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.
(This is one of my favorite
posts on this book. Hope you enjoy it.)
For TF Torrance, our
salvation is definitive. It is an
objective reality. Nothing remains to be done. (“It is finished.”). What the
future awaits is the full manifestation of that reality. While the word
“apocalypse” has a negative connotation today, notes Radcliff, for Torrance, it
is positive, for it is associated
with the final “unveiling” of God’s redemptive purpose. According to Torrance:
Apocalypse is the unveiling to faith of the new creation as
yet hidden from our eyes behind the ugly shapes of sinful history, but a new
creation already consummated and waiting for eschatological unfolding or
fulfillment in the advent presence of Christ.
Thus, notes Radcliff, TF
is less concerned with “last things” than the significance of the resurrection
for the present.
For Torrance, the Church
is the “new humanity within the world, the provisional manifestation of the new
creation within the old.” In the Church, we get glimpses of the glory of the
new creation (even if the glimpses are often dim). Thus, we need a greater
appreciation of the significance of the resurrection for the present. For example, the Reformers said
that the believer is “at the same time both righteous and a sinner” (Latin: simul justus et peccator). For Torrance,
justus is our primary reality, for we are “made right” in the incarnation of
Jesus. If we focus on peccator (sinner),
as seems to be the case in much preaching, then we are in danger of undermining
the transformative power of the resurrection here and now. Until the parousia, we remain peccator (sinner), but that is a secondary reality; it is not
an ontological reality. Our ontological reality is primary; we are justus; we
are “made right” in Jesus here and now,
although our “right-ness” is largely hidden
until the parousia. To assert
“sinfulness” as our primary reality is to discount the ontological healing
accomplished for all humanity in the incarnation. In short, to know who we are,
we should not look at Adam; we should look at Jesus. (So say I. I think
Radcliff would agree.)
OK. Now get this from
Radcliff: “The significance of Christ’s resurrected humanity is also maligned
when Paul’s description of struggling with sin in Romans 7:14-25 is interpreted
as normative Christian experience,” for
it does not adequately reflect Christ’s transformative power. Wow! I need to
chew on that for a while! Many view this passage as Paul articulating his
present experience as a Christian. However, this interpretation is disputed by
those who think Paul is either talking about his pre-Christian experience or life
under the law (I think NT Wright fits with the latter. In fact, Wright thinks
that Paul is actually talking about Israel’s
experience under the Law).
So, the question is whether
Paul is describing normative
Christian experience. If so, he is in league with the Puritans, who describe
the sanctified life as a hard-fought war or bruising experience (bring out the
hair shirts and whips!). Radcliff argues that Paul’s description is not the normative Christian experience,
for this is not how believers are intended to live. Romans 7 should be
contrasted with Romans 8, which shows that the alternative to life under the
law (Rom 7) is life in the Spirit (Rom 8). For Barth, the heart of Paul’s
argument is that we have been liberated from sin. The struggle of Romans 7 is a
description of our past situation,
not our present reality in Jesus. As Radcliff astutely notes, the focus on the
struggle of Romans 7 as normative may arise from external views of the
atonement that fail to account for humanity’s transformation in the vicarious
humanity of Jesus. In external views of the atonement, we are merely “declared”
to be in the right, as the righteousness of Jesus is “imputed” to us. Our
ontological reality remains that of sinner, so that we must strive for
holiness. In the Torrances’ ontological view of atonement, however, we are in
reality made right in Jesus. Rather
than striving for holiness, we are liberated to participate by the Spirit in
the holiness and right-ness of Jesus.
NOTE: Radcliff offers much more exegesis than I am allowing
here. I am simply providing a summary of her comments on Romans 7.
Jesus’ death on the cross
marks the death of sinful Adamic humanity. Adam died on the cross with Jesus. We
are no longer “under Adam”; we (everyone!) is “in Jesus.” If we fail to recognize
this, we are thrown back upon ourselves to struggle with sin. In regard to
believers, to think of the Church as a company of justified “sinners” is to
discount the ontological reality of our transformation in Jesus and to make
sanctification a remote possibility that we must strive to achieve. “According
to the Torrances understanding of salvation,” notes Radcliff, “humanity is
ontologically transformed through the vicarious humanity of Christ. Christ
became incarnate to be an example of
us, not just for us. [Great line!]
This means that humanity is truly holy and we are liberated to grow into that
reality as we participate in Christ by the Spirit.” Thus, it is better to
describe the believer as a “saint who sins” than a “sinner who is forgiven,”
for our primary ontological reality (though hidden until the parousia) is “saint,” not “sinner.” In a
sermon, T.F. Torrance affirmed the congregation’s identity in Jesus:
Don’t you see, in God’s sight, you are already secluded in
the heart of Jesus Christ, you are already a new creature though to all outward
appearances you may be far from it, you are already a saint though you know
yourself to be a sinner. That is the glorious paradox of the Gospel.
Again, from Karl Barth:
We who were once children of wrath … are saints. We are holy
… This is no time for false modesty … Hold your head high! You have dignity.
You have worth … you have been redeemed in the blood of His Son and sanctified
by the power of His Spirit through Word and Sacrament.
Even Luther says that each of us is just as much a saint as
St. Peter himself and “accursed” be the one who does not call himself a saint
and glory in it! To fail to do so is to slander Christ and baptism. Both Barth
and Luther assert that there is no arrogance in such claims, for our boast is
not in ourselves but in Jesus. As Radcliff assets, “It is a false humility to
make sinfulness our primary identity because it is a rejection of what God has
done for us in Christ.” To be sure, our holiness is not of our own achievement
but, rather, is a participation in
the holiness of Jesus.
Comment: Again, we find implications for pastoral counseling,
since many Christians have been taught to view themselves as “miserable sinners,”
who must approach the throne of grace hat-in-hand. For those whose self-worth
is already in the gutter, the news that our primary reality is that of saint might just bring some much-needed
relief. So saith Saint Martin!
Radcliff concludes the
section with a comparison of the uplifting view of humanity in the Torrance
tradition with that of neo-Puritanism. J.I. Packer, for example, calls for “a
progress into personal smallness that allows the greatness of Christ’s grace to
appear.” As I see it, Packer is playing a zero-sum game. The smaller we get,
the bigger Christ becomes. As Radcliff notes, believers are often unaware of
our identity because of the misunderstanding that we must abase ourselves to
glorify God. She argues that Packer has no concept of humility and dependence
upon God’s grace that does not involve shame and debasement. (She is really
onto something here!) In contrast, the Torrances affirm both the reality of our
ontological identity in Jesus and our dependence upon grace.
Comment: One more comment on pastoral counseling. People who
are hurting because they are ridden with shame, guilt and self-contempt do not
need to be told to make themselves small. The world has already helped them do
that. They need to hear that they are new creations in Christ, that they are
saints, that they are the beloved children of the Father, that they no longer
stand as sinners in the Father’s eyes …. That comes from someone who worked as
a therapist in a megachurch for ten years: me!
Till next time, amigos!
***
For more on the ontological transformation of our humanity in
Jesus, go here
.
No comments:
Post a Comment