Divine child abuse?

We have been arguing for a nonviolent God and a nonviolent apostle. However, the description of God's response to human sin in the form of the cross strikes some as violent rather than nonviolent, and that in at least two ways. First, it seems violent to hand one's Son over to death by crucifixion—”divine child abuse” as some have called it. Second, it seems violent to speak of participating in that event, to describe one's life as “co-crucifixion” (especially Gal 2;19).

Although Paul hardly denies the reality of the cross as a human and perhaps even demonic instrument of violent exclusion and elimination (1 Cor 2:8), it is not for him a symbol of divine violence that permits or even encourages violent acts and language...Rather, it is above all the reality and symbol of divine inclusion and love. For that reason it is absolutely crucial for Paul and for us that the cross of Christ is not merely the loving action of God the Father (Rom 5:8) but also the loving action of Christ the Son (2 Cor 5:14; Gal 2:20). Indeed, Paul beautifully ties the two together in Rom 8:31-39. To die with the Son in faith and baptism (Gal 2:15; Rom 6:1-7:6; see chapter two above), and subsequently in a life of ongoing cruciform holiness, is not to actively do something violent, but to do something loving and grace-filled for the benefit of others.—Inhabiting the Cruciform God, p. 145

<idle musing>
I like that answer. I have been accused of doing something violent when I speak of death to self; Gorman's answer is very good—now if I can just remember it next time someone accuses me of violence :)
</idle musing>