According
to Veli-Matti the task of Christology is to interpret the significance and
meaning of Jesus Christ for our times in light of Biblical and historical
development. Since biblical period Christian Theology has tried to make sense
of the person and work of Jesus Christ, the founder of Christianity and of
religious history. The person of Jesus Christ stands at the centre of the
Christian faith and theology. J.P.Calvin said “No theology would be complete
without the serious reflection on Jesus Christ”. William J. LaDue reiterates
“Over the years Christology has been a perennial object of fascination, for it
is the keystone of theology for serious Christian”.
The spectrum of
Christology:
From
the beginning of Christianity there arose a variety of interpretations of who
Christ is. With the establishment of biblical canon and the classical creeds in
the fourth and fifth century it formulated a definitive understanding of Christ
in light of the existing cultural milieu. Christological study and reflection
blossoms from twentieth century and culminating in the emergence of contextual
and intercultural Christologies in the 1960s and produces fascinating rainbow
of Christological interpretation. In protestant theology, Christology has been
the focus of debate for nearly two centuries with the quest of historical Jesus
and gave impetus to the rise of a myriad of rich interpretation. Roman Catholic
theology has witnessed a resurgence of Christology focusing on contextual and
intercultural Christologies.
The Person and Work of
Christ
Before
twentieth century there was often a sharp distinction between ‘the person of
Christ’ (Christology proper) and ‘the work of Christ’ (soteriology/doctrine of
salvation). Nowadays, due to philosophical and practical reasons there is less
division. Eastern Father Athanasius argued that ‘Christ had to be both human
and divine in order to save us’. Philip Melanchthon, a colleague of Martin
Luther once said “To know Christ is to know his benefits”. Philosopher Immanuel
Kant inquired into the conditions of our knowledge, maintained that in general
we cannot know things directly but also insofar as we can perceived their
impact. Albrech Ritschl, founder of classical liberalism argued that it is
improper to separate Christology and soteriology because the only way to
received knowledge of something is to observe its effect on us.
These
foundational perspective concerning the integral link between the work and
person of Jesus Christ have led theologians to a growing realization of the
connection between ‘functional’ (what Christ has done for us) and ‘ontological”
(who Christ is in his person) Christologies.
Christology ‘from
Above’ and ‘from Below’
Inquiry
into the person and work of Jesus Christ it has labeled ‘from Above’ and ‘from
Below’. Christology from above begins
with the confession of faith in the deity of Christ as expressed in the New
Testament Christology. Christology from
below begins with an inquiry into the historical basis for belief in
Christ. In other word, the approach from above takes the theological
interpretation of Jesus Christ as found in the New Testament. Approach from
below goes behind the theological interpretation of the evangelists, Paul and
other New Testament writers and attempts to ascertain for himself or herself
the historical and factual foundation of Christological claim.
Christology
from above method argues that faith in Christ is not based on historical or
rational proof and it cannot be scientifically proven. Bultmann argued that
‘Kerygmatic Christ is based on the preaching of the New Testament authors,
cannot with certainty connected with the actual earthly life of Jesus. Since
the time of Enlightenment, the main orientation of Christology has been from
below. All religious, philosophical and other authorities were replaced by
independent individual judgment and the right to form one’s own opinion.
Wolfhart Pannenberg a leading below approach proponent argued that the task of
Christology is to offer rational support for belief in the divinity of Jesus,
he further said that historical inquiry is both necessary and possible, if we
rest our faith on kerygma alone and not on historical facts.
A Christological
Profile
The
brief life of Jesus of Nazareth on earth, his suffering and eath and his
subsequent resurrection and ascension form the foundation for Christian
theology in general and Christology in particular. Four major approaches have
been presented and summarized as-
- The incarnation Christology of the early church and Catholicism.
- The theology of the cross of Protestantism especially of the Lutheran tradition.
- The resurrection and ascension Christology of Eastern Orthodoxy.
- The empowerment Christology of Pentecostalism and the Charismatic movements.
Martin
Luther and other Reformers did not downplay the incarnation by they did shift
the incarnation to the suffering and death on the cross of the One who was
condemned for our sins and for our justification.. Luther Theology of Cross
maintained that God can be found lonely in the shame and suffering of the
cross. The Orthodoxy focuses on icons and liturgy and placed the resurrected
sits on the right side of the Father.
Pentecostal
and Charismatic movement Christological model is the most controversial. They
do not ignore the incarnation, cross and resurrection but they look to Christ
especially as the miracle worker and baptizer with holy spirit who is the
source of power and empowerment be it for physical healing, freedom from evil
powers or charismatic gifts such as prophesy.
These
various paradigms of Christology have literally stands at the center of
theology and has implications for the rest of one’s theology.
.jpg)
.jpg)