consequences; there could be no moral laws without penalties; and
penalties of laws must be enforced, else laws are mere nullities.
Violations of moral law are attended by shame and suffering; suffering
is the consequence or the penalty of violating divine, moral law; and
the penalty must be paid, either by the one sinning or by another who
shall suffer vicariously for him.
This brings us to one of the great questions inseparably connected
with the Atonement. Can there be such a thing as vicarious suffering?
And can the vicarious suffering of an innocent victim pay the debt to
justice due from one who is guilty of the transgression of law?
LESSON XXIII.
(Scripture Reading Exercise.)
THE EFFICACY OF VICARIOUS ATONEMENT.
ANALYSIS.
I. The Law of Righteousness.
II. Possibility of the Spirit Suffering.
III. The Suffering of Men.
1. Because of Their Own Sins.
2. Because of the Sins of Others.
3. With Each Other on Account of Sin.
4. Willingness of Men to Suffer for Others and what it Suggests.
IV. Vicarious Suffering the Doctrine of Christ.
V. The Reign of Law and Love.
REFERENCES.
The texts and contexts of the scriptures quoted and cited in the body
of this lesson.
_SPECIAL TEXT: "He that loveth not knoweth not God, for God is love. * *
* Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent
his Son to be the Propitiation for our sins._
_"Beloved, if God so loved us, we also ought to love one another." (I
John iv:8-11.)_
DISCUSSION.
_1. The Law of Righteousness:_ All sin against moral law is
followed by suffering. At first glance that statement may not be
accepted without qualification; but it is true. "Sin is transgression
of the law," is scripture definition of sin.[A] No difficulty will
arise from that definition, but there might arise difference of opinion
as to what constitutes "moral law," which to violate would be sin.
Of course moral law, varies among different races, and nations; and
indeed varies in the same race and nation in different periods of time;
but no matter how variant the law may be, between different races or
nations; or how variant it may be between individuals, the principle
announced that suffering follows sin will hold good. Of course between
the Christian whose conscience is trained in the moral law of the
doctrine of Christ, and the heathen, "who know not God," there is a
wide difference. Many things which are sin to the Christian conscience
are not sin to the heathen races, unenlightened by the ethics of the
Christian religion; but, nevertheless, what I say is true; and if
heathen peoples do not have the same moral standards that prevail in
Christian lands, they have _some_ moral standards; and whenever they
violate what to them is the "rule of righteousness," it is followed
by chagrin, by sorrow, by mental suffering for them; and so with the
Christian people who are instructed in the high, moral principles of
the Christian religion. When they fall below their ideals, when they
consciously violate their rule of righteousness, it is followed by
suffering, by sense of shame, by sorrow; and, indeed, the great bulk
of the sorrows of this world spring from sin, the transgression of the
moral law, and there is no escaping its penalty--suffering.
[Footnote A: I John iii:4; and Rom. iv:15.]
_2. Possibility of the Spirit Suffering:_ It is just as real,
this suffering of the spirit for the violation of the moral law, as
the suffering of physical pain that comes from the violation of some
physical law. The mind no less than the body may be hurt, wounded as
deeply as the body, and carry its scars as the evidence of its wounds
as long. Mental suffering is as real and poignant as physical pain; and
he who sins suffers. "And it often happens," says Guizot, "that the
best men, that is, those who have best conformed their will to reason,
have often been the most struck with their insufficiency, the most
convinced of the inequality between the conduct of man and his task
between liberty and law;" and therefore have they suffered most. It is
possible, then, for men to suffer because of their own sins.
_3. Men Suffer Because of the Sins of Others:_ This we know, also,
it is possible for men to suffer _because_ of the sins of others, and
they often do it. You can scarcely conceive of a man being so far
isolated, so far outside the sympathies of the world, that it can be
said of him that he lives unto himself alone; that his sinning and
his suffering concerns only himself. We are so knit together in a net
work of sympathies--not seen, but real nevertheless--that we suffer
_because_ of each other. It is easily proven. Take the case of an
honorable father and mother who have led we will say--and there are
such fathers and mothers--ideal lives. They have lived in honor; they
have met their obligations to the world with reasonable fidelity; they
have lived lives of righteousness; they have set good examples to their
children; they have taught the Christian truths at the fireside; they
have surrounded their family with every advantage that would prepare
them for honorable stations among men. They have taken pride as they
have seen their children grow from infancy to manhood, and their souls
have hoped that a sort of immortality would subsist in the perpetuation
of their race through their children. Then out of this family group,
over which the parents have watched with such anxious solicitude, there
comes forth a reprobate youth, in whom there seems to be scarcely any
moral sense. He violates all the conventions of society, and of moral
living; he destroys his intellect by his excesses, and he becomes
a vagabond and outcast among men, a degenerate, perhaps finds his
way through the sewers of sin, into the prison house, and at last,
perchance, may go to the very gallows itself.
And what is the condition of that righteous father and mother the
while, when they look upon this sad mischance in their household?
Sorrow! The one who has led the shameful life, though he may suffer
somewhat for his sins, has not suffered the one-thousandth part of the
shame and humiliation and disgrace that has been experienced by this
father and mother. They suffer _because_ of the sins of this wayward
son. They illustrate in their experience the fact that men can suffer
because of each other; _the innocent are involved in the sins and
crimes of the guilty._
From this confessedly extreme case all down the line of human
experiences and relationships in constantly varying degrees men suffer
_because_ of each other.
_4. Men Suffer With Each Other on Account of Sin:_ Then men suffer
_with_ each other? An outsider, looking at this scene I have presented
--I mean one not a member of the grief-stricken family--witnessing
the sorrow of the father, and the inconsolable grief of the mother;
the mental distress and shame experienced by brother and sisters; the
stranger witnessing all this, weeps with the sorrowing father and
mother; he suffers _with_ them.
_5. Willingness of Men to Suffer for Each Other:_ There is still
another phase of this suffering on account of sin, and one that draws
very near to the point I am trying to reach. There is among men, and
especially among men of highly sensitive natures, a willingness to
suffer _for_ others. Take the case, for instance, of David and Absolom.
Absolom was the most worthless of all David's many worthless sons;
he had planned rebellion against the grand old king; he would have
clutched the crown from the hoary head of David and put it upon his
own. In every way he had warred against the honor and the interests
o. his noble father. Yet when news was brought to the king that the
worthless young man had been caught in the battle and slain, the old
king was stricken with sorrow, and gave vent to the parent-cry that
rings through all the ages--"Oh Absolom, my son! my son! would to
God I had died for thee!" In this experience of David's we see the
willingness of one to suffer _for_ another. Nor is this willingness
confined to parents alone who would so often and so willingly take upon
themselves the consequences of their children's sins, though those
consequences involved death. The same willingness exists on the part
of the children, but perhaps is less frequently manifested, to suffer
for their parents. The same is true also as to brothers and sisters,
and among friends, where no tie of consanguinity exists; and even among
strangers, on the occasion of great, imminent danger, this impulse in
man, this willingness to risk his own life for others is frequently
manifested. Such experiences make up the history of heroism, which is
the chief glory of our human race.
_6. The Great Principle Suggested by the Foregoing Facts:_ Does
this fact of willingness to suffer for others, so abundantly attested
in human experiences, bear witness to the existence of no great and
eternal principle, that may be of incalculable benefit in the moral
economy of the world? Is it meaningless? I think not. On the contrary
it suggests the existence of a great and effective truth, namely, that
the Intelligences of the universe are so bound together in sympathetic
relations that at need they can suffer for each other, as well as with
each other, and because of each other. "Greater love hath no man than
this, that a man lay down his life for his friends."[A] This is true
because when a man lays down his life for a cause or for a friend he
has then given all he has to give; for with life goes all things else;
he can give no more. Shall those Intelligences we must needs think of
as Divine, as making up David's "congregation of the Mighty," the Gods
among whom God the greatest of all the Intelligences, standeth and
judges,[B] shall these be denied the privilege of love-manifestation
which goes with this giving of all? And shall this suffering for others
have no benefiting effect upon those others for whom the suffering is
endured? Shall this love-force of men and of divine Intelligences be
mere waste of the highest and most refined of all forces--spiritual
force? Not so, if reason answers the question. Certainly not so if
scripture answers it. "Here by perceive we the love of God, because he
laid down his life for us."[C] "God so loved the world that he gave his
only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish
but have everlasting life."[D] "For Christ hath also once suffered for
sin, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God."[E] "When
we were yet without strength in due time Christ died for us. * * * Being
now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him. *
* * When we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his
son * * *."[F] The scriptures then abundantly confirm the declaration
made that divine Intelligences are not denied the power of giving the
highest love manifestation for others by suffering for them; and in
that love-manifestation giving all they can give even to taking upon
themselves the consequences of the sins of others and making Atonement
for them; suffering that others might have placed within their reach
the means of escape from suffering, if only they would accept such
means and apply them. Otherwise, of course, the sinners themselves must
suffer all the consequences due to their sins; for nothing is clearer
in the revealed word of God, developed in this treatise, than that
satisfaction must be made to Justice whenever the domain of Justice is
trespassed upon, else all is confusion in the moral government of the
world; so that if men will not avail themselves of means which Mercy
provides for their redemption, then they themselves must meet the
inexorable demands of Justice.
[Footnote A: St. John iii:15.]
[Footnote B: Psalms lxxxii.]
[Footnote C: I John iii:16.]
[Footnote D: St. John iii:16.]
[Footnote E: I Peter iii:16.]
[Footnote F: Rom. v:6-10.]
_7. Vicarious Suffering. Its Reality and Its Effectiveness is the
Doctrine of the Christ:_ This, then, is the especial doctrine of the
Christ on which his earth-life's mission is based. One Intelligence at
need can suffer for others. It is possible for one to stand responsible
for another; a man can be his brother's keeper, and vicariously endure
even suffering for another's sins; make a satisfaction to justice, and
bring the quality of Mercy into the moral economy of things, and give
it legitimate standing under a reign of law, softening somewhat the
otherwise harsh aspect of things.
_8. The Reign of Law and Love:_ To this then our inquiry and
discussions lead us; to recognize in the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the
central truth of which is the Atonement, a reign of Law and Love; and
that to preserve this Law, and to manifest this Love was the purpose of
the earth-life's mission of the Christ. To teach and to demonstrate,
first of all, God-love for man, by a sacrifice that tasks God that
man might be saved;[A] and second, to inspire man-love for God, by
the demonstration that God first loved man, and how deeply God loved
man;[B] and third, to teach man-love for man. "For beloved," said
the apostle whom Jesus loved pre-eminently--"If God so loved us, we
also ought to love one another."[C] In this love for one another
the children of God are manifest, he contends. "Whosoever doeth not
righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.
For this is the message that ye heard from the beginning, that we
should love one another. * * We know that we have passed from death into
life, because we love the brethren. He that loveth not his brother
abideth in death. * * Here by perceive we the love of God, because he
laid down his life for us; and we ought to lay down our lives for
the brethren."[D] It is not to be marveled at that this same apostle
declared that "He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love,"[E]
or that Paul, accepting the same principles, should say, "he that
loveth another, hath fulfilled the law. * * * Love worketh no ill to
his neighbor; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law."[F]
[Footnote A: St. John iii:16, 17.]
[Footnote B: "In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because
that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live
through him. Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved
us, and sent his son to be the propitiation for our sins" (I John iv:9,
10.)]
[Footnote C: I John iv:11.]
[Footnote D: I John iii:10-16.]
[Footnote E: I John iv:8.]
[Footnote F: Rom. xiii:8, 10.]
Jesus, however, teacheth the matter most perfectly. Accepting the love
of God for man as assured, then the great commandment for man is--
"Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart and with
all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great
commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy
neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and
the prophets."[A] "Love is the fulfilling of the law"[B]--
_"All's Love, yet all's Law."_[C]
[Footnote A: Matt. xxii.]
[Footnote B: Rom. xiii:10.]
[Footnote C: Browning.]
Love exists in the earth-scheme of things, in the moral government of
the world, as we have seen, in harmony with the universal reign of law.
It is not born of some caprice, or mere impulse, howsoever beneficent;
but interwoven it is into the very web of things, and is immanent
in them, an indestructible _Presence_. It is because love reigns in
harmony with law that we mortals can be so sure of it; and rest so
secure in it. For as it was not born of caprice, so, too, it will
not depart from the world, nor from individuals on caprice; but will
endure as space itself endures--from the very nature of it; as truth
abides; as law itself subsists; as God lives; for it is of the _Eternal
Things--the Things that do not pass away._
APPENDIX.
Other Views of the Atonement.
I.
HISTORY OF SOTERIOLOGY[A] FROM APOSTOLIC TIMES UNTIL IT TAKES
DEFINITE FORM UNDER THE TEACHING OF ANSELM IN THE TWELFTH CENTURY.
[Footnote A: Soteriology is that branch of theological science which
treats of the work of the Redeemer, or of the divine agency in the
salvation of the soul (Die. Funk & Wagnall). This brief historical
statement of soteriology is either condensed or quoted from Shedd's
work on the "History of Christian Doctrine," and is not mine.]
Not even an epitome of the history of the doctrine of the Atonement may
be attempted here. The title is written out, not to attempt a summary
of the history of this branch of theological science; but merely to
make a few remarks about that history.
It is quite generally conceded that the doctrine of the Atonement
developed slowly. "Taking the term Atonement in its technical
signification to denote the satisfaction of divine justice for the sin
of man, by the substituted penal sufferings of the son of God, we shall
find a slower scientific unfolding of this great cardinal doctrine than
of any other of the principal truths of Christianity."[A]
[Footnote A: "History of Christian Doctrine" V. "History of
Soteriology," Vol. II, p. 204.]
_Heretical Views During the First Two Christian Centuries:_
There were two views of the atonement held to be heretical during the
two first Christian centuries, the Gnostic[A] and the Ebionite,[B]
respectively.
[Footnote A: The Gnostics were a sect which arose in the Christian
Church in the first century, flourished in the second, and had
almost entirely disappeared by the sixth. The Gnostics held that
knowledge rather than faith was the road to heaven, and professed to
have a peculiar knowledge of religious mysteries. They rejected the
literal interpretation of the scriptures, and attempted to combine
their teachings with those of the Greek and Oriental philosophies
and religions. They held that God was the unknowable and the
unapproachable; that from him proceeded, by emanation, subordinate
deities termed "eons," from whom again proceeded other still inferior
spirits (Cent. Dict.--Gnostics).]
[Footnote B: The Ebionites were a party of Judaizing Christians which
appeared in the church as early as the second century and disappeared
about the fourth century. They agreed in (1) the recognition of Jesus
as the messiah; (2) the denial of the divinity; (3) belief in the
universal obligation of the Mosaic law, and (4) rejection of Paul and
his writings The two great divisions of Ebionites were the Pharisaic
Ebionites, who emphasized the obligation of the Mosaic law, and the
Essentic Ebionites, who were more speculative and leaned toward
Gnosticism (Cent. Diet.--Ebionites).]
The Gnostic heresy as affecting the Atonement brought against the
scripture doctrine on that subject two contradictions; the first by
one Basilides (A. D. 125), who affirmed only a human suffering in the
Redeemer, which was not expiatory for the reason, first, because as
merely human it was finite, and inadequate to atone for the sins of
the whole world; and, second, because the idea of substituted penal
suffering is inadmissible. "Suffering for the purposes of justice,"
their teacher said, of necessity implied personal criminality in the
sufferer," and therefore can never be endured by an innocent person
like Christ." "The principle of vicarious substitution, in reference to
justice, he held to be untenable.
The other contradiction of Gnosticism was made by Marcion (A. D.
150). He affirmed a divine suffering in the Redeemer, which was but
apparent, however, because the "Logos," or "Word"--Christ--having
assumed a phantom, not a real body, only a seeming suffering could
occur, and could not, of course, be expiatory. "It was merely
emblematical--designed to symbolize the religious truth, that man, in
order to attain his true and highest life must die to his earthly life."
"If now we examine these Gnostic and Judaizing theories," says Shedd,
from whom I am condensing this account, "we find that they agree in one
capital respect, viz., in the rejection of the scripture doctrine of a
real and true expiation of human guilt."
_2. Soteriology of the Apostolic Fathers:_ In the writings of the
Apostolic Fathers, we obtain the views of the Church upon the doctrine
of the Atonement during the first half century after the death of the
last inspired apostle (A. D. 100-150). Examining them, we find chiefly
the repetition of Scripture phraseology, without further attempt at an
explanatory doctrinal statement. There is no scientific construction
of the doctrine of Atonement in the writings of these devout and pious
disciples of Paul and John; yet the idea of vicarious satisfaction is
distinctly enunciated by them."
Our author then quotes from the Apostolic Fathers in proof of the above
statement.[A]
[Footnote A: See "History of Christian Doctrine," Vol. II, pp. 208-212.]
_3. Early Patristic Soteriology:_[A] One characteristic of
the early Patristic Soteriology which strikes the attention is the
important part which the doctrine of Satan plays in it. The death
of Christ is often represented as ransoming man from the power and
slavery of the devil. Such passages as Colossians ii:15, and Hebrews
ii:14: "Having spoiled principalities and powers (Satanic dominion),
he made a show of them openly, triumphing over them in it. * * * That
through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that
is, the devil,"--were made the foundation of this view. The writer who
exhibits it more plainly and fully than any other is Iranaeus (+200?)
As an illustration of his sentiments, we quote a passage from the first
chapter of the fifth book of his important work, "Adversus Haereses:"
"The Word of God (the Logos), omnipotent and not wanting in essential
justice, proceeded with strict justice even against the apostasy or
kingdom of evil itself, redeeming from it that which was his own
originally, not by using violence, as did the devil in the beginning,
but my persuasion, as it became God, as that neither justice should be
infringed upon, nor the original creation of God perish."
[Footnote A: This period extends into the last quarter of the 2nd
century.]
All true scientific development of the doctrine of the Atonement it is
very evident, must take its departure from the idea of divine justice.
This conception is the primary one in the Biblical representation of
this doctrine. The terms, "propitiation" and "sacrifice," and the
phraseology, "made a curse for us," "made sin for us," "justified by
blood," "saved from wrath," which so frequently occur in the revealed
statement of the truth, immediately direct the attention of the
theologian to that side of the divine character, and that class of
divine attributes, which are summed up in the idea of justice. And
as we follow the history of the doctrine down, we shall find that
just in proportion as the mind of the Church obtained a distinct and
philosophic conception of this great attribute, as an absolute and
necessary principle in the divine nature, and in human nature, was
it enabled to specify with distinctness the real meaning and purport
of the Redeemer's passion, and to exhibit the rational and necessary
grounds for it.
Now, turning to the writings of the Patristic period, we shall see that
sufferings and death of the Redeemer are, in the main, represented as
sustaining their most immediate and important relation to the justice
of God. It is not to be disguised that the distinctness with which this
is done varies with different writers. We shall find in this period,
as in every other one, some minds for whom the pollution of sin is
more impressive than its criminality, and in whose experience the
doctrine of justification[A] is less formative than the doctrine of
sanctification.[B]
[Footnote A: Justification, as here used, is the act of God by which
the sinner is declared righteous, or justly free from obligation to
penalty, and fully restored to divine favor.]
[Footnote B: Sanctification, the act of sanctifying or making holy. In
Theology the act of God's grace, coupled with the efforts of man, by
which the affection are purified and the soul is cleansed from sin and
consecrated to God.]