.'!. From the Reformation. — All the great confessions —Greek, Roman, Lutheran, Reformed, and Methodist — agree in placing the salvation of the sinner in the mediatorial work of Christ. But there are various modes of apprehending the doctrine in this period (sec Winer, Comparat. Darstt Hung, ch. vii). The Council of Trent cenfounds justification with sanctification, and hence denies that the satisfaction of Christ is the
ATONEMENT
519
ATONEMENT
sole ground of the remission of sin (Canones, De Justifi- catione, vii, viii). The Romanist writers generally adopt the " acceptilation" theorj' of Scotns rather than that of Anselra, and hold that the death of Christ made satisfaction only for sins before baptism, while as to sins after baptism only the eternal punishment du< to them is remitted ; so that, for the temporal punish ment due to them, satisfaction is still required by pen ance and purgatory. Luther does not treat of satis faction in any special treatise ; he was occupied rather with the appropriation of salvation by faith alone, though he held fast the doctrine of expiation through Christ. So, in Melancthon's Loci, and in the Augs- burg Confession (A.D. 1530), the atoning work of Christ is fully stated, but under the head of justifying faith. "Men are justified gratuitously for Christ sake through faith when they believe that they are received into favor, and that their sins are remitted on account of Christ, who made satisfaction for our trans- gressions by his death. This faith God imputes to us as righteousness" (Augsburg Confession, art. iv). The distinction between the active and passive obedience of Christ came later ; its first clear statement in the Lu- theran Church is in the Formula of Concord (157G) : "That righteousness which is imputed to the believer simply by the grace of God is the obedience, the suffer- ing, and the resurrection of Christ, by which he has satisfied the claims of the law and atoned for our sins. For as Christ is not merely man, but God and man in one person, he was, as Lord of the law, no more sub- ject to it than he was subject to suffering death ; hence not only his obedience to God the Father, as exhibited in his sufferings and death, but also by his righteous fulfilment of the law on our behalf, is imputed to us, and God acquits us of our sins, and regards us as just in view of his complete obedience in what he did and suffered, in life and in death" (Francke, Lib. Symj. 68.3). Nor did this distinction appear early among the Calvinists any more than among the Lutherans. Cal- vin joins them together (Institutes, bk. ii, § 16, 5). None of the reformed confessions distinguish between the active and passive obedience before the Formula Con- sensus Helvetica (1675 ; comp. Guericke, Symbolik, § 47).
The Socinians deny the vicarious atonement entire- ly. They assert that satisfaction and forgiveness are incompatible ideas ; that the work of atonement is sub- jective, i. e. the repentance and moral renovation of the sinner ; that God needs no reconciliation with man. Christ suffered, not to satisfy the divine justice, but as a martyr to his truth and an example to his followers. Socinus did, however, admit that the death of Christ affords a pledge of divine forgiveness, and of man's resurrection as following Christ's (see Winer, Comp. Darstellung, vii, 1 ; and comp. Hagenbach, History of Doctrines, § 268 ; Shedd, Hist, of 'Doctrines, bk. v).
In opposition to Socinus, Grotius wrote his D/fensio fidei Cathol. de Satisfactione (1617), which forms an epoch in the history of the doctrine. He deduced the necessity of satisfaction from the administrative or rectoral justice of God, and not from his retributive justice. He taught that the prerogative of punishing is to be ascribed to God, not as an injured party, but as moral governor of the world. So the prerogative of substitution, in place of punishment, belongs to God as moral governor. If, by any other means than pun- ishment, he can vindicate the claims of justice, he is at liberty, as moral governor, to use those means. The atonement does thus satisfy justice ; and through Christ's voluntary offering, the sinner can be pardoned and the law vindicated. The defect of this theory lies in its not referring the work of Christ sufficiently to the nature of God, contemplating it rather in its moral as- pects as an exhibition of the evil of sin. The Dutch Arminian divines bring out more prominently the idea of sacrifice in the death of < Ihrist. The Methodist the- ology' asserts the doctrine of satisfaction strongly, e. g. "Watson: "Satisfaction [by the death of Christ] by
Christ is not to be regarded as a merely fit and wise expedient of government (to which Grotius leans too much), for this may imply that it was one of many other possible expedients, though the best ; whereas we have seen that it is everywhere in Scripture repre- sented as necessary to human salvation, and that it is to be concluded that no alternative existed but that of exchanging a righteous government for one careless and relaxed, to the dishonor of the divine attributes, and the sanctioning of moral disorder, or the uphold- ing of such government by the personal and extreme punishment of every offender, or else the acceptance of the vicarious death of an infinitely dignified and glorious being, through whom pardon should be of- fered, and in whose hands a process for the moral res- toration of the lapsed should be placed. The humilia- tion, sufferings, and death of such a being did most obviously demonstrate the righteous character and ad- ministration of God ; and if the greatest means we can conceive was employed for this end, then we may safe- ly conclude that the righteousness of God in the for- giveness of sin could not have been demonstrated by inferior means ; and as God cannot cease to be a right- eous governor, man in that case could have had no hope" (Watson, Theol. Institutes, vol. ii, pt. ii, ch. xx). The Arminian theology did nevertheless, maintain that God is free, not necessitated as moral governor, and that the. satisfaction of Christ has reference to the general justice of God, and not to his distributive jus- tice. The Methodist theology also brings out promi- nently the love of God, which is organic and eternal in him — his essential nature — as the source of redemp- tion, and holds that the free manifestation of the divine love is under no law of necessity. Even Ebrard, one of the most eminent modern writers of the Reformed Church, sets this forth as a great service rendered to theology by the Arminians (Ebrard, Lehre der stellver- tretenden Genug'huiing, Konigsb. 1857, p. 25 ; compare also Warren, in Methodist Quarterly, duly, 1866, 390 sq. ; and, on the other side, Shedd, History of Doctrines, bk. v, ch. v; and his Discourses and Essays, 291). Hill (Calvinist), in his Lectures on Divinity (bk. iv, ch. iii), appears to adopt the Grotian theory.