The relation of incarnation to atonement in the Christology of R. S. Candlish, and its contribution to the development of Scottish theology

Abstract

The object of this thesis is to show how R.S. Candlish sets forth the relation of incarnation to atonement in a truly Biblical way. Candlish was brought up in a theological tradition in which the atonement was conceived of almost wholly in terms of Christ's passive obedience. This exclusive emphasis on Christ's passive obedience resulted in a corresponding neglect of the place of the Incarnation in theology, especially in its relation to the Atonement. Candlish, in his theology, restored the doctrine of the Incarnation to a central place in two quite decisive ways.First, in seeking to recover the long-neglected Biblical teaching on the sonship of believers, Candlish was disposed to give a much more central place to the Incarnation. This was necessary, since, in his view, the sonship of believers took its rise in the One Eternal Sonship of Jesus Christ. Since originally and primarily there was but one Sonship - Christ's very own - it was necessary that the Word become flesh in order that sonship might be revealed, communicated, and shared with men. Thus Candlish was led to stress the human nature of Christ in which He enjoyed the life of Sonship. Indeed, for Candlish, true evangelical sonship stands or falls with the real humanity of Christ. Thus believers come to share Christ's Sonship by union with Him in His human nature. And so Candlish defines Adoption not forensically as in Federal Theology and in the Westminster Confession of Faith, but as union and communion with Christ in His Sonship. In recovering this Biblical view of Sonship which takes its rise in Christ's Sonship revealed through the Incarnation, Candlish was opposing the view that the Incarnation is merely instrumental.The second way in which Candlish restored the Incarnation to a central place in his theology, was by showing that in a truly Biblical doctrine of atonement, it is impossible to separate incarnation from atonement, since these are really two aspects of the one work of God in Jesus Christ for man's redemption. To do this, meant that he had to oppose the teaching of Federal Theology with its exclusive emphasis on the passive obedience of Christ in the work of atonement. Following Irenaeus and Calvin, Candlish taught that atonement was wrought by "the whole course of His obedience." Thus he was led to place greater weight on the life and ministry of Jesus and the saving significance of His humanity. Atonement includes both the active and passive obedience of Christ, beginning with the humiliation of the Son of God taking our flesh, and reaching its climax in His death on the Cross. The death of Christ is not the whole atonement; rather it is the climax of all that He has been doing throughout His whole life of earthly obedience. Candlish related the incarnation to the atonement by emphasising the importance of grounding atonement in the fact of the hypostatic union. Indeed, atonement was the hypostatic union in reconciling action. Candlish further showed how incarnation and atonement are related by stressing that the work of Christ is both substitutionary and representative in character. Substitution stresses the forensic aspect of atonement, while representation emphasises the incarnational aspect.