What is in Kelvin's Head?

  • Atonement theory and the Naughty Step

    One of the parents in the congregation recently was saying how hard it is to answer good questions from children about why Jesus came and had resorted to trying to explain it in terms of the Naughty Step.

    I thought it might be helpful to lay out some of the main theories of the Atonement thus:

    • Ransom theory – our parents were so naughty that they deserve the naughty step and have passed their naughtiness onto us. Justice requires that someone has to go to the naughty step to pay for this and God tricked the devil into seeing Jesus on the naughty step as sufficient payment for this.
    • Christus victor theory – Jesus has gloriously broken down the powers and dominions of naughtiness and only has to glance at the naughty-step for his holiness to turn it in to dust. Nothing can withstand his might and power.
    • Moral influence theory – Jesus came to teach us how to be so good that we would never be sent to the naughty step.
    • Penal substitution theory – God simply won’t forgive anyone until He is satisfied that the naughty step punishment has been fulfilled in full. Fortunately, Jesus comes along and takes on that naughtiness for himself, freely offering to pay the debt of naughtiness to God the Father. We need urgently to recognise this offer and accept it.
    • Incarnation theory – the amazing thing is that Jesus comes and sits on the naughty step with us, sharing our frailty and sharing our sorrows.

    There are other possibilities, but those should keep you going for a bit.

    Now, all these things have been believed by Christians. However, it doesn’t make much sense to claim that you believe them all at once. Notwithstanding that, I’d say that they all move me at one time or another, even though I tend towards one of them as my dominant way of understanding why Jesus came. We encounter all of these theories in our hymns, if not elsewhere.

    That’s the way atonement theory works for me.

    , , , , ,

4 responses to “+Katharine Jefferts Schori – interview”

  1. ryan Avatar
    ryan

    Hurrah! Evidence, like the interview with +Gene a few years back, that you’d make a great ecclesiastical chat show host Kelvin 😉 I’d watch it!

    Reply
  2. Martin Ritchie Avatar
    Martin Ritchie

    Loved her vision of the church as holding different perspectives in tension. Hard work, but much better than settling for a monochrome church!

    Reply
  3. Revd Ross Kennedy Avatar
    Revd Ross Kennedy

    Yes – a well produced and conducted interview. But why no quesions asked that might challenge +Katharine. E. g. why does she seem so determined to turn the TEC into a monochrome (i.e. liberal) church by driving out those who hold conservative theological views? Why is she so intent ( using the full weight of secular law) to grab the church properties from those Episcopal parishes which have decided to realign with another Province? Of course, legally in the USA the church buildings do belong to the denomination. But morally? After all most of those churches have been built and maintained by the local people with not a penny being contributed by TEC. Bishop Katharine impresses me in many ways although she is at the opposite end of the theological spectrum. I just find it so sad that since she became PB the TEC has become increasingly fragmented. And just in case I am asked – I do not support the action of parishes that have decided to defect. I believe they should stay and continue to witness to their understanding of the Faith.

    Reply
    1. kelvin Avatar
      kelvin

      Well, I guess its a matter of perspective. I did kind of think that the oil spill affecting the US coast and the most devastating earthquake in recent history were kind of big stories. They also both related to the Synod that +Katharine was at. We were discussing ecological stuff quite a lot and we gave money directly to Episcopal Sisters in Haiti.

      It seems to me that the US church ownership thing is a bit of a non-story in the long run, however emotive it might be today. The SEC here and the Church of England down south would surely behave in exactly the same way to any vicar and congregation claiming they own the buildings and church fabric. Indeed, I think that in Scotland at least, it might well be the case that the charity regulations would make the Diocesan Trustees liable if they were not to press such a case.

      I’m no lawyer, I’m a priest. And I’m not as brave as you are, Ross, if you really think that the law of the land in the US (or in the UK) and moral values are not more closely linked than you seem to suggest.

      In Scotland we have no choice. Our canons acknowledge that our church will be governed in accordance with Scots Law.

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Previous Posts

  • That daring young man

    The most exciting thing I’ve seen all week was a daring young man. On a flying trapeze.

  • Veterinarian Bulletin #2

    Vet: So, how are things going with the tablets? Are you getting them down her? Me: Yes, no problem. She loves them. Vet: What?! Me: Takes them off the palm of my hand. Vet: I think we need to think about getting her to see a cat psychologist. There is obviously something very wrong.

  • Health bulletin etc

    Or perhaps “lack of health” bulletin. Life with a sick and rather sickly cat is challenging at the moment. Madam has two modes of operation – rather pathetic and grumpy as per usual. She has never been an entirely easy individual to cope with at the best of times. (Yes, rather like the person she…

  • Swimming

    Just back from yet another nifty 20 lengths of the pool, the third, or perhaps the fourth swim this week. Those who scoffed at the purchase of the flip-flops, scoff ye not. Swimming is holy too, of course.