J
jcrichton
Guest
Hi, Eric!Jesus obedience to his Father’s Will was sufficient, even though both Father and Son both know that adherence to the course of action will result in suffering and death of Jesus at the hands of man. Adam’s disobedience was satisfied by Jesus obedience. Catechism 411 The Christian tradition sees in this passage an announcement of the “New Adam” who, because he “became obedient unto death, even death on a cross”, makes amends superabundantly for the disobedience, of Adam. Where does Scripture says Jesus death’s was to appease God’s wrath? I think the Father has been unfairly scapegoated for the evils of man.
Our Catechism says these :
597 All sinners were the authors of Christ’s Passion
598 In her Magisterial teaching of the faith and in the witness of her saints, the Church has never forgotten that “sinners were the authors and the ministers of all the sufferings that the divine Redeemer endured.”
599 Jesus’ violent death was not the result of chance in an unfortunate coincidence of circumstances, but is part of the mystery of God’s plan, as St. Peter explains to the Jews of Jerusalem in his first sermon on Pentecost: "This Jesus (was) delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God."This Biblical language does not mean that those who handed him over were merely passive players in a scenario written in advance by God.
600 To God, all moments of time are present in their immediacy. When therefore he establishes his eternal plan of “predestination”, he includes in it each person’s free response to his grace: "In this city, in fact, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, gathered together against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed, to do whatever your hand and your plan had predestined to take place."For the sake of accomplishing his plan of salvation, God permitted the acts that flowed from their blindness.
“He died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures”
I know this topic may meet with resistance because this Wrath of God satisfaction theories have been around for long long time and some may wrongly held that this in the only acceptable theory by the Church. There are newer theories non-violence based redemption. vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_cti_1995_teologia-redenzione_en.html
Peter Abelard and Karl Rahner among others have been mentioned. Unfortunately I do not know enough to confidently discuss them here. My intention is to bring awareness that God’s wrath theory of satisfaction is inconsistent with the image of a loving God AND that there is no necessity to default to a violent punishing God that needs to be satisfied by the death of his son for the sins of others. The other objective is to get others to reflect on the image of the Father that Jesus painted vs the Anselm’s image.
I thank you for the discussion although you sided with the traditionalist view. I was like that too before I signed up for a seminar on Christology last year and I urge traditionalists to have an open mind. I re-challenge Anselm’s theory on what the Bible actually said about appeasing God’s wrath. I have to conclude that satisfaction theory while appealing in a medieval time setting is not strongly supported with actual Scripture. Afraid that I may have missed some important verses supporting Anselm’s theory, I implore those in the know to volunteer these knowledge. So far the Isaiah quote is insufficient and inconclusive.
Meanwhile I am rooting for God’s innocence.
As I have said, I am quite pedestrian… I don’t follow trends and views… I know there’s a CCC but I have not read it… everything to me is “resource” material (‘not allowed to take it out of the library’); so when I propose an idea I do so from Scriptures with the added research (when required) from the Church’s official Teachings and the writings of the Church Fathers/Doctors.
I do not see a problem with God’s Justice.
I do not see a conflict with God’s Mercy, Love, Justice.
I do see a need for man to put God and God’s Way in a box so that his sensibilities can better palate His Revelation.
I do appreciate the discourse.
God Bless!
Maran atha!
Angel