being found in human form, he humbled himself and became obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross' (Phil. 2.6-8). Christ did not 'seize' his equality with God or see it as something to be exploited for his own self-interest, but 'emptied' himself of this divine equality in order to assume the form of a servant. On the basis of the use of the term 'ekenosen' in this text, 'kenosis' has come to be used as shorthand for a series of problems and issues arising from the claim that Christ is both truly divine and truly human. How can these two natures co-exist in the one, united Person of Christ without undermining the integrity of either nature? 'Kenotic Christologies' are those Christologies which address this problem by arguing that Christ 'emptied' himself of something in order to become a human being. The dispute among kenotic theologians concerns this 'something' that Christ has allegedly emptied himself of and whether it compromises his divinity. Is it his divine nature or only certain non-essential attributes belonging to his divine nature? Or does Christ continue to possess his divine attributes but merely refrains from exercising them? In this study I intend to examine the contribution that the Danish thinker Soren Kierkegaard (1813-55) makes to this debate.
My contention is that Kierkegaard offers an original contribution to kenosis theology. Like many of the classic kenotic theologians of the 19th century he argues that Christ undergoes a limitation on becoming a human being. Where he differs from his contemporaries is in emphasizing the radical nature of this limitation. Christ is 'bound by his servant form' and even if he had wished to exercise the powers belonging to his divine nature, he could not have done so. Another distinctive feature of Kierkegaard's thought is his claim that the ascended Christ's relationship to human beings continues to be that of the humiliated Christ. Kierkegaard criticizes Christians who emphasize the exalted Christ and who forget that Christ came to humankind as the lowly, humiliated servant, because this distracts them from their task of taking up their cross and following Christ in suffering discipleship. Kierkegaard, then, conceives of the kenosis not as finished with Christ's ascension into heaven but sees it as an ongoing event. In my monograph I place these ideas in dialogue with the leading kenotic thetheologians and assess the significance of Kierkegaard's version of kenosis for 21st century debate.
The term 'kenosis' is derived from 'ekenosen', which Paul uses in his letter to the Philippians to describe Christ's action or attitude towards his equality with God. In the first stanza of this text we read of 'Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not regard equality with God as something to be exploited, but emptied (ekenosen) himself, taking the form of a servant, being born in human likeness. And being found in human form, he humbled himself and became obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross' (Phil. 2.6-8). Christ did not 'seize' his equality with God or see it as something to be exploited for his own self-interest, but 'emptied' himself of this divine equality in order to assume the form of a servant. On the basis of the use of the term 'ekenosen' in this text, 'kenosis' has come to be used as shorthand for a series of problems and issues arising from the claim that Christ is both truly divine and truly human. How can these two natures co-exist in the one, united Person of Christ without undermining the integrity of either nature? 'Kenotic Christologies' are those Christologies which address this problem by arguing that Christ 'emptied' himself of something in order to become a human being. The dispute among kenotic theologians concerns this 'something' that Christ has allegedly emptied himself of and whether it compromises his divinity. Is it his divine nature or only certain non-essential attributes belonging to his divine nature? Or does Christ continue to possess his divine attributes but merely refrains from exercising them? In this study I intend to examine the contribution that the Danish thinker Soren Kierkegaard (1813-55) makes to this debate.
My contention is that Kierkegaard offers an original contribution to kenosis theology. Like many of the classic kenotic theologians of the 19th century he argues that Christ undergoes a limitation on becoming a human being. Where he differs from his contemporaries is in emphasizing the radical nature of this limitation. Christ is 'bound by his servant form' and even if he had wished to exercise the powers belonging to his divine nature, he could not have done so. Another distinctive feature of Kierkegaard's thought is his claim that the ascended Christ's relationship to human beings continues to be that of the humiliated Christ. Kierkegaard criticizes Christians who emphasize the exalted Christ and who forget that Christ came to humankind as the lowly, humiliated servant, because this distracts them from their task of taking up their cross and following Christ in suffering discipleship. Kierkegaard, then, conceives of the kenosis not as finished with Christ's ascension into heaven but sees it as an ongoing event. In my monograph I place these ideas in dialogue with the leading kenotic thetheologians and assess the significance of Kierkegaard's version of kenosis for 21st century debate.
Organisations
People |
ORCID iD |
| David Law (Principal Investigator) |
