2. A new period in the history of this doctrine begins with Anselm in his Cur Dens Homo. Anselm's theory turns on the necessity of a ' satis- faction ' to God's violated honour ; but it is note- worthy that he does not find this satisfaction in the penal endurance of our curse. His theory moves rather in the circle of the Catholic ideas of supererogatory merit. Christ, as man, was bound to obey God's law, but, as sinless man, He was not bound to die. His voluntary submission to a shameful death, therefore, for the glory of His Father, was an act of such transcendent merit as infinitely to outweigh all the dishonour done to
God by humanity. Anselm is strong in basing the necessity for satisfaction in God's nature ; but his theory is faulty in the idea of merit on which it turns, in its ignoring of the penal aspect, and in its too external character. Abelard rejaresented the opposite pole of doctrine — the purely moral view of the effect of Christ's death. Bernard opposed Abelard, and gave prominence to the important thought of the vicarious suffering of the Head for the members (vers. Abel. vi. 15). Aquinas sought, but without real logical cohesion, to combine all these points of view in a compre- hensive scheme. Meanwhile, in accordance with the scholastic tendency to exalt the will of God at the expense of His other attributes, atonement was removed from the ground of necessity in the Divine nature on which Anselm had placed it, and was rested on the mere fiat of the Divine sovereignty (Duns Scotus). To this tendency the whole body of the Reformers, in the great reli- gious upheaval of the 16th cent., strenuously opposed themselves, and, with their clearer views of what was needed as the basis of the sinner's justification, definitely placed the Atonement on the ground of a satisfaction to eternal law. Sin they regai'ded as ' a violation of the order of public law that is upheld by God's authority, a violation of the law that is correlate with the eternal being of God Himself ' ; they ' estimated the atoning work of Christ by reference to that justice of God which finds its expression in the eternal law' (Ritschl). It is this view which it embodied in the Protestant creeds. Socinianism denied the necessity of all satisfaction for sin, and explained Christ's work, as man, in terms of His prophetic office. The later Governmental theory of Grotius likewise denied the need of satisfaction to essential justice, and sought a basis for the atonement in ' rectoral ' considerations. Christ's death was a ' penal example ' for the upholding of public law, and the deterring from future sin. The ' covenant ' theology viewed redemption as flowing from a compact between the Divine Persons, in which Christ became surety for the elect, and pur- chased their salvation by His death in their room.
3. The increasingly mechanical and narrowly legal character which thus tended to be stamped on redemption led, as it was bound to do, to a reaction. Modern theology has been marked, accordingly, by a considerable revolt against every form of satisfaction theory, and by a return, in one form or another, to views more purely ethical.
(1) In certain of these theories Christ's redeem- ing work is brought mainly under the head of 'revelation.' Its essence lies in His revelation of the character and will of grace of the Father, His death is the culminating point in this revelation, and the supi-eme test of His fidelity to God in His vocation (thus, e.g., Ritschl). — (2) Bushnell's theory attaches itself specially to the idea of ' sympathy ' in Christ, and finds in this the key to His vicarious sufferings. The redeeming quality of Christ's sufferings lies wholly in their moral efficacy. Christ ' simply engages, at the expense of great suffering and even of death itself, to bring us out of our sins themselves, and so out of their penalties ' (Vic. Sac. pt. i. ch. 1). Later, Bushnell felt the need of doing more justice to the idea of ' propitia- tion ' ; but, while allowing that Christ came under the 'penal sanctions' of sin, he still held that these sanctions were 'never punitive, but only coercive and corrective' (Forg. and Laiv, p. 132). But what does ' penal ' mean, if not ' punitive ' ? — (3) A third class of theories lays main emphasis on the surrender to the Father of the ' holy will ' of Christ. In this lies the essence of His redeeming .sacrifice for humanity (Maurice, F. W. Robertson, Erskine of Linlathen, etc. ) . — (4) A prof ounder view,
484
REDEMPTION
REFLECTIVENESS
in some respects, is that of M'Leod Campbell, whose ideas have considerably influenced later theology both at home (Moberly) and on the Con- tinent (e.g. Haring). Campbell finds the essence of Christ's atonement in what he calls a ' vicarious repentance ' for sin. The language is unfortunate, for, in strictness, no one can 'repent' for another, though he may ' confess ' the sin of another, and ' intercede ' for that other. The real value of Campbell's theory lies in its attempt to give an ethical and inward character to Christ's dealing with the wrath of God against sin. He I'ecognizes that sin's guilt, and the reality of the Divine con- demnation of sin, cannot be ignored. There is but one way, he holds, in which that condemnation can be met, namely, by entering fully into God's mind regarding sin, and rendering to His judgment upon it a perfect response. In his own words, there goes up an '"Amen" from the depths of the humanity of Christ to the Divine condemnation of .sin ' {Atonement, pp. 117-118). This ' Amen,' in Christ's case, is viewed by him as rendered, not 'in naked existence' (i.e. in purely mental realiza- tion), but under actual experience of the power of evil, and of death, viewed as including 'the sen- tence of the law against sin' (ih. pp. 259-262). A note is touched here which perhaps takes us very near the heart of the matter. — (5) Moberly's view in his Atonement and Personality has affinity with Campbell's, but differs from it in viewing punish- ment in this life as only disciplinary — chastisement inflicted for the good of the transgressor — and never retributive. [Punishment, however, must be felt to be one's due, or it has no good effect.] Punishment in itself does not atone ; atonement arises only when the punishment is met by a spirit of perfect contrition. The essence of atonement is 'penitential holiness.' This, it is held with Camp- bell, is perfectly realised in Christ alone. In Christ is offered a perfect contrition for the sins of the world. But it is offered in Christ only that it may be reproduced in the believer. Great diffi- culty, in this theory, must be felt to attach to the idea of ' penitence ' as an element in Christ's con- sciousness ; it is besides, after all, not Christ's perfect penitence which is held to be the ground of forgiveness, but the spirit of contrition awakened in the believer himself. Christ's work has its value as producing that. Forgiveness, it is further taught, is not complete at once, but is propor- tioned to the degree of penitence ; surely not a Scriptural notion.