My recent post on whether or not we must begin theology with Christ has engendered a lot of discussion.  One of the thoughts that led me to post on this is the incredible difficulty of “beginning with Jesus” in our theology. I fear that we too quickly turn the Jesus with which our theology begins into an object that is far to given at the outset. We have a pretty good idea of what Jesus is about and his signficance from which we then can construct our theology.

However, in the gospels, and particularly the resurrection narratives, one of the central features of the Risen Christ is his irreducible otherness, his mysterious distance from us, his refusal to be easily circumscribed in a way that we might “cling to him” (John 20:17). He bears the scars of the crucifixion and yet appears in rooms with locked doors. He is the Jesus we knew throughout his life, and yet his now beyond us in a new way, a way that we cannot bridge to have immediate access to him. When we talk about the Risen Christ we are always in some sense talking about a Stranger. This is a central insight of Rowan Williams’ christology.

So, if this is the case, then “begining with Jesus” or having Christ as “the center” is no easy or straightforward matter. It involves a long and agonizing process of, well, discipleship in which we must labor and strive to find points of contact with the one who is always alien, always beyond our grasp.

I guess my fundamental point is that being Christocentric in our theology is no easier than the actual task of following Christ. It is not a methodological decision that we can just make and be done with it. If we find it easy for Christ to be the “center” of our theological constructs, we may well have domesticated Christ in ways we don’t suspect, attempting to turn the Stranger into a familiar.  I am all for being Christocentric in theology, in fact I think it is absolutely indispensible for us to be so engaged in the theological task.  However, I believe we often underestimate the difficulty, both intellectual and existential of truly being Christocentric.  Christocentric theology, if it is truly Christocentric should be a very painful and difficult process.  For Christ the Stranger cannot be assimilated into any theological system.  The task of theology is to become assimilated to him.  And that is a costly task, one that may cost our very lives.  And almost certianly it will cost our academic credibility.