Theological
Comparisons
Abelard
His comment
begins regarding Rom. 3:21 and Abelard was quick to separate the formal,
covenantal Law from the natural transcendent law of God and he then went
on to
make a contrast between the age prior to Christ when that formal Law
ruled, and
his present age, ruled, as he said, by grace, the age in which Christ
has been
manifest through the teaching of the gospel. And when we read further we
see that
Abelard made an additional contrast between the Law (be it formal or
natural,
it is not clear from his comments here) and love for God. Whereas, I
believe
the more orthodox position is that love for God is the fulfillment of
God’s
formal Law, not only an aspect of God’s natural law. Here is that
contrast, “A
righteousness, I say, imparted to all the faithful in the higher part of
their
being—in the soul where alone love can exist—and not a matter of the
display of
outward works.”[i]
And then there are those passages that seem to exonerate Abelard of a
justification by anything other than faith and show a doctrine of
atonement
more like that of Anselm than of Niebuhr or Tillich. “‘In his blood.’
[citing
Paul’s letter to the Romans] This means by his death; and since this
propitiation is set forth and established by God, not for all but only
for
those who believe, he adds, ‘Through faith’[citing Paul’s letter to the
Romans];
for this reconciliation affects them only who have believed it and hoped
in
it.”[ii]
But
then, as one might expect, there are the occasions of his leaning toward
what
we now call the “Moral Influence” theory,
By
the faith
which we hold concerning Christ love is increased in us by virtue of the
conviction that God in Christ has united our human nature to himself
and, by
suffering in that same nature, has demonstrated to us that perfection of
love…So we, through his grace are joined to him as closely as to our
neighbor
by an indissoluble bond of affection...[iii]
And
this comment
further on in Rom. 3:26, “In other words, to show forth his love to us,
or
convince us how much we ought to love him who ‘sparred not even his own
son’ [citing
Paul’s letter to the Romans] for us…That is to say that through this
righteousness [the showing of God’s righteousness or justice as in v.
26]—which
is love—we may gain remission of our sins”[iv]
The
common view
of Abelard in the last 100 years or so can be summed up in the words of
Sam
Storms, “In fairness to Abelard, it would be a mistake to conclude that
he
omitted all reference to the sacrifice of Christ as a payment for our
sin. Yet,
his emphasis is clearly on the subjective effects of that sacrifice
rather than
its objective relationship to the wrath of God.”[v]
Abelard’s primary emphasis therefore being the equation of love and
righteousness (being justified), I believe the Abelardian theory of the
atonement is positively stated, by God’s grace we are made lovers of Him
and
those who love God are justified before Him. Or, in the final accounting
we are
justified by faith and our love for the Father; the Father gives us this
capacity to love Him, by His grace, therefore we are saved by grace
through our
love of God. It must be noted that “love for God” in the sense that
Abelard
used in his commentary on Romans in particular, encompasses faith; so
there is
no justification without love for God, there is no love for God without
faith.
[i]
Ibid., 278
[ii]Ibid.,
279
[iii]
Ibid., 278
[iv]
Ibid., 279
[v]
Sam Storms, “11) Anselm” [cited 13 March, 2010]. Online:
http://www.enjoyinggodministries.com/article/11-anselm/
No comments:
Post a Comment