"Christ the Liberator" by Jon Sobrino

Without Pope Benedict’s endorsement of “Christ the Liberator”, i.e., his censure of the author, I would not have struggled to complete this very difficult theological effort to examine the question of Christ in today’s verbal currency.

Without attempting to do justice to his work, let me review a few basic points in any theological undertaking:
(1) no one claims to understand God
(2) the experience of Jesus preceded any written articulation, e.g., Mark’s Gospel was not written until around 60 CE
(3) all people think and write with constructs appropriate to their times, e.g., Gospels written primarily for the Jews (Matthew) was written with constructs familiar to the people, Hellenic thought patterns were used in the 2nd and 3rd centuries

The Jesuit Jon Sobrino lives and breathes in El Salvador. His life experiences color his thinking. Trying to understand who Christ is becomes a challenge for those who appear to be poor and unjust victims in a society and world that seems to discount. Jon Sobrino clearly comes to his work from their perspective.

It is hard to appreciate why the Pope would consider necessary to censure this author. In the first order, there are relatively few who would read such a difficult tome. However, it appears that the Pope was concerned about his academic approach.

John Allen summarized the Vatican’s concerns, as follows:
“Sobrino’s method makes the “church of the poor” the central context for theology, thus minimizing or ignoring the apostolic tradition of the church, especially as expressed in the declarations of early church councils;
• It’s not sufficiently clear in his work that the divinity of Christ is taught by the New Testament itself, as opposed to being a product of later dogmatic development;
• In places, Sobrino tends toward the ancient Christological heresy of “assumptionism,” treating the historical Jesus as a separate figure who was “assumed” by the divine Son of God;
• Sobrino makes too strong a distinction between Christ and the Kingdom of God, thereby devaluing the “unique and singular” significance of Christ;
• Jesus’ self-consciousness as messiah and as the Son of God are not sufficiently clear;
• The death of Christ on the Cross is reduced to a moral example, rather than understood as having universal significance for salvation.”

Let me try to make it relatively easy to understand what is at stake. When I was in the seminary and taught Christology, we were TOLD what the dogma was and then looked to the Scriptures to verify the dogma. Sobrino would consider this approach to be invalid. You start with the historical Jesus and you find God. Granted, it becomes quite complicated trying to put into words the impossible, viz., a belief that Jesus is both God and Human. Again, Sobrino will not force later Hellenic and Thomistic categories into the Scriptures. While discussing those concepts, he relies on an interpretation of the Scriptures within the context of his belief that the dogma of Jesus being both God and Human is true.

Secondly, Sobrino attempts to work through an understanding of this dogma to the point where it supports the conclusion that Christians find God in Jesus and in Jesus, we find out what it is to be human.

Thirdly, he reclaims the emphasis on the Kingdom of God as the essential ingredient in his life and, consequently, in the lives of the followers of Christ. Essentially, the work is to further the aims of the Kingdom of God which is NOT the same as the Church. We are servants to further the Kingdom by spreading justice and hope and defeating the idols of power and destruction.

Finally, Sobrino stresses that the Kingdom of God is biased in favor the poor and unjust victims of society. We who do not personally share the lot of the poor and unjust victims can identify with the Kingdom by promoting justice and dignity to the poor.

I thank Pope Benedict for bringing this book to my attention.