The Dœtrine of Atondieni' in the Theology of Paul Tillich
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
THE DŒTRINE OF ATONDIENI' IN THE THEOLOGY OF PAUL TILLICH Art.hington Frank Thompson, B.A., B.Th. A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Researeh in partial .f'ul.filment of the requirements for the degree of Mast er of Sa.cred Theology. Depa.rtment of Divinity, McGill UniversitT, Montreal. April, 1960. ii The author of this thesis wishes to express his gratitude to Dr. James S. Thomson of the Faculty of Divinity, McGill University for his patient direction of a sometimes hazardous enterprise. Mention should be made too of the author' s indebtedness to Dr. William R. Coleman, of Huron College, London, Ontario, through whom he was first intro duced to the writings of Paul Tillich. iii TABIE OF CONI'ENrS Page INI'RODUCTION 1 I. A SYSTEMATIC APOIDGETIC THEOLOGY 5 An Apologetic Theology 6 The Method of Correlation 13 Tillich t s Ontolo~ am The Problem of The ystem 20 II. THE HUMAN Sri'UATION 32 Existentialism and Atonement. 33 PhilosoJfly and The Fall 39 Estrangement 45 Evil 52 III. THE DOCTRINE OF GOD AND THE DOCTRINE OF ATONEMENT 59 God as 1Being-Itself' 60 Images and Atonement 69 God and The Processes of Atonement 74 IV. THE DOCTRINE OF ATOrmŒ:m' The New Being S5 Atonement in Christ 94 Atonement as The Act of God 100 Atonement in The Cross and The Reasurrection 106 Atonement in History llO COJ.CWSION ll7 BIBLIOGRAPHY INI'RODUCTION The doctrine of atonement attempts to elaborate the statement of the Creed that it was "for us men and for our salvation" that Jesus Christ was born, lived, died and rose again. It has tried to show how these facts are central for the establishment of a new community between God and man. The fact that this doctrine has never been defined as dogma may derive pa.rtly from uncertainty about the use of language; but most certai~ it derives from the fact that what is here spoken of is the mystery of an •act of God 1 • Atonement bas been made and is established from beyond the human world. The resulta of atonement can not be set out finally and concretely within the huma.n world: atonement is the dominion of man brought into the Kingdam of God. Opinions have varied as to the extent of the area of theology which may be brought within the scope of the consideration of the atonement. Among modern writers, Hodgson has pointed out that the word •atonement 1 may stand for the whole message of the Church, or, more narrowly, for "theories attempting to explain the precise nature of what was effected 1 by God in and through the earthly ministry of Christ." Taylor, similarly, is concerned precisely with 'the atonement ', but his analysis of what the term implies spreads rapidl.y to constitute, finally, a 2 summary of the faith of the Church. But this is inevitable, since 1. Leonard Hodgson, The Doctrine of The Atonement, (London, Nisbet and Co., 1951), p. 13. 2. Vincent Taylor, The Atonement in New Testament Teaching, (London, The Epworth Press, 1940). See, for example, the number of ideas which the primitive Church associated with •the atonement 1 • pp. 72, 73. - 2- the pa.rticular events in which the Church has recognized atonement are understood in the light of the history of the discovery of God's gracious purpose to covenant with man. Tillich's presentation of the doctrinenof atonement follows the lines here suggested in that he s~s that atonement takes place, in sorne sense, in Jesus Christ. He too finds the rest of Christian theology nec- essacy for sorne ldnd of adequate explanation of how this is so. But there is one other element of importance in Tillich's presentation. All biblical theories of atonement have insisted, implicitl7 or explicitl7, that atone- ment has meaning for ali of history. This is perhaps a rudimenta.ry con- sciousness, a.t beat, in parts of the Old Testament. But it is there none theles s. For Christians, since the first days of the Church, it is clear that what has been accanplished in Jesus, the Christ, has meaning for ali mankind. Tillich rejoices in the task of attempting to show how this is so: that the doctrine of atonement has wide, even universal, implications. The way in which he attempts to carry out his task is affected by very many considerations. There is first of ali the fact., implied in what is said above, that Tillich claims to be a theologian of the Church, a.nd to be irrterpreting 1 the faith of the Church. BUt there are a number of reasons why he reels that it is not enough for him merely to e.x:pound what he has received as tradition. The problem is that of making the Christian message intelligible to 1. Paul Tillich, Systematic Theology, I, (Chicago, The University of Chicago Press, 1951), 3. - 3- 1 •the modern mind'. Tillich is conscious of the difficulty of making Christian doctrine intelligible in a culture which has ceased to depend ver.y much on the Christian message for its meaning and purpoee. The problem is perhaps even greater: it is the tendency to reject aey explanation of life in 1religious' terms in favour of a materialistic view of life which simply does not ask certain questions. Such a material istic view of life is frequently motivated by the desire to face and to deal with the concrete problems of man's historical existence. Here Tillich is concerned to show that the atonement has meaning and promise for man in the tensions of man's historical existence; it has significance for man not merely as a 1religious 1 experience, but as an experience determining his whole destiey. Then there is the problem of the relation of Christian 'solutions' to those proposed by other religions. Tillich is conscious of having to solve this problem, a.nd, in attempting to do so, he is conscious of havi:ng to fight against a kind of 'Christian parochialism 1 vis-a-vis other religions which consista in proclaiming that there is no salva.tion outside of a particular doctrine or a particular kind of religioue experience. As against such a point of view Tillich is amcious to admit some ~lidity in the religious experience of men of different 1religious backgrounds'. One important consideration bearing on his marmer of going about his task is the extraordinary comprehensiveness of his mind. He has been influenced to sorne extent by almost ever.y important think:er in the 1. Ibid.' p. 8. - 4- history of the l'lest. This is Tillich 's strength and greatness: he has remoulded the classical thought fonns of western 'christendom'. But because this is so it is also true that there are many influences on his thought, some of which may have bad considerable importance in shaping his presentation of the doctrine of atonement. This thesis, then, aima to set forth Tillich' s statement of the doctrine of atonement as this is presented by him in the context of his system. It will attempt to expose sorne of the influences which demand and shape this statement. And, fina.lly, it will attempt to judge the adequacy of his statement in the light of the central character of 1 the New Testament experience, which Taylor describes as reconciliation- The structure of this thesis takes into account the necessity of giving seme prior consideration to the nature of Tillich 's thought, and to the aim and method of his theology. After this is accomplished in the first section, subsequent sections will consider in turn the 'human situation' in relation to which the need for atonement is understood, the doctrine of God in relation to the doctrine of atonement, a.nd, finally, Tillich 1s statement of the doctrine of a.tonement. 1. Vincent Taylor, The Cross of Christ, (London, Macmillan and Co., Ltd., 1956), p. SS. I A SYSTF>fATIC APOWGEI'IC THEOLOGr - 6 - An Apologetic Theologr Theology finds its foundation in the life of the Christian Church, for Tillich, to the extent that it may be described as 11the methodical 1 interpretation of the contents of the Christian faith." How ie 2 1apologr 1 related to this 'interpretation'? The aim of an apologetic theology is communication. For Tillich, .3 apologetics is not the construction of defensive rationalizations. Rather it is an inescapable part of the theological task, and is "an 4 omnipresent element and not a special section of systema.tic theology." There is an imperative which issues from the nature of revelation itself, in Tillich's view; the demand for theologr as an apologetic endeavour is derived from the fact that. revelation is -for human knowledge. Theology.is, by its own nature, an apologetic endeavour; it is logos of theos. This is true, s~s Tillich, in all religions, but especiallr in Christ- ianity where the claim is made that the logos has been manifested. 1. Tillich, op. cit., p. 15. 2. Alan Richardson, Christian Apologetics, (London, S.C.M. Press Ltd., 1947) defines apologetics, distinguishing it from the task of 1apology 1 • 11 Apologetics deals with the rela.tionship of the Christian faith to the wider sphere of man's 1secular' knowledge - philosophy, science, history, sociology, and so on - with a view to showing that faith is not at variance with the truth that these enquiries have un covered. In every age it is necessary that this task should be under taken; • • • apologetics as a theological discipline is a kind of intellectual stock-taking on the part of Christian thinkers • • • apologetics is primarily a study undertaken by Christiane for Christ ians • • • a necessary preparation for the work of an apologist." pp.