Atonement on the Unitarian theory of the Person of Christ. But his analogy is doubly false; false to his own conception of God, false to our conception of Christ. On his theory, God can pardon the sins of men without an atonement, but a judge can only acquit or condemn the prerogative of pardon does not belong to him. On our theory, Christ is infinitely more than the most "noble and generous of citizens" who could offer himself to the executioner instead of the guilty. He is Himself the representative-and more than the representative of the law which has been violated. The question which Mr. Martineau has asked is irrelevant. The true question is -Whether the act of Christ, in enduring the suffering which He must otherwise have inflicted, is an "immorality, "a crime," which should raise "a cry of indignant shame from the universal human heart"? For an answer to that question I can trust "the universal human heart" to which Mr. Martineau appeals. Wherever the real facts have been known, instead of "a cry of indignant shame," there has been a cry of thanksgiving and of worship. Had God insisted/ that before He would forgive sinful men, some illustrious saint or some holy angel should endure the agonies of Gethsemane and the awful sorrow of the cross; had He refused to listen to the prayer of the penitent until His anger had been allayed, or His retributive justice received what would have been an unreal satisfaction, through the sufferings of one of His creatures who had kept all His commandments, then Mr. Martineau's However question could have received no answer. voluntary, however eager might have been the sacrifice on the part of saint or angel, God could not have accepted it without perplexing and confounding all our conceptions of His moral character. But is there any “immorality,” any "crime," anything to provoke “a cry of indignant shame," in the resolve of God Himself, in the person of Christ, to endure suffering instead of inflicting it? Will any man who confesses that Jesus Christ is God manifest in the flesh cry "shame" when He, the Moral Ruler of men, to avoid the terrible. necessity of condemning us to eternal death, assumes our nature, is tempted in the wilderness, endures the ingratitude, malignity, and scorn of those whom He has come to save, submits to be charged with blasphemy, spat upon, scourged, nailed to the cross, passes into that "outer darkness," into which He must otherwise have driven the human race for its crimes, and dies of a broken heart through the greatness of His sorrow? "Immorality!" It is the most wonderful proof of the infinite love of God. "Crime!" It is the supreme manifestation of God's moral perfection. But for this, we might have thought that self-sacrifice, which is the flower and crown of all human excellence, was impossible to God. We see now that every form of heroic love and mercy by which our hearts are thrilled in the story of the noblest of men, is but the shadow of the transcendent and eternal perfection of the Most High. "An indignant cry of shame!" It is this expression of the righteousness and grace of the Moral Ruler of mankind which has kindled the most passionate love that has ever glowed in the hearts of men on earth, and it is this which is celebrated in the most rapturous anthems which are ever heard in heaven. |