A Chapter Talk sent to the Company of Jesus on November 30, 2008.
Grace to all on this first Sunday of Advent!
Since we have talked about using the Rule of Christus Victor for a special Advent intention, I thought it might be well to pass along some quotes each week from a famous book by Swedish theologian Gustaf Aulen. His “Christus Victor” is actually a series of collected lectures and is “An Historical Study of the Three Main Types of the Idea of the Atonement”.
Normally we think of Advent as being primarily about the Incarnation and the Atonement as dealing with the Easter events, but we shall see as we proceed that the two stand in the closest possible relation to one another. Chapter Two of Christus Victor (CV) deals with the thought of Irenaeus, the earliest of the Fathers to deal with the topic of the Atonement. We’ll start with his question about the Incarnation and then work backwards.
“Ut quid enim descendebat?” (Against Heresies, II, 14.7), asks Irenaeus. For what purpose did Christ come down from heaven? (CV pg. 18) …Answer: ‘That He might destroy sin, overcome death, and give life to man’ (AH III,18.7). …”Man had been created by God that he might have life. …through the Second Man He bound the strong one, and spoiled his goods, and annihilated death, bringing life to man who had become subject to death.” (CV pg. 19)
‘In Irenaeus’ thought the Incarnation is the necessary preliminary to the atoning work, because only God is able to overcome the powers which hold man in bondage, and man is helpless. The work of man’s deliverance is accomplished by God Himself, in Christ…The Word of God was made flesh in order that He might destroy death and bring man to life; for we were tied and bound in sin, we were born in sin and live under the dominion of death.”’… the Word is God Himself, who has entered into this world of sin and death… to accomplish victory over both. (CV, pgs 20, 21).
These thoughts reflect the ‘Classic” view of the Atonement, explains Aulen, which is both “dualistic” and “dramatic” - the forces of Evil are arrayed against God, and the Atonement is seen as a “Divine conflict and victory; Christ – Christus Victor – fights against and triumphs over the evil powers of the world, the ‘tyrants’ under which mankind is in bondage and suffering, and in Him God reconciles the world to Himself. …the victory over the hostile powers brings to pass a new relation, a relation of reconciliation, between God and the world.” (CV :pgs 4, 5).
Aulen asserts that ‘Christus Victor’ was the primary view of the Atonement for the first thousand years of the Christian Church. Over against this view is the “Latin” type, promulgated by Anselm of Canterbury, who is actually the first theologian to attempt a thoroughly thought-out doctrine of the Atonement. His “Satisfaction” Theory became synonymous with the Roman Catholic view and held dominance until the Reformation. This view teaches a deliverance from the guilt of sin, and an ‘objective’ Atonement in which God is the object of Christ’s atoning work, and is reconciled through the satisfaction made to His justice.”
While the differences between these two views may seem those of relative emphasis, the practical effects are huge. While the religion of Christus Victor centers around the Mysteries of Redemption and the Sacraments, The Satisfaction view leads to a System of Christianity in which “man’s way to God was interpreted as a way of justification by works and by human merit.” (CV, Translator’s note pg. xxv).
Luther’s protest against abuses engendered by this System of works righteousness “was an endeavor to deliver the Christendom of the West from the domination of a system, which had entangled the gospel of salvation in a rationalized theology and a moralistic ethic.” (op cit).
Ironically, Aulen claims that Phillip Melancthon actually went back to the Satisfaction view leading to as much legalistic bondage as did mediaeval scholasticism. One hears Paul saying to the Galatians, “For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery. (Gal.5:1).
Ideas have consequences; sometimes huge consequences. I’ll stop here with this gloss on Aulen’s magnificent work. I’m sure I’ve done enough damage to it by now. (But that won’t stop me from trying again over the next few weeks.) Thanks for your patience.
No comments:
Post a Comment