Clemens Romanus, a disciple of Paul, died ciurewm A.D. 100. In his Epistola ad Corinthios (quoted by Dorner{), he writes thus: ‘‘ His blood has been shed for us, for our salvation; he has, according to God’s will, given his body for our body, his soul for our soul.” ‘Every in- terpretation of this passage,” says Dorner, ‘is forced which does not recognize in it the idea of substitution, and that as well subjective, Christ’s substitutionary design, as objective, the actual fulfilment of that-design, and its objective results. There is connected therewith
* Chap. i. 8. + Shedd’s History of Christian Doctrine, p. 168. t Div. 15 vol. i., p. 98.
HISTORY OF OPINION. 257
the fact that with Clement, as in the Epistle to the cmarre Hebrews, the name ‘high priest’ is frequently peonte i to Christ.’”
Justin Martyr (A.D. 114-168), quoted by Neander, Justin
Martyr. says: ‘The law pronounced on all men the curse, because no man could fulfil it in its whole extent (Deut. xxvii. 26). Christ delivered us from this curse in bearing it for us.’”’*
The author of the Epistle to Diognetus, which is ad- Author of mitted by all to date from the early part of the second Dione century, consequently in the generation immediately “* succeeding the death of the Apostle John, and which is usually published among the works of Justin Martyr, says, as quoted by Dorner:+ ‘“ Thus God delayed, that we might be made conscious of our own guilt and impo- tency. But as that was filled up, and it was rendered manifest that punishment and death duly awaited us, the one love continued true. It hated not, it departed not, it remembered not evil, but was long-suffering and bore; nay, itself took on our sins. It gave His only Son as aransom for us; the holy for the unholy, the sinless for the wicked, the pure for the vile, the im- mortal for the mortal. For what else could cover our sins than the righteousness of him? Whereby could the unholy and ungodly be justified but by the Son of God ?
Oh, sweet substitution! Oh, what an unsearchable device, what unexpected blessing! The unrighteousness of the many to be hid by the righteousness of the One the righteousness of the One to justify many sinners !”
[B.] Lhe doctrine of vicarious eapiution accomplished resti- by the sufferings of Christ was professed yet more ea- Nort
Nicene
plicitly, though still in a crude form and mixed with oe
much error, by the Nicene Fathers and their successors succes- up to the tae of the Schoolmen. Lok
* Dial, cum Tryph. Jud.,;¢. xxx., f, 322. 7 Dively vols hype oon
CHAPTER XIX.
258 THE NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT.
From the commencement of this period it is well known that a strange fancy, entertained by Origen A.D. 185-254) and Irenzeus (+200), to the effect that, Christ was provided by God to ransom his people out of the hands of Satan, as captives are ransomed by friends from the hands of pirates, continued for a long time to tinge the meditations of Christian writers upon the sub- ject of Redemption. This fact, both curious and lament- able, is, of course, made much of by all those whose interest, for any reason, it is to show that the Church of Christ has never been committed to any fixed view as to the nature of Redemption, but has always drifted among various opinions of human origin, more or less rational. With respect to this view I would remark—(a.) That there is no evidence that it represented the definite and total eonception of any one of the ancient Fathers as to the nature of Christ’s work. It was a general and indeter-_ minate form, in which that work was conceived of in one of its aspects, suggested by such Scriptural passages as Col. u. 15, and Heb. 1. 14; and however inconsistent as a matter of logic, nevertheless coexisting in the same mind also with vague conceptions of the very views which are common to the modern evangelical Churches. (b.) This view, grotesque as it is, involves, in common with the orthodox Satisfaction Theory, a principle which is utterly inconsistent with the Moral Influence Theory ; and that principle is, that the direct design and effect of the sufferings of Christ were to redeem sinners from an obstacle to their salvation exterior to themselves. The prevalence of this fancy, therefore, in connection with more correct views as to the nature of Redemption, con- tributes to prove the truth of our allegation, that all Christians have from the beginning, without exception, felt the need of being ransomed from a power under which they were held, and which they were impotent to
HISTORY OF OPINION. 259
resist. The following witnesses also make it evident that, in spite of the general prevalence of this form of error for a time, the true doctrine ef the need of pro- pitiating divine justice was never absent from the faith of the Church.