Introduction: Rowan Williams's Presentation Last Week Assumed The (Encompassing) Incarnational'

The Ascension and St Agnes (ASA), DC, School of Theology and Prayer
March 1, Lent I, 2020
‘How does Christ Save? Varieties of Theories of Atonement’ (Dr. Nicholas Lombardo OP,
[email protected]; Dr. Sarah Coakley, [email protected])
Introduction: Rowan Williams’s presentation last week assumed the (encompassing) ‘incarnational’
view of the atonement (John 1.14, John 3.16; Athanasius On the Incarnation); but this incarnational
principle does not, as such, tell us why the cross was necessary for this ‘incarnational’ transformation.
How then does Christ save through the cross?
On the one hand, Christians are united in the belief that Christ somehow accomplishes the
salvation of the world through his cross; on the other hand, there is no consensus about exactly how
Christ saves, or how God could somehow work through the torture and murder of an innocent man.
Today we shall look at some puzzles in scripture and then, in light of those puzzles, consider
possible ways to understand how Christ saves.
I Some theological puzzles from Scripture

• He advanced a little and fell prostrate in prayer, saying, ‘My Father, if it is possible, let this
cup pass from me; yet, not as I will, but as you will’. (Matt 26:39 and synoptic pars.)
o The sheer fact of Christ’s crucifixion shows only that God was not willing to spare
his Son. It does not tell us anything about the positive content of the Father’s will,
or why God did not intervene. So, then, what is the Father’s will for Jesus?
• He said in reply, ‘He who has dipped his hand into the dish with me is the one who will
betray me. The Son of Man indeed goes, as it is written of him, but woe to that man by
whom the Son of Man is betrayed. It would be better for that man if he had never been
born.’ Then Judas, his betrayer, said in reply, ‘Surely it is not I, Rabbi?’ He answered, ‘You
have said so.’ (Matt. 26:23-25; see pars.in Mark, Luke and John)
o Since Christ’s crucifixion follows from Judas’ betrayal, does that mean that Judas is
doing God’s will when he betrays Jesus? Is he doing God’s dirty work, so to speak?
And if so, why does Jesus speak this curse about him?
• From noon onward, darkness came over the whole land until three in the afternoon. (Matt
27:45 and pars.)
o This narrative detail might suggest divine displeasure with Christ’s crucifixion. But
doesn’t God the Father want his Son to be crucified? Isn’t it part of the plan?
II Heightening the paradox:
• ‘The Son of Man did not come to be served but to serve and to give his life as a ransom for
many.’ (Matt 20:28, Mark 10: 45)
o The Gospels are filled with indications, implicit and explicit, that Jesus expected to
be killed, and that he saw his life as somehow life-giving for others. So does that
mean the Word became flesh to commit suicide?
2
• On Pentecost, Peter proclaims that Jesus was ‘delivered up according to the definite plan and
foreknowledge of God’ (Acts 2:23). Likewise, in Galatians, Paul writes, ‘Grace to you and
peace from God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ, who gave himself for our sins to deliver
us from the present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father; to whom be the
glory forever and ever. Amen.’ (Gal 1:3–5)
o These passages suggest that God positively wants the crucifixion of his Son. It’s not
merely something he permits to happen; it’s somehow central to his plan. So how
can that fit with God’s absolute opposition to moral evil?
• On the walk to Emmaus, Jesus says, ‘Was it not necessary that the Messiah should suffer these
things and enter into his glory?’ (Lk. 24:26)
o This passage has long been taken to suggest that the crucifixion is somehow
‘necessary’ to God’s plan of salvation. But how could that be?
III Possible solutions (see Gustav Aulen’s classic ‘typology’ of atonement theories):
• Anselm (Cur Deus homo): God the Son voluntarily offers satisfaction to God the Father for the
infinite injustice of sin, by voluntarily giving up his life for the many.
• Abelard (Commentary on Romans): Christ saves us because his heroic generosity on the cross
inspires charity in us, and this charity in us constitute our salvation
• Early Christian notion of ‘devil’s ransom’ (Gregory of Nyssa, Catechetical Oration): Christ tricks
the powers of evil into attacking him, and after he has been swallowed by death, his
resurrection on the third day breaks the power of death for himself and for others.
IV Some principles for resolution (and discussion):
• Some (proposed) principles for thinking about crucifixion

o Salvation as Trinitarian
o Redemption (redemptio, ransom) as a primary theological category for understanding
crucifixion, quite plausibly going back to Jesus himself (Mark 10:45)
o Christ’s crucifixion as the price of salvation, and sharing in the power of Christ’s
resurrection as our actual salvation
Select bibliography
Anselm. Cur Deus homo. In Basic Writings. Trans. Thomas Williams (Indianapolis: Hackett, 2007)
Aulén, Gustaf. Christus Victor: An Historical Study of the Three Main Types of the Idea of Atonement. Trans. by A. G.
Herbert (London: S.P.C.K, 1931)
Gregory of Nyssa. Catechetical Oration (also known as The Great Catechism or Address on Religious Instruction).
In Christology of the Later Fathers, 268–325 (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2006)
Lombardo, Nicholas E. The Father’s Will: Christ’s Crucifixion and the Goodness of God (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2013)
Stump, Eleonore. Atonement (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019)

Introduction: Rowan Williams's Presentation Last Week Assumed The (Encompassing) Incarnational'

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Introduction: Rowan Williams's Presentation Last Week Assumed The (Encompassing) Incarnational'

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Introduction: Rowan Williams's Presentation Last Week Assumed The (Encompassing) Incarnational'

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Ascension and St Agnes (ASA), DC, School of Theology and Prayer

March 1, Lent I, 2020

[email protected]; Dr. Sarah Coakley, [email protected])

I Some theological puzzles from Scripture

II Heightening the paradox:

IV Some principles for resolution (and discussion):

• Some (proposed) principles for thinking about crucifixion

You might also like