Reference
Radcliff, A.S. 2016. The Claim of Humanity in Christ: Salvation
and Sanctification in the Theology of T.F. and J.B. Torrance. (Princeton
Theological Monograph Series 222), Eugene, OR: Pickwick. 208 pp.
Christ our Righteousness
In order to clarify how
Christ’s entire life (not only his death), is of atoning significance, the
Torrances draw on the traditional Reformed distinction between Christ’s active and passive obedience.
(from a previous work of mine) “The active obedience
of the incarnate Son refers to the positive fulfilment in the whole life of
Jesus, who, from beginning to end, lived a life of perfect filial obedience to
the Father, perfectly fulfilling God’s will in our name and laying hold of the
Father’s love on our behalf. The passive obedience of Jesus Christ refers to
his willing submission to the judgement of the Father upon our sin, especially
as manifested in his expiation of our sins upon the cross. Christ’s passive
obedience, however, cannot be limited to the cross, for his passion began at
his birth, so that his entire life was a bearing of the cross. Torrance follows
Calvin in asserting that as soon as Christ put on the form of a servant (cf.
Phil 2:7), he began to pay the price of liberation for our salvation.”
The notion that Jesus’ entire life is a filial, not legal,
response to the Father’s will brings the Torrances into contention with legalistic
views of atonement. For evangelicals, especially conservative Calvinists,
Christ’s obedience fulfills the legal requirements of the Law. Consequently,
Christ’s righteousness, legally defined, is “imputed” to the believer upon a personal confession of faith. In this view, we are declared righteous,
not made righteous. Opponents refer
to this as a “legal fiction,” for there is no ontological change in our being.
For the Torrances, Jesus’
filial obedience is not legal but ontological
and transformative. Throughout the
whole course of his obedient life, Jesus brings his purity and holiness to bear
upon the sinful, Adamic humanity assumed in the incarnation, in order to
cleanse it of the stain of original sin and heal its corruption and disease,
while bending the rebellious human will back to the Father. Thus, in Jesus, we
are not merely “declared”’ righteous; we are made righteous. In my understanding, this means that all humanity is “made righteous” in
Jesus. (In my experience, this has a joyous, happy effect on evangelism. Trust
me, this will preach!)
Comment: Obviously, many of us, including me and a
few of you readers I know, don’t look particularly righteous. Nevertheless, we
are truly “made” righteous in Jesus. While our righteousness is absolutely real—and
is no mere legal fiction—it is hidden
with God in Christ, waiting to be unveiled at the parousia. [This is one reason I like the New Living Translation.
Instead of the word “justified,” it uses the phrase “made right.” For example,
“So we are made right with God
through faith and not by obeying the law” (Romans 3:28)]
I think it is pastorally important to teach that Jesus
has fulfilled the Law on our behalf and made
us righteous, even if it is hidden for now. As Radcliff notes, “If Jesus fulfillment
of the law is denied, it is this which can lead to legalism because we are
turned back upon ourselves to achieve it for ourselves.” On the other hand, knowing
that we are “made right” in Jesus takes the load of the toad! rribet!!
In Christ
Radcliff notes that the
language of “imputation” is deficient. “Imputation” is an abstract declaration
that is detached from the person of Christ. For Paul, redemption is personal, not merely legal. We are
justified by the redemption that is “in Jesus.” Jesus “is” our righteousness,
etc. As Radcliff notes, “We receive righteousness not through an external
imputation of the benefits of Christ but through a personal participation in
Christ’s very self” (p. 69). (This sentence would have been better if she had
said we are “made righteous” rather than we “receive righteousness.”) For
Radcliff, salvation is not an external transaction but a person in whom we participate. Jesus is the “content” of our
salvation. As TFT argues, Christ does not give us “benefits”; he give us himself. Grace is the “impartation” of God himself.
Ontological
The reason all this matters
is that the Torrance tradition stands in contrast to both Protestant and Roman
Catholic ideas of justification. As we have seen, Protestants assert a legal
view of justification, where Christ’s righteousness, understood in terms of
obedience to the Law, is imputed to us. Again, we are “declared” righteous, not
“made” righteous. In Roman Catholicism, justification is transformative but it
involves a process of moral effort, wherein righteousness is infused through
baptism and penance. As the Torrances often note, however, this throws us back
upon our own efforts (penance).
For the Torrances,
justification is an empty idea unless it is understood in terms of a transformative, ontological union.
Justification is transformative because humanity participates in Jesus via the
hypostatic union (“the Word became flesh…”) and is lifted up to the Father in
the resurrection/ascension. For the Torrances, to make justification a merely
declatory change in status is to bypass the resurrection! Thus, in the Torrance
tradition, justification is an actualization
of what is declared. When Jesus said to the paralyzed man, “Your sins are
forgiven,” the man really was
forgiven, as the healing made clear.
In summary, for the
Torrances, justification is fully accomplished via the hypostatic union,
wherein our humanity is taken up in Jesus and lifted to heaven in the resurrection.
In Jesus, we are not merely declared righteous, we are really made righteous.
Against Catholicism, our justification is not the infusion of righteousness by
a lifelong process of moral effort but an accomplished fact in Jesus.
Comment: Notice that at this point we are not saying
much about the Holy Spirit. Torrance’s theology is “radically Christocentric.”
Some argue, I think incorrectly, that Torrance does not pay enough attention to
the role of the Spirit in salvation. (I used to think that myself, but
Radcliff’s book has helped me to see the light!) So, hold your horses, brothers
and sisters. The Spirit’s ‘a comin! The role of the Spirit will occupy much of
the remainder of Radcliff’s book, beginning next post I think…
***
For more on Torrance's doctrine of justification, see my post here.
***
For more on Torrance's doctrine of justification, see my post here.
No comments:
Post a Comment