Christus Victor

[kenrapoza]

Greetings!

I've heard from several different sources that there is a significant theological affinity between the Lutherans and Eastern Orthodox. I find that quite puzzling for several reasons:

1.) Martin Luther considered justification to be the indispensible centerpiece of soteriology but the Eastern Orthodox don't really conceive of salvation in terms of justification and imputation, but rather in terms of theosis.

2.) The Lutheran emphasis on the distinction between law and gospel seems to be mostly absent in Eastern Orthodox thought.

3.) Other doctrines such as the atonement, the sacraments and ecclesiology seem to be irreconcilable between the two traditions.

But what I really wanted to ask you guys about was a specific aspect of this question. I've heard that the Christus Victor theory of atonement has been gaining significant popularity in Lutheran circles. I know that Aulen was a Lutheran, so in a sense I guess that makes sense. But it seems as though Christus Victor does not really fit with the Lutheran doctrine of justification. Is this theology popular in Lutheranism? If so, how does it mesh with the rest of Lutheran theology?

Thanks!

Ken

 

[kenrapoza]

Interesting...nobody wants to discuss this one?

 

[Aibrean]

Considering I've never heard of it...

This is what it is, courtesy of Wikipedia:

this is the theory that Adam and Eve made humanity subject to the Devil during the Fall, and that God, in order to redeem humanity, sent Christ as a "ransom" or "bait" so that the Devil, not knowing Christ couldn't die permanently, would kill him, and thus lose all right to humanity following the Resurrection.

http://www.bookofconcord.org/historical-19.php - Read that.

Lutherans hold to the satisfaction theory.

John Gerhard, a Lutheran theologian:

It was the infinite God that was offended by sin; and because sin is an offense, wrong, and crime against the infinite God, and, so to speak, is Deicide, it has an infinite evil, and deserves infinite punishment, and, therefore, required an infinite price of satisfaction, which Christ alone could have afforded."

Augsburg Confession

Son of God, did assume the human nature in 2] the womb of the blessed Virgin Mary, so that there are two natures, the divine and the human, inseparably enjoined in one Person, one Christ, true God and true man, who was born of the Virgin Mary, truly suffered, was crucified, dead, and 3] buried, that He might reconcile the Father unto us, and be a sacrifice, not only for original guilt, but also for all actual sins of men.

 

[RobsBabe]

I was trying to find out about that, myself. Never heard of "Christus Victor" -- what is your definition, exactly? Atonement is just a theory, in this view?

 

[mnphysicist]

Luther was all over the place on atonement. In some places CV, in others satisfaction, in others even PSA. EO is sort of a mix of ransom+CV if I remember correctly.

If Protoevangel is still around, he could shed much light on this.

 

[RobsBabe]

Luther was all over the place on atonement. In some places CV, in others satisfaction, in others even PSA. EO is sort of a mix of ransom+CV if I remember correctly.

If Protoevangel is still around, he could shed much light on this.

Could somebody tell me what page in the BoC I can find anything on CV and the atonement? And PSA?

I'm totally lost here and want to know.

:o

 

[kenrapoza]

Considering I've never heard of it...

This is what it is, courtesy of Wikipedia:
Book of Concord - Read that.

Lutherans hold to the satisfaction theory.

John Gerhard, a Lutheran theologian:


Augsburg Confession

Thank you for your help, was the wiki quote from an article on Christus Victor? From what I can tell historically, it is related to the Ransom theory of atonement from the early church, but the name is from Gustaf Aulen's book Christus Victor. In other words, the purpose of Christ's incarnation and suffering was to triumph over sin, death, and Satan in a devastating and victorious way, but he didn't take our place in a specific way in the sense of Penal Substitution. God's love triumphs over Hell's evil.

Is the Ransom view codified in the Lutheran Confessions? The link from the Book of Concord describes Christ's victorious entrance into Hell, which is an interesting historical study in and of itself

 

[kenrapoza]

I was trying to find out about that, myself. Never heard of "Christus Victor" -- what is your definition, exactly? Atonement is just a theory, in this view?

Hi there!

Christus Victor is the title of a book by Gustaf Aulen, a Swedish bishop in the earlier half of the 20th century. In it he argues that the atonment is about Christ liberating humanity from the bondage of sin, death and Satan and rescuing us from destruction. In this view, the Cross of Christ isn't seen necessarily as the place where Jesus took our place and bore our sin in a specific way, but it was where we most clearly see the lengths to which God was willing to go in order to rescue humanity from our condition.

It has some affinities with Eastern Orthdox theology and even liberal Protestant theologies.

 

[kenrapoza]

Luther was all over the place on atonement. In some places CV, in others satisfaction, in others even PSA. EO is sort of a mix of ransom+CV if I remember correctly.

If Protoevangel is still around, he could shed much light on this.

Interesting, I didn't realize that Luther didn't clearly hold to a specific view. Do you know in what writings he discusses the issue?

 

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

Considering I've never heard of it...

This is what it is, courtesy of Wikipedia:
Book of Concord - Read that.

Lutherans hold to the satisfaction theory.

Oh dear me. I hate to point this out, but this is woefully incorrect.

The satisfaction theory is the theory of St. Anselm of Canterbury.

I believe you mean 'substitution' theory. That is the theory of Luther and Calvin.

Thought I might also note that many Lutherans, including Luther himself (and me) also believe in Christus Victor.

I haven't the time to post tonight, but I'll write a full reply to this thread tomorrow evening.

Cheers!

 

[Aibrean]

Oops...Well I at least have the right sources on whatever the right one is called.

 

[kenrapoza]

Oh dear me. I hate to point this out, but this is woefully incorrect.

The satisfaction theory is the theory of St. Anselm of Canterbury.

I believe you mean 'substitution' theory. That is the theory of Luther and Calvin.

Thought I might also note that many Lutherans, including Luther himself (and me) also believe in Christus Victor.

I haven't the time to post tonight, but I'll write a full reply to this thread tomorrow evening.

Cheers!

Okay this makes sense, my prior understanding was that Luther held to the Penal Subsitution view of atonement. What you describe as holding to both positions sounds like what I hold to as well. There is certainly a Christus Victor aspect to the atonement, but Christ was our substitute paying for our sins. I look forward to your full reply!

 

[DaRev]

Okay this makes sense, my prior understanding was that Luther held to the Penal Subsitution view of atonement. What you describe as holding to both positions sounds like what I hold to as well. There is certainly a Christus Victor aspect to the atonement, but Christ was our substitute paying for our sins. I look forward to your full reply!

It's not an "either or" but a "both and".

 

[doulos_tou_kuriou]

Oh dear me. I hate to point this out, but this is woefully incorrect.

The satisfaction theory is the theory of St. Anselm of Canterbury.

I believe you mean 'substitution' theory. That is the theory of Luther and Calvin.

Thought I might also note that many Lutherans, including Luther himself (and me) also believe in Christus Victor.

I haven't the time to post tonight, but I'll write a full reply to this thread tomorrow evening.

Cheers!

Calvin has actually been heavily associated with the satisfaction theory of atonement, and is often credited with its prominence in much of protestantism.
Anselm may have been the one who it is often attributed to but satisfaction theory of atonement is scattered throughout the early western church.

I would call Christus Victor a ransom theory, not substitutionary. Technically I think substitutionary is any concept of vicarious atonement (such as the OT Day of Atonement).

I'm not sure one would say Lutherans and Luther only held to one atonement theory, since there is probably enough evidence to suggest several, but I think Christus Victor is an appropriately Lutheran view.

I think one could argue that the catechism on the second article of the creed suggests support for Christus Victor.

Pax

 

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

Calvin has actually been heavily associated with the satisfaction theory of atonement, and is often credited with its prominence in much of protestantism.
Anselm may have been the one who it is often attributed to but satisfaction theory of atonement is scattered throughout the early western church.

I would call Christus Victor a ransom theory, not substitutionary. Technically I think substitutionary is any concept of vicarious atonement (such as the OT Day of Atonement).

I'm not sure one would say Lutherans and Luther only held to one atonement theory, since there is probably enough evidence to suggest several, but I think Christus Victor is an appropriately Lutheran view.

I think one could argue that the catechism on the second article of the creed suggests support for Christus Victor.

Pax

Ransom theory is a subcategory of Christus Victor, not the other way around. Christus Victor is a general view of atonement as a battle ending in victory, a biblical motif, if you will, that has two sub-theories attached to it: the Adamic recapitulation theory of St. Irenaeus of Lyon (the one Aulen held to and believed Luther held to, and the one I hold to), and the ransom theory of St. Justin Martyr.