I've long been a critic of penal substitutionary atonement. It's a hugely problematic doctrine.
But in
my post yesterday about fragile worshipers in the comments Mike asked me about how I've come to be more grace-filled when I bump into penal substitutionary atonement at church.
Because you're going to bump into it. In songs, prayers, sermons. You can't avoid penal substitutionary atonement. And if you bristle and become unglued every time you bump into penal substitutionary atonement you're regularly going to be miserable and upset at church.
So, how do you cope with it? That was Mike's question. Here was my answer from yesterday's post:
What helped me is seeing how something I found problematic was helpful to others.
For
example, I'm with you about penal substitutionary atonement. But I've
grown more tolerant of it because of how I've experienced it out at the
prison. The men in the prison have done horrible, terrible things.
Murder. Rape. Child abuse. Consequently, they feel damned. They feel an
acute sense of God's wrath and judgment. Understandably so.
So the
notion that God absorbed the damnation, wrath and judgment that was
rightly and deservedly falling upon them is hugely impactful and
transformative.
The notion that God wants to damn you for your
sins doesn't preach well in American suburbs. But it preaches with
murderers and rapists. They get it.
Basically, if you're burdened
by a deep sense of guilt and shame--and a lot of people are--penal
substitutionary atonement makes a lot of sense. I still have some deep
theological problems with the notion, but I get the emotional resonance
and I've seen the doctrine change lives for the better. Is that worth
the costs, the negative effects the doctrine has had? I can't say. I'm
just describing how I've come to check my knee-jerk reactions to get to a
more reflective place.
No comments:
Post a Comment