Basic HTML Version
370
2. This theory really has no place for the idea that Christ by suffering endured the penalty of sin,
and that His suffering was strictly vicarious. The death of Christ is merely a tribute offered
voluntarily to the honor of the Father. It constitutes a supererogatory merit, compensating for
the demerits of others; and this is really the Roman Catholic doctrine of penance applied to the
work of Christ.
3. The scheme is also one-sided and therefore insufficient in that it bases redemption
exclusively on the death of Christ, conceived as a material contribution to the honor of God,
and excludes the active obedience of Christ as a contributing factor to His atoning work. The
whole emphasis is on the death of Christ, and no justice is done to the redemptive significance
of His life.
4. In Anselm’s representation there is merely an external transfer of the merits of Christ to
man. It contains no indication of the way in which the work of Christ for man is communicated
to man. There is no hint of the mystical union of Christ and believers, nor of faith as accepting
the righteousness of Christ. Since the whole transaction appears to be rather commercial, the
theory is often called the commercial theory.
C. THE MORAL INFLUENCE THEORY.
This theory was first advocated by Abelard in opposition to Anselm, and since his day found
many ardent supporters. The fundamental idea is always the same, though it has assumed
different forms at the hands of such men as Young, Maurice, Bushnell, Stevens, David Smith,
and many others. The fundamental idea is that there is no principle of the divine nature which
necessarily calls for satisfaction on the part of the sinner; and that the death of Christ should
not be regarded as an expiation for sin. It was merely a manifestation of the love of God,
suffering in and with His sinful creatures, and taking upon Himself their woes and griefs. This
suffering did not serve to satisfy the divine justice, but to reveal the divine love, so as to soften
human hearts and to lead them to repentance. It assures sinners that there is no obstacle on
the part of God which would prevent Him from pardoning their sins. Not only can He do this
without receiving satisfaction, but He is even eager to do it. The only requirement is that
sinners come to Him with penitent hearts. The following objections may be urged against this
theory:
1. This theory is contrary to the plain teachings of Scripture, which represents the atoning work
of Christ as necessary, not primarily to reveal the love of God, but to satisfy His justice; regards
the sufferings and death of Christ as propitiatory and penal; and teaches that the sinner is not
susceptible to the moral influence of the sacrificial work of Christ until the righteousness of
Christ has become his own by faith.