whom he will, on whatever grounds his sovereign will may dictate. It, therefore, constituted a great advance in Latin theology, as also an evidence of its immeasurable superiority to Mohammedanism when Anselm, for the first time in a clear and emphatic manner, had asserted an inward necessity in the being of God that his justice should receive satisfaction for the affront which had been offered to it by human sinfulness.?

Henry George, Progress and Poverty, 481 ? ?In the days of feudalism, men thought of heaven as organized on a feudal basis, and ranked the first and second Persons of the Trinity as Suzerain and Tenant-in-Chief.? William James, Varieties of Religious Experience, 329, 830 ? ?The monarchical type of sovereignty was, for example, so ineradicably planted in the mind of our forefathers, that a dose of cruelty and arbitrariness in their Deity seems positively to have been required by their imagination. They called the cruelty ?retributive justice,? and a God without it would certainly not have struck them as sovereign enough. But today we abhor the very notion of eternal suffering inflicted. Arbitrary dealing out of salvation and damnation to selected individuals, of which Jonathan Edwards could persuade himself that he ?had not only a conviction, but a ?delightful conviction,? as of a doctrine ?exceeding pleasant, bright, and sweet,? appears to us, if sovereign anything, sovereign irrational and mean.?

(b) In its eagerness to maintain the atoning efficacy of Christ?s passive obedience, the active obedience, quite as clearly expressed in Scripture, is insufficiently emphasized and well nigh lost sight of.

Neither Christ?s active obedience alone, nor Christ?s obedient passion alone, can save us. As we shall see hereafter, in our examination of the doctrine of Justification, the latter was needed as the ground upon which our penalty could be remitted, the former as the ground upon which we might be admitted to the divine favor. Calvin has reflected the passive element in Anselm?s view, in the following passages of his Institutes: II, 17:3 ? ?God, to whom we were hateful through sin, was appeased by the death of his Son, and was made propitious to us.? ...II, 16:7 ? ?It is necessary to consider how he substituted himself in order to pay the price of our redemption. Death held us under its yoke, but he, in our place, delivered himself into its power, that he might exempt us from it.? ...II, 16:2 ? ?Christ interposed and bore what, by the just judgement of God, was impending over sinners, with his own blood expiated the sin which rendered them hateful to God. This expiation satisfied and duly propitiated the Father, by this intercession appeased his anger and on this

<- Previous Table of Contents Next ->

Was this article helpful?

0 0

Post a comment