PERSON, KENOSIS AND ABUSE: HANS URS VON BALTHASAR AND FEMINIST THEOLOGIES IN CONVERSATION 1 ARISTOTLE PAPANIKOLAOU Introduction The Christian notion of kenosis or “self-emptying” has an ambiguous history. In a more positive sense, it has referred to the unconditional love of God for creation manifested in the descent of the Son of the Father for the sake of salvation. This kenosis of God, expressed for Christians in its extreme form in the suffering of the Son on the Cross, became itself the paradigm for human salvation. Kenosis, understood as obedience, humility and self-sacrifice, constituted the precondition for human participation in the saving event of Christ. As such, this definition of kenosis, especially the notion of kenosis as self-sacrificial love, emerged as an ethical imperative within the Christian tradition. Kenosis as obedience, humility, and self-sacrifice has a negative history as well. As feminists over the past century, and especially the last half-century, have made clear, this understanding of kenosis has been used throughout the history of Christianity to maintain women in situations of oppression. Rather than offering a liberating salvation, the experience of kenosis, feminists would contend, has depersonalized women. For the sake of obedience to God’s com- mand, or self-sacrifice to one’s family, women have been advised for centuries “to go back” to their husbands, often at the price of their own lives. Less tragic uses of kenosis have denied women full dignity with men by relegating them to socially constructed, gender-specific roles. Women have every reason to be suspicious of an ethic of kenosis. Modern Theology 19:1 January 2003 ISSN 0266-7177 © Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2003. Published by Blackwell Publishing, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA. Aristotle Papanikolaou Department of Theology, Fordham University, 113 West 60th Street, New York, NY 10023, USA