Page 309 [309]
OCR
THEATRICAL APPROACHES TO MYSTERY: “KENOSIS” IN VALERE NOVARINA S WORKS The word éxévweoev in Phil. 2:7 certainly does not mean this. It says that ‘being in the form of God,’ enjoying it, freely disposing of it (¢v Hophñ Oeoû dräpxwv) He carried through a self-emptying, that is, He took the form of a servant (uopdiv dSovAov). The xévwoic consists in a renunciation of His being in the form of God alone. (...) As God, therefore, (without ceasing to be God) He could be known only to Himself, but unknown as such in the world and for the world. His divine majesty could be in this alien form. It could be a hidden majesty. He could, therefore, humble Himself in this form. (...) He had the freedom for this condescension, for this concealment of His Godhead. He had it and He made use of it in the power and not with any loss, not with any diminution or alteration of His Godhead. That is His self-emptying.* To sum up the theological introduction, imitatio Christi also means the possibility of repeating kenosis, being created as images of Christ means (for humankind) a condescension and the deconstruction of the human idol (images) and its exaltation. On the other hand, the word “imitation” suggests that there is some volitional act in this. In his work Systematic Theology, Paul Tillich distinguishes four ways of self-salvation: the legalistic, the ascetic, the mystic, and the sacramental-dogmatic-emotional. The sacramental presence of God is the opposite of self-salvation, Tillich suggests in the conclusion of his chapter: “The mere performance of the accepted rites or the mere participation in a sacramental act is considered to have saving power. The sacrament is given, and, as such, it is understood to negate self-salvation. But the way in which it is used opens wide the door for a self-saving attitude.” Apart from some allusions and references in Balthasar and Tilliette’s works, Western scholarly literature does not discuss the connection between kenosis and literature or kenosis and theatre.’ It was the Japanese theologian Kazoh Kitamori who, in his book Theology of the Pain of God," presented the analogy of the father and sons conflict (i.e. the father sacrificing his son) in traditional kabuki theatre’ to explain God’s hatred of sin and love for humankind, which are unified in the pain of God sacrificing his Son on the cross.® > Ibid., 180. * Paul Tillich, Systematic Theology, Vol II., Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1957, 85. Apart from two exceptions: Larry D. Bouchard, Playing Nothing for Someone: ‘Lear,’ Bottom, and Kenotic Integrity, Literature and Theology, vol. 19. No. 2 (June 2005), 159-180, and J. Edgar Bauer’s study. But these studies use the adjectival form of the word (i.e. kenotic) in a metaphorical sense, and not in its theological complexity. § Richmond, Va., John Knox Press, 1965. 7 Ibid., 177. In Der Gekreuzigte Gott, Jirgen Moltmann criticizes several of Kitamori’s statements. At the same time, the above-mentioned work by Kitamori sits well with nineteenth-century and twentieth-century Russian thinkers like Nikolai Berdyaev and Sergei Nikolaevich Bulgakov, who also hold that God’s suffering is an inevitable part of experiencing love and connecting with others, which is a basic characteristic of God’s nature. + 307 + Daréczi-Sepsi-Vassänyi_Initiation_155x240.indb 307 6 2020.06.15. 11:04:25
