Christus Victor part 2
A few weeks ago I began an occasional series looking at the history of the Christian doctrine of the atonement as outlined in Gustav Aulen's classic work Christus Victor. In part 1 we saw how there have been three main ways of understanding the atonement, from the earliest 'classical' view to the later western forensic 'objective' view and then finally the 'subjective' view.It may unsettle some that this series on the atonement begins with dogmatic theology and not the New Testament, although it must be pointed out that all atonement theories have sought to base themselves in the biblical witness and it is not a question of a 'biblical' version of the atonement against a 'theological' one as I have been accused of doing on more than one occasion.
Part 2 will look at the idea of atonement expressed in the theology of Irenaeus, who lived in the second century. Irenaeus' work is hugely important in terms of atonement studies because it was the first serious attempt to explain Jesus' work in a complex and coherent manner. Before I start however I'm going to insert a brief disclaimer: I'm told by someone who knows Irenaeus a lot better than me that Aulen seriously misunderstands Irenaeus, and that his interpretation of him is quite inaccurate. I can't vouch for this myself, but here's an outline of one of the most important and earliest theologies of the atonement.
1. The Purpose of the Incarnation
The question of why Christ came down from heaven is the driving force behind most of Irenaeus' theological enterprise, and the way in which we answer this question will determine how well we understand his theology. Put simply, Irenaeus held that Christ became man so that we might become divine:
"we could not otherwise attain to incorruption and immortality except we had been united with incorruption and immortality."
Against Heresies IV 33:4
So right from the very beginning, the doctrine of atonement and salvation is bound up with the idea of incarnation. This is contrary to most Latin views of the atonement which often separate incarnation from atonement or simply ignore the incarnation altogether as something merely incidental. Through Adam's disobedience humanity has become enslaved and trapped by sin, evil, and death, and so it becomes clear that
"the work of Christ is first and foremost a victory over the powers that hold mankind in bondage: sin, death, and the devil....the victory of Christ creates a new situation, bringing their rule to an end, and setting men free from their dominion." (Aulen, 20).
This is why the incarnation is so important to understanding Christ's work: man is helpless and is enslaved to sin and evil, but only God can save us, and therefore it is only by becoming man in Christ that God is able to free humanity from the tyrannical evil powers that dominate and oppress him:
"The Word of God was made flesh in order that he might destroy death and bring man to life; for we were tied and bound in sin, we were born in sin and live under the power of death."
Epideixis, 37
Notice that although Irenaeus asks the same question Cur Deus Homo? as Anselm would a millennium later, he gives a very different answer. Anselm's model drives a wedge between the Father and the Son so that the Son is simply an intermediary being between God and humanity, whereas Irenaeus crucially recognises that Christ is not a kind of third party between God and humanity but that God himself is in Christ as the Word become flesh and as such is the active subject in bringing about man's liberation from sin and evil.
For Irenaeus, Christ's work is a recapitulation. Man has fallen away from God and become corrupt and enslaved to the powers of death and evil and so in turn God becomes man and defeats the evil powers and so restores man back to his position of freedom and union with God. In the meantime, Christ's Spirit works in us to quicken us towards the perfection and freedom that are part of the victory Christ has won for us. This means of course that Irenaeus' theology is necessarily eschatological in its outlook.
2. Sin, Death, and the Devil
It may already be clear that Irenaeus' understanding of the human predicament and sin differs somewhat from what we are used to in the western tradition. Aulen says that Irenaeus is typical of Eastern theologians in that he places little emphasis on sin (p22), which is a little unfair in my view as it not so much a case that the Eastern tradition places less emphasis on sin but that it understands sin as part of a greater organic whole involving death and evil whereas the West (especially the Reformed tradition) has a tendency to view sin simply in legal or juristic terms, with death following as a kind of judicial consequence and salvation thus as a bestowal of forgiveness and a change of legal status rather than the impartation of life. Aulen illustrates this difference superbly with this quote from Orthodox theologian Stephen Zankow:
"Salvation from what? From sin or from death? Western theologians like to put this in contrast and claim that Orthodoxy put death in the foreground instead of sin. But this is scarcely true. Orthodoxy is quite inclined, it is true, to conceive of original sin as the first sin, and death as the reward of sins; yet, as has been said, empirically one is not separated from the other; where sin is, death is also, and vice versa ... To the Orthodox the question 'why salvation?' is very clear: in order to be free from sin and death, in order to break down the wall of partition between God and men, to enter into inner and complete communion with God, to be at one with him." (Aulen, 23)
So it is with Irenaeus who does not take a legal and moralistic view of sin, but sees sin as something organic, affecting the entire person both physically and spiritually. This does not diminish man's guilt before God however, because man wilfully and deliberately chooses to flee from the light of God. We were created to be his sons but through our disobedience we have disowned God and are now alienated from him. The only way back for man is through a reconciliation or atonement.
Irenaeus chiefly expresses death as a loss of immortality or having become corrupted, but at the same time death is much more than this. Disobedience to God is death in its very essence:
"Fellowship with God is light and life, and the fruition of thr good things that are with him. But on those who voluntarily rebel against God, He brings separation from Him, and separation form God is death."
(Against Heresies V 27:2)
Along with sin and death, Irenaeus also sees the Devil as being one of the powers from which God must deliver mankind. The Devil is essentially the Lord of sin and death, and as such is the Father and ruler of all rebellious human beings and fallen angels. Christ's victory over the devil comes because Christ is man, and so by restoring humanity back to fellowship with God mankind is delivered from under Satan's power.
3. The Atoning Work
As we have seen already, Irenaeus does not view Christ's work on the cross as an exclusive act of Atonement, but traces a continuous line from the incarnation, through Jesus' death and resurrection and on to his exaltation without breaking down Christ's life and work into separate theological parts. Indeed his particular emphasis on salvation as deliverance from death and the bestowal of life requires that the resurrection and ascension feature just as prominently as the cross.
The entire earthly life of Christ is seen as leading up to Christ's final climactic victory in two main ways. Firstly Christ reveals the Father in his preaching and ministry and opens up the way to the knowledge of God which will free us from slavery and corruption, and secondly Christ's obedience to God and his refusal to disobey Him and give in to Satan's tempations means that Satan's hold over disobedient humanity is finally broken as Christ subverts and finally overthrows Satan's rule: "by his obedience unto death the Word annulled the ancient disobedience committed at the tree."
In the climactic act of atonement at Calvary God is both active and passive in the work of reconciliation. He is active because he is the one stepping forth to defeat and overthrow the powers of evil, and at the same time he is passive as the removal of the power of sin and death and the reuniting of humanity with God mean that God himself is also reconciled. Here we see echoes of Pauline thought: "God was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself."
The cross marks the end of the old age of sin and death and in turn the Resurrection marks the beginning of the reign of Christ in the new age where the powers of sin, death and evil have been decisively crushed. The ascended Christ then sends forth his Spirit to renew humanity and to draw man and God into closer and closer union.
"The Lord, through his passion ascended up on high, led captivity captive, and gave gifts to men, and gave power to them that believe in Him to tread upon serpents and scorpions and upon all the power of the enemy - that is, the prince of the apostasy. The Lord through his passion destroyed death, brought error to an end, abolished corruption, banished ignorance, manifested life, declared truth, and bestowed incorruption."
Amen to that. The next part in this series will look at the rest of the church Fathers and also the first beginnings of the Latin model of atonement.