Ep. #238 – Roundtable on Christ’s Atonement w/ Dr. Joy, Plance, and Gomer
Summary
What does Scripture say about Christ’s atonement? How should we understand penal substitution theory and what is wrong with it? What theories of atonement work best from a Catholic perspective? Dr. John Joy, Chris Plance, and Michael Gormley join the show for a roundtable discussion on these topics.
Resources
The Atoning Death of Christ: St. Thomas’s Doctrine of Vicarious Satisfaction by Dr. John P. Joy
ChrisPlance.com (Chris Plance’s personal website)
What is Redemption: How Chris’s Suffering Saves Us by De La Trinite (Recommended by Chris Plance)
Gomer’s Recommended Book List for Doctrine/Theology of Atonment
Jesus Christ, Fundamentals of Christology by Roch A. Kereszty (UD prof and Cistercian):Summary of Christology and Soteriology of the Patristics, Scholastics, and Moderns (including Reformers):
Atonement (Oxford Studies in Analytic Theology) by Eleonore Stump, (referenced by Dr. John Joy in the show) a great exploration of the topic
Atonement: Soundings in Biblical, Trinitarian, and Spiritual Theology, by Margaret Turek; Four Nouvelle Theologie theologians’ approach (Ratzinger/Benedict, JP2, von Balthasar, and Norbert Hoffman) to the topic, if you are looking for something that shows von Balthasar in a more favorable way
The Catholic Doctrine of the Atonement by Henry Nutcombe Oxenham, a famous Anglican convert to Catholicism in the mid-1800s.
The Love of God and the Cross of Christ by Fr. Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange
Gomer’s Recommended Book List for Exegesis of the Old Testament roots of the Cross and Resurrection
Paul, a New Covenant Jew by Barber, Pitre, and Kincaid, has a solid chapter on blood, atoning sacrifice, and Christ’s mission in Temple terminology.
The Mystery of Israel and the Church, a 3-book series by Dr. Lawrence Feingold, professor at Kendrick-Glennon seminary, convert from agnostic Judaism, was head of the Association of Hebrew Catholics.
The Death of the Messiah and the Birth of the New Covenant by Micahel Gorman.
How God Became King by N.T. Wright, Anglican bishop and scholar, exegete; he is a part of the “New Perspective on Paul” which is a rebuttal of Reformation polemics that viewed God’s covenant with Israel in 16th Century European views instead of 1st Century Jewish context. Helpful, alongside his polemic against American pastor John Piper Justification, for understanding the implications of Christus Victor with Penal Substitutionary Atonement.
Quote from St. Ephrem the Syrian (Read by Dr. John Joy during the podcast)
Death trampled our Lord underfoot, but he in his turn treated death as a high road for his own feet. He submitted to it, enduring it willingly, because by this means he would be able to destroy death in spite of itself. Death had its own way when our Lord went out from Jerusalem carrying his cross; but when by a loud cry from that cross he summoned the dead from the underworld, death was powerless to prevent it.
Death slew him by means of the body which he had assumed, but that same body proved to be the weapon with which he conquered death. Concealed beneath the cloak of his manhood, his godhead engaged death in combat; but in slaying our Lord, death itself was slain. It was able to kill natural human life, but was itself killed by the life that is above the nature of man.
Death could not devour our Lord unless he possessed a body, neither could hell swallow him up unless he bore our flesh; and so he came in search of a chariot in which to ride to the underworld. This chariot was the body which he received from the Virgin; in it he invaded death’s fortress, broke open its strongroom and scattered all its treasure.
Related Episodes
Ep. #160 – What do Catholics believe about the atonement? w/ Michael Gormley
Ep. #130 – A Lutheran’s Case for Catholicism w/ Dr. Robert Koons
I really like theology concerning the concept of atonement. Thanks for the episode!
I would like to make some comments on the theology described by Chris. I don’t think ransom theory is always synonymous with the “Christus Victor” model. I am referencing Aulen’s book Christus Victor (which Dr. Joy mentioned), which is a very influential text. Aulen argues for the Christus Victor which he calls the Classical theory of salvation and is critical of ransom theory, seeing them as distinct theories. He favors this classical model which he sees present in Paul, the fathers, and Luther. While the ransom theory has elements of Christus Victor it seems very different. At heart, ransom theory says the devil has (at least some) rights over humanity which prevents humanity from being with God in heaven, and God pays the ransom to gain humanity back. Patristicly (specifically Gregorys of Nyssa and Nazianzus) this ransom has taken the form of deception (mentioned by Chris). The devil kills Christ, not recognizing that he is actually the Son because of the flesh “camouflage.” Then, the devil cannot possess the Son because the Son is more powerful, and God triumphs. Aulen’s Christus Victor overcomes the devil in the death and resurrection more directly, without a payment to or deception of the devil. I disagree with Aulen’s preferences but it does not run into the same problems as ransom theory. The main one was mentioned here, that the devil has any legitimate right over man. Chris mentioned it could make sense by seeing that humanity first owes itself to God, then God gives humanity to itself, who turns itself over to Satan. (Chris uses the “pink slip” analogy where the pink slip belongs to God, then humanity, then the devil.) The problem with this is that it implies that man was in a position to to have total authority over itself. This would have meant that Adam, prior to the fall, would have owed God nothing, because he had all rights over himself. I don’t know of any Catholic thinker that would want to make that claim. If humanity never had total authority over itself, this means human “ownership” could never be legitimately given to the devil, because man never had the authority to do so. So the conclusion runs that salvation does not require that devil receive any ransom for salvation.
Thanks for your valuable thoughts on the topic!