Anselm's Theory of the Atonement and Its
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Asian Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities Vol. 5(2) May 2016 ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ANSELM’S THEORY OF THE ATONEMENT AND ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR SALVATION IN AFRICAN TRADITIONAL RELIGIONS Abraham O. Adebo Department of Religious Studies, University of Ibadan, NIGERIA. [email protected] ABSTRACT African theologians arose from its consultative forum held in Ibadan, Oyo State, Nigeria in 1965 with the decision validating extra-biblical revelation and the universality of grace, which in their view, authenticates the redemptive value of African traditional religions. Consequently, there have been clamors for the revitalization of the African traditional worship and sacrificial system among Africans. Such agitation has drawn many away from the church as they have come to embrace the traditional African system of worship. Indeed, proponents of African cultural revivalism have discredited the teachings of Christianity and have emphasized the adoption of African traditional worship system in lieu of Christianity. In their view, protagonists of African cultural and religious resurgence are out to liquidate Christianity. Without doubt, such teaching serves as a great challenge to the uniqueness of the Bible as the word of God as well as the lordship of Jesus Christ; thereby diminishing the purpose of the incarnation. Using theological and philosophical approaches, this work shows that Anselm’s satisfaction theory of the atonement provides one of the best approaches to explaining the essence of the kenosis of Christ and its uniqueness in effecting salvation for humankind. In the same vein, the uniqueness of the incarnation and the works that it accomplished indubitably makes Christ lord over all divinities as well as the final revelation of God to humanity and the ultimate sacrifice needed for the redemption of humankind. Keywords: Atonement, African theologians, cultural revivalism, lordship of Jesus, kenosis INTRODUCTION Saint Anselm of Canterbury was a medieval scholastic who contributed immensely to Christian thinking in the fields of theology and philosophy. The concern of this paper is to highlight the theological contributions of Anselm, particularly with regard to the doctrine of atonement and its implications for the concept of salvation in African traditional religions. Prior to the time of Anselm, the Church Fathers made various efforts to explain the concept of the atonement, but most of them were inadequate. The dominant view was that the death of Christ was a ransom, which was paid to Satan in order to effect the release of humankind from its bondage.i Most of these teachings were based on the understanding of the early iIrenaeus was one of the first thinkers of the patristic period who argued that the death of Christ was a ransom paid to Satan. Origen also believed that the death of Christ was a ransom paid to the devil. Rufinus of Aquileia in his „mouse-trap‟ theory also held a similar view. Augustine as influential as he was in the development of Western theology, did not have a significant contribution to the doctrine of the atonement. Augustine, like Rufinus and Origen believed that the death of Jesus was a ransom that was paid to Satan. His greatest contributions were elsewhere, particularly in the development of the Trinitarian doctrine for the church as exemplified in his De Trinitatis. This is not to say that other thinkers and apologists before Anselm did not Copyright © 2016 Leena and Luna International, Chikusei, Japan. ISSN: 2186-8492, ISSN: 2186-8484 Print 1 | P a g e (株) リナアンドルナインターナショナル, 筑西市,日本 www.ajssh. leena-luna.co.jp Asian Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities Vol. 5(2) May 2016 _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________ Church Fathers and Apologists‟ understanding of Scriptures at the time of their writing. In line with the above the paper is divided into five major sections as follows: a. Introduction; b. Definition of Atonement; c. An Overview of the doctrine of the atonement before Anselm; d. Anselm‟s contribution to the doctrine of the atonement; and e. Implications for Salvation in African traditional religions. Definition The New International Webster’s Concise Dictionary of the English Language defines atonement as follows: Satisfaction made, as for wrong or injury; The reconciliation between God and man effected by Christ‟s life, passion and death – reparation, amends, compensation. A synthesis of these definitions shows that the idea of atonement presupposes a situation of having done a wrong, which needs be corrected. The second definition orients one to a more theological understanding of this concept. It has to do with the work of Christ in bringing God and humankind together again after a period of separation. Both Morris (1991: 45) and Dillistone (1983: 50) agree that atonement suggests a situation of reconciliation after a prior estrangement between two parties. In its secondary meaning, (Morriis : 45) posits, “atonement” as denoting “the means, an act or a payment, through which harmony was restored.” The word occurs once in the King James Version of the new Testament in Romans 5:11, where the Greek word καταλαγή is translated as, bringing about friendship between humanity and God. The same word is translated reconciliation in 2 Corinthians 5: 18.In the Old Testament, the concept conveys the implication of removal of guilt and, at a point in time in Israel‟s history a day was set apart every year as the day of atonement known as “Yom Kippur” (Leviticus 23: 26ff). Elaborate ceremonies are performed on this day with the intention of expiating the sins of the people. Morris (1991: 45) captures this better when he said, Atonement is frequent only in Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers, but the basic idea is widespread. In the OT sin is dealt with by offering of sacrifice. Thus the burnt offering will be accepted to make atonement (Lev. 1:4), as also the sin offering and the guilt offering (Lev. 4: 20; 7: 7) and especially the sacrifices on the Day of Atonement (Lev. 16). In the NT the principle on which atonement was effected is that the sacrifice of animals cannot avail for sin (Heb. 10: 4), but has been replaced by the perfect sacrifice of Christ (Heb, 9: 26; 10: 5-10). It follows from the above that atonement could be said to be the means by which the wrong committed against God was corrected in order to restore the lost harmony between God and man. This was done through the death of Jesus Christ, which became the supreme sacrifice to broker this peace. This paper now examines views before Anselm on the atonement. An Overview of the Doctrine of the Atonement Before Anselm This section is devoted to a consideration of the doctrine of the atonement before Anselm. This becomes necessary so that it might give one a better understanding of how the early thinkers understood the atonement for a better appreciation of Anselm‟s thought. Prior to the argue for the penal substitutionary view, but it was not as clear as seen in Anselm. It was not until Anselm that a more satisfactory answer was provided for the reason of Christ‟s death. For details see Louis Berkhof (1975), The History of Christian Doctrines, Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, pp. 165-70; John Hannah (2001), Our Legacy: The History of Christian Doctrine, Colorado Springs: NavPress, p. 218. ISSN: 2186-8492, ISSN: 2186-8484 Print Leena and Luna International, Oyama, Japan. Copyright © 2016 www.ajssh.leena-luna.co.jp (株) リナアンドルナインターナショナル, 筑西市,日本 P a g e | 2 Asian Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities Vol. 5(2) May 2016 ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ time of Anselm in the medieval period, the Church Fathers had made several attempts to explain the reason for the incarnation of Christ. In their attempts to explicate this concept, however, they committed some errors that were susceptible to heresies. For the purpose of this work, three of the writings of the patristic are considered and they are Irenaeus of Lyons, Tertullian and Rufinus of Aquileia.ii Irenaeus of Lyons (c. 130 – c. 200) Irenaeus was one of the early church fathers to give a good explanation of the doctrine of the atonement and salvation. Aulen (1969: 17) noted that although he might not have been as erudite as Tertullian or as witty as Augustine, he could be said to be a formidable force in the development of the doctrine of