In spite of the lingering snow (or perhaps helped along by it), local Christians are looking forward to Easter. While society as a whole isn’t quite as affected by Easter as it is by Christmas, there’s still an awareness and recognition of it.
What might Easter mean for someone who thinks and practices faith from a liberal or progressive Christian perspective? It’s probably best to start with what Easter traditionally represents.
While “Easter” refers specifically to the day on which Jesus of Nazareth was raised from death, in most minds it also involves the events leading up to that moment – particularly Jesus’ trial and death by crucifixion, as well as his resurrection. (In church lingo, this series of events is referred to as Christ’s “Passion.”)
The dominant contemporary understanding of Christ’s Passion is that an angry God required the blood sacrifice of a representative human to “pay for” human sinfulness. Jesus’ death “bought” God’s forgiveness for humanity. And Jesus’ resurrection was like God stamping “paid” on the bill.
Drastically simplified, of course, but not all that far from the popular view.
And that perspective has always raised questions. Wouldn’t an all-knowing God realize that people would fail, make mistakes, commit sin? If so, why wouldn’t a loving God either prevent that, or at least, make a less graphically punitive arrangement?
And how can a God who willingly kills his own son expect human beings to love him freely, without feeling as if they are forced into an “or else” situation? Theologian Rita Nakashima Brock has called the idea of God the Father requiring the death of Jesus the Son “divine child abuse.”
It shouldn’t be a surprise that many people have turned away from faith, just because of unresolved issues like these. But other people have retained their faith, working through the questions and doubts to discover (or reclaim) a different view on what it all means.
For me, one of the most transforming ways to understand Christ’s Passion is to view it with the world’s violent ways clearly in mind. Violence is the environment in which we live; evil-doers, whether cinematic or actual, are dispatched by officially sanctioned violence (capital punishment, military action, assassination by drone).
Jesus of Nazareth also lived in the midst of a violent environment, and his message was that God did not desire humans to live in that fashion. However, the ways of violence have such a hold on human society and psychology that Jesus became violence’s victim.
By dying an undeserved death, the innocent Jesus demonstrates God’s complete solidarity with the innocent and victimized, a notion that runs throughout Jesus’ ministry and is then, in some sense, ratified by God’s act of raising Jesus again from death.
So what might Easter mean in this sort of context?
First, it isn’t an opportunity to beat ourselves up over how terrible we are, how badly we’ve treated God, and how unable we are to make amends.
Second, I don’t need to “prove” certain facts about Jesus in order to validate his presence or role in the world. It seems to me that the continued survival of multiple churches that worship Jesus and try to perpetuate his teachings is proof enough of a life worth celebrating and imitating.
Third and most important, this approach invites us to re-commit ourselves to justice for the oppressed and abused and an end to violence and exploitation, in order to participate in the work of “raising” humanity out of its captivity to the ways of death and into the life we were intended to live.
If God seeks to be completely on the side of the abused, the oppressed, the victims of violence both physical and mental, and if God’s desire is for a world where those persons are not only cared for but the causes of their suffering are ended permanently, then whatever “new life” Easter brings is an opportunity to join God in standing with the victimized.
This is at least part of the reason why liberal/progressive Christians tend to be involved in issues of social justice, because we believe in being partners with God in demonstrating the ultimate weakness and worthlessness of the forces of oppression and violence and making visible another way of being human together.








Kris Katarian | Mar 11, 2013 | 3:22pm
Hi Steve. Thanks for the recognition of people who gave up Christianity in part due to the requirement that one must believe in the truth of all events in the Bible. Of all the written accounts of the life of Jesus, I find the concept of substitutional atonement perhaps the most far-fetched.
Ryan Levi | Mar 11, 2013 | 3:29pm
Great piece as always, Steve. One of my personal issues with the major organized religions has been the idea of a vengeful/spiteful/petty/downright mean God. I have never thought of it in the terms of the Passion but your description made a lot of sense to me. I do appreciate the aspect of the Lent/Easter season that encourages people to reflect on where they’ve fallen short in the past year as Jews do between the High Holy Days of Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur. However, these reflections on our negative qualities must not dominate our thoughts as some religions tend to encourage. Focusing on what we’ve done well and what we can do well for ourselves and others going forward needs to be a part of the conversation.
Steve Swope | Mar 11, 2013 | 3:31pm
Thanks, Kris. While penal substitutionary atonement may be the predominant view, it’s not the only possibility, historically or biblically (and, in my view, not the one that best fits the data). I happened upon another blogger’s post this morning (we’re both ordained in the same denomination): http://www.patheos.com/blogs/kimberlyknight/2013/03/washed-in-his-blood-my-ass/
Steve Swope | Mar 11, 2013 | 3:36pm
Thanks, Ryan. I definitely agree that self-evaluation needn’t become endless self-criticism. For some reason, the human psyche is really good at accentuating the negative. But we always do better when we build on strengths rather than simply tearing down weaknesses.
Kris Katarian | Mar 12, 2013 | 6:43pm
Thanks for the link, Steve. Her notion of redemption through forgiveness by a loving God is certainly more palatable than One who demands a blood sacrifice.
Kelsey Gillespy | Mar 20, 2013 | 5:48pm
I love this piece, Steve! Great job! And as for those who question why God would give us the free will to follow Him or not—would it be more loving for Him to force us to follow Him? I think by giving us the choice, He not only shows His great love to us, but allows us to love Him even more!
Steve Swope | Mar 21, 2013 | 12:08pm
Thanks, Kelsey! I agree; the freedom to choose is an incredible gift, and probably not one that we would offer if we were in God’s place. For me, the most amazing aspect of it is God’s trust in us - that sooner or later, even with our imperfect nature, we’ll manage to make the right choices.
Add Your Comment