Atonement As Reunion: the Atonement and the Beatific Vision
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Atonement as Reunion: The Atonement and the Beatific Vision David Andrew Worsley PhD University of York Philosophy August 2017 Abstract There is no doctrine more central to Christianity than the doctrine of the Atonement. However, there is also no doctrine more contested. I claim that these disputations stem from a failure to attend to what the Atonement is supposed to achieve, namely, maximal union with God at the beatific vision. I therefore argue that understanding the Christian doctrine of the beatific vision is key to understanding the nature of the Christian doctrine of the Atonement. I start by analysing the connection between union with God and the Doctrine of the Beatific Vision. On one recent model of union, Eleonore Stump’s, maximal union requires full knowledge of the other. At the beatific vision, it is supposed that we come to know God as God knows us, thereby meeting this criterion for union. I then explore an account of the problem the doctrine of the Atonement is supposed to resolve, namely, the problem of ‘willed loneliness’, where willed loneliness includes (1) the reflexive inability to share attention with the other, and (2) the sort of psychological fragmentation that makes it difficult or impossible to be fully known by someone else, where (1) and (2) are inimical to beholding the beatific vision. I use recent work in ethics to provide a plausible solution to this general problem of willed loneliness; however, I suggest the Christian doctrine of the Atonement must explain a particularly intractable case of willed loneliness, and therefore that this general framework is, by itself, explanatorily insufficient. I conclude by demonstrating one way the work of Christ might fit into this framework, and how one might avail of this work. I argue that maximal union with God can be achieved through a certain kind of union with Christ, and I outline one candidate for such union. 2 Table of Contents Abstract 2 Contents 3 Acknowledgements 5 Author’s Declaration 6 Introduction: Analytic Theology: A Methodology 8 Analytic Theology: A Brief History 9 What is Analytic Theology? 11 Analytic Theology and Divine Revelation 18 Narrative and Methodology 27 Chapter 1: Union with God and the Beatific Vision 30 Augustine on the Distinction between Use and Enjoy 33 Aquinas on Peace and the Will 44 Love and Real Union 60 Freely Willed Union and Grace 67 Divine Ineffability and the Beatific Vision 69 The Requirements for Union with God 86 Chapter 2: Separation: God and Humanity 88 Psychological Fragmentation and Sin: Primal and Original 89 Shame, Guilt, and ‘Willed Loneliness’ 100 The Doctrine of Hell 108 Resurrection and the Beatific Vision 128 Chapter 3: A Framework for Atonement 135 Grace and the Will of Justification 136 3 Suffering and Sanctification 143 A Framework for Dealing with Shame 155 A Framework for Dealing with Guilt 161 The Question of Forgiveness 164 Chapter 4: Atonement and Transaction 168 Divine Data: Ecumenical Tradition and Divine Revelation 169 Transaction: God to Some Third Party 175 Transaction: God to God 178 Transaction: God to Humanity 183 Transaction: Humanity to God 184 Non-Transaction and Union 188 Chapter 5: The Christian Doctrine of the Atonement 191 Grace and the Sufferings of Christ 192 Atonement and Shame 195 Atonement and Guilt 200 Atonement and Forgiveness 207 The Christian Doctrine of the Atonement 208 Conclusion 211 Abbreviations 213 Bibliography 214 4 Acknowledgements I dedicate this thesis to my wife, Laura. Whilst words cannot do justice to what we have been through together, you have been throughout a constant source of unparalleled support, encouragement, and inspiration. You are wonderful! I would also like thank my family, particularly my father, for his infectious enthusiasm for both philosophy and theology. No doubt I would have taken a different path had it not been for his influence. I would also like to thank members of the St Benedict’s Society for the Philosophy of Religion and Philosophical Theology at the University of York for their help proof reading many of my ill- thought through papers over the course of my time at York. In particular, I would like to thank Joshua Cockayne, who has been a valued friend and colleague. Finally, I owe an incalculable debt to my supervisor, David Efird. His selfless support and tireless encouragement have been both fundamentally formative and thoroughly exemplary. 5 Author’s Declaration I declare that this thesis is a presentation of original work and I am the sole author. This work has not previously been presented for an award at this, or any other, University. All sources are acknowledged as References. Some of the material in this thesis has previously been presented in different formats. I list the relevant sources here: Introduction: Some of the material in this chapter is shared with the paper Worsley, D., (2017) ‘Experiencing the Word of God: Reading as Wrestling’ forthcoming in TheoLogica. Chapter 1: Some of the material in this chapter is shared with the paper Worsley, D., (2016) ‘Could there be Suffering in Paradise? On the Primal Sin, the Beatific Vision, and Suffering in Paradise’ published in The Journal of Analytic Theology 4: 87-105 and also with the paper Worsley, D., ‘Augustine on Beatific Enjoyment’ forthcoming in the Heythrop Journal. Some material is also shared with two papers co-authored with David Efird, ‘Divine Action and Operative Grace’ forthcoming in The Heythrop Journal and ‘What Can an Apophaticist Know?: Divine Ineffability and the Beatific Vision’ forthcoming in Philosophy and Theology. I can confirm that the material taken from those papers and presented in this thesis is my own work. Chapter 2: Some of the material in this chapter is shared with the paper Worsley, D., (2016) ‘Could there be Suffering in Paradise? On the Primal Sin, the Beatific Vision, and Suffering in Paradise’ published in The Journal of Analytic Theology 4: 87-105 and also with the manuscript Worsley, D., ‘(Affective) Union in Hell’. Chapter 3: Some of the material in this chapter is shared with the papers Efird, D. and Worsley D ‘Divine Action and Operative Grace’ forthcoming in The Heythrop Journal and Efird, D. and Worsley, D. (2015) ‘A Critical Review of Eleonore Stump’s 6 Wandering in Darkness: Narrative and the Problem of Suffering’ in The Philosophical Quarterly. I can confirm that the material taken from this paper and presented in this thesis is my own work. Chapter 4: Some of the material in this chapter is shared the manuscript Worsley, D., ‘Is Christian Perfection Possible? On the Problem of Suffering and the Completion of Sanctification’. 7 Introduction Analytic Theology: A Methodology There is no doctrine more central to Christianity than the doctrine of the Atonement.1 However, there is also no doctrine more contested.2 For, whilst church councils have been relatively clear on what the Atonement generally secures, namely, the Christian’s salvation, they have been decidedly unclear on either what such salvation looks like, or how the Atonement secures it. Trying to resolve this long-established problem by motivating a further underexplored model seems, on the face of it, doomed to fail. Nevertheless, there are two reasons why, despite this, this project has continued. First, I am convinced that there is more to be said, philosophically, about the thing the Atonement is supposed to secure, namely, a person’s union with God at the beatific vision, and I believe that reflection on the beatific vision can provide an underexplored angle at which to view the Atonement. Second, I am convinced recent philosophical work on the nature of Atonement in general, that is, the everyday making of amends we all engage in, can be fruitfully brought into dialogue with the lineaments of the Christian doctrine, such as they are. Therefore, in addition to work on the nature of the beatific vision, I also intend to employ recent philosophical work in ethics to explore what I will call a reunion account of the Atonement. Before I begin either task, however, it is important to note that the Christian doctrine of the Atonement is motivated by and derived from revealed theology, rather than from natural theology. That is to say, without reference to purported divine revelation, it is not at all apparent that the Atonement is either necessary, or 1 Atonement could refer to either the Christian doctrine, that is, to the specific work of Christ, or to the general making of amends between persons. Throughout this thesis I will use ‘the Atonement’ or ‘Atonement’ (with the ‘A’ capitalised) to refer the specific work of Christ, as laid out in the Christian doctrine of the Atonement, and the lower case ‘atonement’ to refer to the general making of amends. 2 Richard Cross, for instance, notes that ‘[f]inding a theory to explain how Christ's life, death, and resurrection can bring about human redemption has long been one of the more intractable tasks faced by the theologian.’ (Cross, 2001: 397) 8 that it is somehow secured through the work of Christ, whatever that work might be. Given this, it is necessary that the revelation that motivates it, that is, the various passages of Christian scripture that refer to the doctrine, be critically engaged with. Thus, scriptural coherence, alongside ethical and logical coherence, will form the desiderata for any successful account of the Christian doctrine of Atonement. Whilst I shall later address relevant scriptural desiderata, in this introductory section I will explore one recent methodology for laying out how a philosopher might reasonably engage with scripture, namely, the methodology present in what has become known as ‘analytic theology’. Analytic Theology: A Brief History Attempts to integrate philosophy and (revealed) theology are not new.