ATONEMENT, THE. " The Atonement " is the designation of one of the chief doctrines of the Chris tian religion. To atone means in English to give satis faction, to set at one, to reconcile. The corresponding word in Hebrew is used in the sense of " to cover." In Genesis xxxii. 20 Jacob says of Esau : " I will cover his face (Authorised Version ' appease him ') with the present that goeth before me. and afterward I will see his face; peradventure he will accept me (Hebrew ' my face ')." But there is reason for thinking that prim arily the word meant " to wipe out." The word used in the New Testament (katallage) and translated "atone ment" in the Authorised Version (Rom. v. 11) means really " reconciliation " (so the Revised Version). In the ritual religion of the Old Testament guilt is re moved by the offering of sacrifice. But an enlightened psalmist exclaims : " The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit; a broken and a contrite heart, 0 God, thou wilt not despise." Christian theories of the Atonement may be said to have arisen in answer to the question : " Why was Jesus destined to suffer a cruel death upon the cross? " The sudden termination of Jesus' career in a manner that seemed humiliating came as a shock and surprise to his disciples and followers. The Apostle Paul is the first to offer an explanation. In Romans iii. 25 we are told that God set forth (or purposed) Jesus " to be a propitiation, through faith in his blood, to shew his righteousness, because of the passing over of the sins done aforetime, in the forbearance of God." In Rom. Iv. 25 it is said that Jesus " was delivered up for our trespasses, and was raised for our justification " (cp. viii. 3; II. Corinthians v. 21); In Rom. v. 10 and 11 that " if, while we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, shall we be saved by his life, and not only so, but we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received the recon ciliation " (cp. II. Corinthians v. 19). In Rom. v. 19 we read : " For as through the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the one shall the many be made righteous " (cp. x. 4; Galatians iv. 4). The conception of another writer Is seen In St. John i. 29, " Behold, the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world," and x. 11, " I am the good shepherd, the good shepherd layette down his life for the sheep " (cp. Rom. v. 6-8; I. Peter Ill. 18). It is clear from such passages as these that the death of Christ was already explained in several ways. It was connected with the Old Testament idea of the fall of man and the atoning (appeasing) power of sacrifice, and with the prophetic and evangelic belief that God is propitiated by a life of penitence, obedience, and self-sacrifice. These ideas were afterwards de veloped in various ways. Athanasius (295-373), the " Father of Orthodoxy," explains that Jesus by paying the penalty incurred by all men satisfied God and de livered mankind from death. He offered up his sacrifice
on behalf of all, " yielding his Temple to death in the stead of all, In order firstly to make men quit and free of their old trespass, and further to show himself more powerful even than death, displaying his own body in corruptible, as first-fruits of the resurrection of all " (De Incarnatione, xx., translated by Archibald Robert son). As to the cross, " if he came himself to bear the curse laid upon us, how else could he have ' become a curse,' save he received the death set for a curse? and that is the Cross. For this is exactly what is written : ' Cursed Is he that hangeth on a tree ' " (xxv.). Again, "as death must needs come to pass, he did not himself take, but received at others' hands, the occasion of per fecting his sacrifice. Since it was not fit, either, that the Lord should fall sick, who healed the diseases of others; nor again was it right for that body to lose its strength, in which he gives strength to the weaknesses of others also " (xxi.). Anselm (1033-1109), however, the founder of Scholastic Theology, is considered to have defined the doctrine more clearly and consistently (Our Deus Homo). " In various ways Anselm seeks to illus trate and establish the truth of the objective necessity of the Atonement. The necessity is not found in the claims of Satan, nor in the character of man, but in the character of God and the claims of righteousness. But though there was a moral necessity for the death of Christ, His sufferings and death were perfectly voluntary. This is vindicated with great clearness against objections. And as it is shown that neither a sinless man nor an angel could have given the satisfaction which justice required, the necessity for a Redeemer who was both God and man is proved, and the connection is established between the two cardinal doctrines of the Deity of Christ and His atonement for sin. The voluntary death of such a person must have an incomparable value, and may well be accepted by God as a reason for righteously remitting the sins of even the vilest of men. It thus illustrates the love of the Father as well as of the Son. Mercy triumphs over guilt, while the claims of Justice are fully met " (E. S. Prout, Introduction to Cur Deus Homo?). The idea of a vicarious satisfaction is now generally accepted by orthodox Churchmen, and the atonement is regarded as complete and sufficient for all men. It may be said that on the whole the main stress is laid now on Jesus' self-sacrificing obedience unto death. Jesus effected the reconciliation not so much by his death as by his life. The " Mystical " theory also refuses to lay too much stress on his death. According to this Jesus made it possible for man and God to be at-one by his incarnation. Before this man could not enter into intimate relations with God. See Prot. Diet.; Oath. Diet.; Chambers' Encycl.; Brockhaus; A. Ritschl, Die christliohe Lehre von der Rechtfertigung and der Verstihnung, 3 vols., 3rd ed. 188S-89, 4th ed. of vol. iii. 1895.