Concluding Remarks
So, as I conclude I will make a summary
comparison of the atonement theologies of the three men in question. We can say
that Anslem approached the theory of substitutionary atonement as expressed in
Reformed and Evangelical circles today: satisfaction for sins, the necessity of
Christ’s death for our life, etc. The Abelardian view maintained that by God’s
grace we are made lovers of God so as to prove our fellowship with him. Often
loosely interpreted in our day as the moral theory of the atonement, it far
more emphasized the idea of God’s love being shown through Christ’s passion
than an answer to His justice. And Thomas’ view was worked out in the
difference between the imputation of and
the infusion of Christ’s
righteousness to the believer; Thomas saw the atonement as a provision of the
grace God used to make a sinner
righteous before He called him just. His
theory, like Anselm’s, counted on God’s grace, but where Anselm saw this in
terms of God’s grace extended in mercy by forgiving the guilty because He
punished the Innocent, Thomas saw it in more of what we would now consider
Roman Catholic terms, that in order for God to call someone just that person
must actually be just, thus God makes them so by infusing Christ’s righteousness
thereby transmuting their soul from wickedness to righteousness.
Thus in the
final assessment, even though their lives were separated by no more than 200
years, neither Anselm of Canterbury, nor Peter Abelard, nor Thomas Aquinas
shared the same view of the atonement. Some of their ideas overlapped but the
three of them drew rather different conclusions and therefore have influenced
the world of theology in different ways: Anselm: penal substitution, Abelard:
moral influence, and Aquinas: Roman Catholic Sacramentalism.
No comments:
Post a Comment