The Cross and Human Sacrifice: Learning from the Prophets

Last updated on: May 3, 2017 at 7:07 pm by Brett Salkeld

The Cross and Human Sacrifice: Learning from the Prophets 2017-05-03T19:07:49-05:00 Brett Salkeld

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

It is an odd fact in the history of Christian doctrine that the Church has never produced an official theology of atonement. All orthodox Christians believe that Christ’s death on the cross was constitutive of our salvation, but there are dozens of different theories and variations of theories to explain exactly how Christ’s cross, that is, his death, is saving. Unlike the great Christological and Trinitarian debates in the early Church, this question has never disturbed the Church’s life in such a way that a Council felt the need to pronounce authoritatively and so, to this day, we are at liberty to profess all kinds of theories about the cross provided one thing, that we profess Christ’s death saves us.

This is healthy. The Church need not pronounce on every detail and force people to accept a particular explanation for every doctrine. This is only necessary when the core of the gospel and/or the unity of the Church is threatened. On the other hand, this does not mean that the theology of the cross is a matter of indifference. Indeed, while there may be many theories of the cross that are acceptable to orthodox Christianity, there are also theories that are not acceptable. A theory is not acceptable if it runs up against other Christian doctrines in an irreconcilable way. As regards the atonement, the most obvious way this can happen is when a particular theory obscures the claim that God is love.

Theories of atonement that make God into a sadist or an arbitrary punisher of sin must be avoided. It is too often the case, however, that many popular versions of the Christian story involve God in, essentially, human sacrifice. The argument goes something like this: the wages of sin is death (i.e., spiritual death, hell), and all are sinners, so all must die (i.e., go to hell) if God is truly just. But, being merciful as well as just, God sent his son to take the punishment due to us. The sacrifice of Jesus on the cross becomes a simple replacement for the death God, in justice, must demand from every human person.

There are at least half a dozen problems that jump off the page here. If everyone sins, isn’t there some fault with the maker? How can it be just to damn humanity en masse for sin when they had no legitimate shot at not sinning? Why does Jesus’ physical death cancel our spiritual death? If God really accepts his death as a substitute for ours, and the death that we are really concerned with is spiritual death, shouldn’t Jesus be damned for eternity? Why is our own death not enough to pay the wages of sin? Why did Jesus’ death need to be so terrible? If what God needed really needed to cancel our debt was blood, couldn’t it have been got in a more humane way? Why does God need blood to cancel debt anyways? Can’t God cancel debt be mere fiat? Etc. etc.

Now, in the course of Christian history, there are those who have tried to answer this or that question. I cannot rebut every proposed solution here. Suffice to say that the whole series of questions (and it could be longer), stems from a misunderstanding. As Frank Sheed put it:

It was not as if Christ said to his Father: “All men deserve death. Would you mind killing me instead of them?” That would have been either horrible or meaningless. What in effect he said was: “Because of my obedience in doing your will, teaching your will, attacking powerful men who are perverting your will, they are determined to kill me. Will you accept my death and apply it to the needs of all men?” (What Difference Does Jesus Make?, p. 200)

Deserving death is not really the issue. The wages of sin are death, yes. But not because God needs to punish us. Rather, as any honest observer will attest, we have spent our history murdering one another. God doesn’t punish sin arbitrarily. He grants us the freedom to love, without which love is impossible. His respect for that freedom means that he hands us over to the consequences of our own actions. This “handing over” is a frequent way for Scripture to talk about God’s punishment for sin. He lets us punish ourselves.

On the other hand, in his great love, God has consented to bear that burden as well. The Father doesn’t punish the Son for sin. He sends the Son to bear the burden of sin that we are already inflicting on each other. Christ wasn’t crucified by himself, but between two sinners. Who knows how many thousands or tens of thousands the Romans crucified? And not just the Romans. The friendship of Herod and Pilate forged at the time of Jesus’ condemnation symbolizes that the whole world (Jews (Herod) and Gentiles (Pilate), from the Jewish author’s point of view) is guilty of violence. We are all responsible for the violence against Christ, yes, but that only makes sense in the context of constant human violence against one another. It is not conceivable that Jesus be the first murder victim in our history. We are a murderous race, killing our brothers and sisters, almost from the beginning.

It was into this violence that Christ inserted himself. Just think of him stepping in front of the crowd about to stone the woman caught in adultery. And the Gospels make it clear he knew what he was doing. He knew that cleansing the temple would not go over well. But he also knew it was God’s will. It is not that it was God’s will to have Christ killed, but rather that doing God’s will often gets one killed. If you need contemporary examples, look no further than Martin Luther King and Oscar Romero. Indeed, as the lives of these three men indicate, sometimes you can be certain that doing God’s will will get you killed.

As St. Anselm, so often misunderstood on the question of atonement, so germanely pointed out, ‘Why did Jesus have to die?” is the wrong question. Anselm laconically points out that Jesus had to die because we killed him. The real question is, rather, “Why was this death saving?”

I want to look at this question by looking at the idea of sacrifice. Why was Jesus’ death an acceptable sacrifice? Now, sacrifice is a widely misunderstood term. When we think of Jesus’ death as a sacrifice it is very tempting to fall into a reading of Scripture, especially the letter to the Hebrews, which matches up very closely with the God who needs blood to forgive sins.

But this is exactly the opposite of the point of Hebrews. Like the prophets of the Old Testament, Hebrews insists that God does not want blood. When the ancient Israelites thought that killing an animal would appease God’s wrath, they were excoriated by the prophets. If you think that you can be right with God through ritual killing, the prophets insisted, you have misunderstood God entirely. God wants your obedience, your contrition. God wants you to act justly, especially to the most disenfranchised among you. To read the letter to the Hebrews as if its argument was that goats’ blood could not satisfy God, but (sinless) human blood could, is to pervert the Gospel.

The ancient Israelites, like virtually every society on earth, understood that sacrifice was necessary to live in community. However articulated, this basic conviction is universal. Just think of the last time you had to host a family function, never mind living with some other person for 50 years or raising children with that person. Without sacrifice, without a person learning to get over him or herself, these relationships inevitably fall apart. That’s why marriage is good preparation for heaven.

And like every culture, ancient Israel expressed its basic convictions through story and ritual. The problem, of course, is that sinful humanity often loses sight of the heart of the issue. Instead of understanding their sacrifices in the temple as symbolic of their gifts of self (“give me your very best!”), necessary to live in harmony with God and neighbor, the Israelites often understood their sacrifices as a way to manipulate God. But Israel was not like every other culture in every aspect. God sent them prophets to remind them of what God really wanted.

Now it is a terrible shame if we Christians, self-consciously heirs to this great tradition (the early Church insisted on keeping the Old Testament), forget its lessons on so central a question as the cross. As the New Testament makes very clear, Christ was able to make of his death an acceptable sacrifice, a gift of himself, precisely by doing what the prophets called for. He obeyed God’s will, he acted with justice to the least, he was even contrite on our behalf. That he died is essential in as far as it gave a context for how he died. Jesus had taught the beatitudes, but here he was given a chance to exemplify them in a way that simply cannot be paralleled in a non-life-threatening situation.

Goats and sheep could never appease God because, being offered by sinful humans, they could never really achieve a perfect getting over oneself. Even in our best moments we find little hints of our egotism creeping in. We can’t trust that our motives are perfectly pure. Our best attempts at self-sacrifice fall short and, as Hebrews points out, we must try over and over and over again. We are incapable of a perfect sacrifice, not because our livestock don’t please God, but because our hearts don’t.

But, if we are to live in harmony with God and neighbor in eternity, perfect sacrifice is needed. We must get over ourselves completely or heaven will not be heaven. It is this total lack of self-concern that defines Jesus’ sacrifice as perfect and, therefore, saving. But the real miracle is this: as Paul indicates in that odd passage to the Colossians, Christ’s suffering lacks something to be made up by us, his body. Why is it miraculous that Christ’s sacrifice needs something to complete it? Because this means that Christ’s sacrifice is not for him alone, but must be applied to all of us, members of his body. Christ’s sacrifice was perfect in itself, but it must be applied throughout history to make us perfect. We could never do this on our own, but in union with him, we can offer what little we have and it will bear fruit. Slowly our motivations can be purified, our egotism weakened, our charity increased until we will finally be like Him because we see him face to face.

God doesn’t need blood to forgive sins, as the prophets never ceased to announce. But God does demand human sacrifice. We must value God’s will over our own. We must love truth more than we despise suffering. And where we fail in this, God joins us, even to the Cross.

Brett Salkeld is a doctoral student in theology at Regis College in Toronto. He is a father of two (so far) and husband of one.

Atonement

Brett Salkeld

Doctrine

Previous Post

February 23, 2011

Fascinating Parallel to Planned Parenthood "Sting"

Next Post

February 23, 2011 Paul, Women, and Badiou

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category 2019 A Consistent Ethic of Life Aaron Weldon Abortion absurdity Abuse Scandal Academics Adoption Advent Africa agreement/disagreement with Church teaching Alexander Schmemann Alexham Alterity America Amnesty International Anarchism angels Anglicanism Animals Annual Statistics Anthony Anxietas Apocalyptic Apophatic Appalachia Aquinas Art Atheism Atonement Augustine Authority Baptism Beauty Bible biblical criticism biblical scholarship Bioethics Bishops Black Catholics Black Theology Blackadder Blogs Books Breastfeeding Brett Salkeld Buddhism Bush administration Byzantine Catholic Calvinism Canada Canon Law Capital Punishment Capitalism Caryll Houselander Catholic Blog Awards Catholic Blogging Catholic League Catholic Social Teaching Catholic Worker Movement Catholicity CFL Charity Children Chris West Christ and Culture Christian Democracy Christian Unity Christmas Christology Church Church Doctrine Church History Climate Change Cohabitation Colbert Collegiality Communion Communism Comparative Theology Competition Conferences conscience conscience rights Consequentialism Consistent Life Ethics Consumerism Contraception Contrition Conversion Converts Coptic COVID-19 Creation Critical Thinking Cross Cuba Culture Culture of Death Culture of Life Darfur David Cruz-Uribe David Wheeler-Reed Death Death Penalty Democracy Demons Desert Fathers Devil Dialogue dignity Disability Disarmament discernment Discipleship discrimination Dissent Distributism Division Doctrine Domestic Church Dorothy Day Double Effect Doubt Down syndrome Driving Early Church Easter Eastern Churches Ecclesiology Economics Economy Ecumenism Education El Salvador Election Election 2020 Ellul Embryonic Stem Cell Research Empire Energy Enlighenment Environmentalism Ephraim Radner Episcopal Church epistemology Equality Eschatology Ethics Eucharist Europe Euthanasia Evangelization Evil Evolution Excommunication F.X. Durrwell Facism Facts Fair Trade Faith Family Fashion Feddie Feminism Feminist theology Fertility Fetal Rights Fiction Film Finances First Things flags Folk Religion Food Foreign Affairs Forgiveness Frank Sheed Free Speech Freedom gay & lesbian persons Genocide George W. Bush George Weigel Gerald L. Campbell Girard/Mimetic Theory Global Warming Globalization Gnosticism Good Friday Grace Gratitude Greed Grey Cup 2009 Guadalupe Guest Post Guest Posts Gun Control Gustave Martelet Habitat for Humanity Hans Urs von Balthasar Harry Potter Hate Speech Health Health Care Healthcare Heather King Hebrew Bible Henri de Lubac Henry Karlson Herbert McCabe Heresy HHS Mandate Controversy History Holidays Holiness Holy Spirit Homiletics Homily Homosexuality Hope Hospitality How Far Can We Go? How Far Can We Go? Human Person Human Rights Humanae Vitae Humility Humor Hunger Hunting Identity Idolatry Ignacio Ellacuría Imagination Immigration In Memoriam Income Inequality Inculturation Indigenous People Individualism Inklings Intellect Interdependence Internet Interpretation Interviews Introduction Iraq War Islam Israel Jain James Alison James Martin Jazz Jesus Christ Jews Joe Biden Joe Hargrave Johann Baptist Metz John Allen John Henry Newman John Paul II John the Baptist John XXIII Jonathan Josef Pieper Joseph (the husband of Mary) Joseph Bernardin Joseph Ratzinger Josh Brumfield Journals Joy Judgment Just War Justice Kari Lundgren Karl Rahner Katerina Ivanovna Kenya Keynes Kingdom of God Kyle R. Cupp Labor Language Latin America Law Leanne Ogasawara Legion of Christ Leisure Lent Liberalism Liberation Theology Libertarianism Libya Lies Life life & dignity & responsibility of the human person Literature Little Way Liturgical music Liturgical Year Liturgy Living Simply Living Wage Local Church Lombard Lord of the Rings Louis Dupre Love M.Z. Magic Magisterium Mark DeFrancisis Mark Gordon Marriage Martin Luther Martin Luther King Jr. Martyrdom Marxism Mary Masculinity Matt Talbot Matthew Fish Matthew Levering McCain Media Memorial Day Mennonites Mental Illness mercy Michael Iafrate Middle East militarism Miroslav Volf Mitt Romney Modesty Moral Theology Morality Mormonism Morning's Minion Mother Teresa Music Muslims Natalie Nate Wildermuth Nationalism Native Americans Nature Nazis Neuhaus New Evangelization New York City News NFP nihilism Nonviolence Not Abortion Nova's Ordo Nuclear weapons Nuns Obama Occult Old Age Opus Dei Ordination ordination of women original sin Orthodoxy Oscar Romero Other Voices Pacifism Palestine Palin Papacy Papal Peace Messages Papal Social Encyclicals Particular Affections Partisanship Patriotism Paul Paul Ryan Paul VI Peace Pentimento persecution Personalism Phantastes Philosophy PKD Planned Parenthood Pluralism Poetry Policraticus Politcal Apathy Politics Poll Pope Benedict XVI Pope Francis Pope John Paul II Pope Leo XIV Population Postcolonialsim Poverty Power Prayer Preaching Predictions Predictions for 2012 President Barack Obama priestly formation & discernment Pro-Life Progress Prophetic Witness Proportionalism Public Diplomacy Public Policy Question Quotes Rachel Maddow Racism Radical Catholic Mom Radical Catholicism Raymund Schwager Real Catholic TV Real Presence Reconciliation Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange Religion religious freedom Responsibility Ressourcement Resurrection Rick Garnett Ridiculous Crap You Never Thought You'd See Robert Barron Roe v. Wade Roman Curia Rome Russia Sacraments Saints Salvation History Sam Harris Sam Rocha Same-sex Marriage Saskatchewan Roughriders Satire School of the Americas Science Scripture Seamless Garment Second Vatican Council Seeing Sex sexual violence Sexuality Sia Sin social justice Social Security Socialism Society of Jesus Sofia Loves Wisdom Solidarity Sophia soteriology Soutenus Spirituality Sports St. Dismas St. Joseph Stanley Hauerwas Statistics Stimulus Suffering Sunday Reflections Supernatural Supreme Court Symbolism Syria Taxing Technology Terrorism The State The Tea Party The Trump Administration Theological Anthropology Theology Theotokos Thomas Merton Throwaway Culture Tim Muldoon Tim Riley Tim Tebow Time Titian Tolkien Torture Toys Trade Traditionalism Transgender Transportation Transubstantiation Trinity Truth TV U.S. Affairs Uncategorized Unions unity among people who disagree US Catholicism USCCB Usury Utilitarianism Utopia Valentine's Day Vatican Vatican II Veterans Vicarious Suffering Video Violence Virgin Mary Vocations Voluntary Associations Voluntary Poverty Voting Vox Nova vox nova blog war War and Peace War Strategy Wealth Weirdness Welfare state Women Women Priests Work Woundedness Youth

Select a Month June 2026 May 2025 February 2025 January 2025 July 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 July 2023 March 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 November 2021 September 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Who said, "The joy of the Lord is your strength"?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Solomon Nehemiah David Paul