Abstract

This paper explores the relationship between the problem of evil and a kenotic view of the Atonement evidenced not just by feminist theologians, but by analytic philosophers of religion. (“Kenosis”, from the Greek κένωσις, “emptiness,” generally refers to the emptying of the self, and more specifically refers to the passion of Christ, during which Christ suffered on behalf of humanity.) I will argue that, although kenosis provides an interesting story about the ability of Christ to partake in human suffering, it faces debilitating problems for understanding divine concurrence with evil in the world. Most significantly, I will argue that the potential tensions between divine justice (in holding wrongdoers responsible) and divine love (for those who suffer) can be loosened by looking at ‘redemptive accounts’ of theodicy in the scholarship of women writing in the early modern period in philosophy, particularly Mary Hays (1759–1843), and Catharine Macaulay (1731–1791). Their work collectively confirms the problem of concrete evil (that is, not just that evil must be logically possible in order for God to create the best possible world, but that atrocious harms are pernicious to a perfectly existing necessary being) and yet offers a unique theodicy grounded in the saving power of the Atonement and restorative power of Christian service. Their arguments are all the more compelling for having been written in response to egregious civil rights abuses and rampant domestic violence of their day. If the Atonement is the divinely-ordained method for gaining insight into the redemptive power of divine grace, then rather than speculating about the metaphysical nature of the divine, this paper will question how we can understand divine perfection in light of evil in the world, especially if the Atonement of Christ involves kenosis.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call