When I was fifteen years old, my parents took me to Paris. I remember discovering behind Notre Dame Cathedral a small memorial to the Holocaust. The memorial was simple and understated, but it conveyed something to me very powerfully. I was too young at the time to analyze or articulate my powerful response to the memorial. I only know I was shaken. Looking back at the experience from adulthood, I think the memorial caused me to experience for the first time in my life a sense of God forsakenness.
Since that time, World War II has been an absorbing interest of mine. By the time I was in college, I was already an inveterate reader in the field. I read chiefly from the vantage point of secular history, focusing my attention on the question of causation – What caused the war and then the Holocaust? Getting to the bottom of that question turned out to be a monumental undertaking; for the causes, I learned, were extremely various and complex. Predominately, of course, it was Adolph Hitler – but he played upon a number of conditions and factors, like World War I and the Treaty of Versailles, like the world depression of 1929, like Christian Antisemitism that was so quickly and easily transmuted into racial Antisemitism.
My early studies of the war were very influential in the shaping of my perspective, and they taught me a great deal. I learned about human nature and human corruptibility. I laid to rest or at least severely delimited any hope of human moral progress. I leaned that collective human privation is a dangerous tinder box, especially when it come into contact with the wrong spark, and Adolph Hitler was the wrong spark. I learned the truth of Jefferson’s words that eternal vigilance is the price of freedom.
But for all my efforts, I was finally left unsatisfied. I think it’s because, despite all I learned about the war, I never got at the underlying question, the question that made the war so compelling to me in the first place, and the question of God forsakenness. So I turned next to the field of theology. Initially after the Holocaust, when hard evidence of what had happened began to trickle out, there was no theological response, only a sort of horrified gasp. But by the 1970’s the nascent field of Holocaust Studies emerged within theology, and scholars, particularly Jewish scholars, began to ask hard and painful theological questions of the Holocaust. One question they asked had to do with the covenant. Is there in the wake of the Holocaust still a covenant between God and humanity? Was there ever a covenant between God and humanity?
In the book of Genesis, God initiates the covenant with Israel. God calls to Abraham, “Go from your country and your kindred to the land I will show you. I will make of you a great nation.… I will bless you and make your name great so that you will be a blessing...” From this moment forward, Israel’s raison d’être, her self-identity, her self-understanding, were bound up in God’s covenantal promises to her. To most theologians, however, in the wake of the Holocaust, talk of God’s promises, God’s covenant, sounded like cruel platitudes. One theologian even insisted that all theology must now begin and end in Auschwitz. This is of course extreme, and carries with it deliberate shock value, but the point I think is sound. Theology now must take stock of the Holocaust. Theologians, both Jewish and Christian, have the right to wonder about the covenant. Is there a covenant?
Not surprisingly, many theologians have concluded no, the Holocaust proves to anyone with eyes and ears that there is no covenant. The Holocaust cannot be absorbed into Jewish salvation history, or Christian salvation history which is based upon identical promises. There may be a God, these theologians say, but nothing is as we were given to think or hope. It's time to grow up now. It’s time to face reality. God, if he is there, is not there for us. We must denude ourselves of all illusions and delusions about God. We must rely upon ourselves, protect ourselves, and live as though God does not exist.
This posture has always struck me as a posture of sad, bitter resignation borne of profound disillusionment. It, however, at least did not close the door entirely upon God. Other theologians in response to the Holocaust have done just that. They assert that, despite all of our wishful thinking, despite all the stock we’ve place in him, it’s time to face the fact that there is no God - no pattern, no purpose, no meaning. We must now jettison all talk or thought about God. But one of the ironic by-products of this is that it gives Hitler the final word. He did after all annihilate two thirds of European Jewry. Without God, Hitler’s achievement, while it did not succeed as fully as he hoped, is decisive; his cause triumphant.
Emile Fachenheim, a great Jewish theologian and philosopher, saw the problem here. He said, “We are forbidden to deny or despair of God, however much we may have to contend with Him or with belief in Him. We are forbidden to despair of our world…lest we help to make it a meaningless place in which God is dead or irrelevant and everything is permitted. To abandon God in response to Hitler’s victory at Auschwitz would be to hand Hitler yet another posthumous victory.”
Emile Fachenheim saw the impasse – either you abandon God and Hitler wins, or you cling to a God who allowed it to happen. Fachenheim opted for the latter. But we still must ask ourselves how do we speak of, have faith in, and proclaim a God who loves us and cares for us without making a mockery of the victims of the Holocaust? What about their forsakenness, which is humanity’s forsakenness? My studies got me this far but no further until I discovered in the apostle Paul the closest thing I’ve ever found to an answer. It’s not a complete answer to be sure, because as Paul well knew, we don’t have the complete context. We see in a mirror dimly. We groan inwardly awaiting redemption.
Paul said that before Jesus came we lived in the time of the law. The law was good, and represented God’s programmatic will for humanity, but the law was deficient. For one thing, we couldn’t keep it. For another, Paul knew the law had no power to save us, to redeem us, to make us right with God.
God’s act in Jesus signaled the end of time of the law, and ushered in a new age in which we are saved by God’s grace bestowed in love for us through the life, death, and resurrection of his son Jesus. This is the time in which we now find ourselves, but the hardship, the tension is that although in Jesus we see God’ triumph, we are yet in an in-between time. He has come, but is yet to come. Our final redemption is still a thing of the future. But it is precisely because of our in-between status that we may keep looking forward, and what we look forward to is based upon what God has revealed to us in Jesus.
In Jesus, God reveals his intentions toward humanity. In the Jesus story, like in Nazi German, we see humanity at its worst. Jesus came to teach us, to heal us, to love us, to save us, but we knew him not. We betrayed him; we humiliated him; and we hung him on a cross until shattered and broken we drove him to God forsakenness: “My God, my God, why hast thou foresaken me?” Jesus lived God forsakenness. But God’s act in Jesus screams that forsakenness is not the final word; that Hitler is not the final word, because God responded to human evil and the forsakenness it engenders, by raising Jesus up. God responded by Jesus’ promise from the other side of forsakenness that he would be with us till the end of the age. He responded by sending his spirit to sustain and inspire us to live faithfully, while we look forward in this in-between time to God’s final act of redemption.
In this we now have our hope. It is not a naïve hope, untempered by the cruel realities of human existence, nor should it be. We have no right to naivety, but nor do we have a right to denial or despair. God’s act in Jesus beckons us forward in hope. Why is there suffering? Why must it happen? I accept now hat these things I will never know. But do now that the resurrection flouts the worst this world can do, and demands with Paul that we hope against hope, holding out for a better way. Amen.
Rebecca Clancy