Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T17:44:07.419Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Forgiveness then satisfaction: why the order matters for a theory of the atonement

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 March 2018

JAMES S. KINTZ
JAMES S. KINTZ*
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, Saint Louis University, 3800 Lindell Blvd, St. Louis, MO, USA, 63108
*
e-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Central to a theory of the atonement is one's position on forgiveness and satisfaction. These two issues are interrelated, but it is unclear whether one takes precedence over the other. Specifically, must one make satisfaction to remove the guilt incurred by sin prior to forgiveness, or can a victim forgive a wrongdoer independently of any work of satisfaction? Richard Swinburne argues that satisfaction must precede forgiveness, but I defend the view that forgiveness is a manifestation of love, and as such satisfaction is not required prior to forgiveness. Instead, I argue that forgiveness can and should precede satisfaction, and I highlight important implications of this view for a theory of the atonement.

Type
Original Article
Information
Religious Studies , Volume 55 , Special Issue 3: Religious Experience and Desire , September 2019 , pp. 337 - 351
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aquinas, Thomas (1975) Summa Contra Gentiles, Book I, Pegis, Anton C. (tr.) (Notre Dame IN: University of Notre Dame Press). [ST I]Google Scholar
Aquinas, Thomas (1975) Summa Contra Gentiles, Book II, Anderson, James (tr.) (Notre Dame IN: University of Notre Dame Press). [ST II]Google Scholar
Aquinas, Thomas (1975) Summa Contra Gentiles, Book III, Bourke, Vernon J. (tr.) (Notre Dame IN: University of Notre Dame Press). [ST III]Google Scholar
Aquinas, Thomas (1975) Summa Contra Gentiles, Book IV, O'Neill, Charles J. (tr.) (Notre Dame IN: University of Notre Dame Press). [ST IV]Google Scholar
Aquinas, Thomas (1981) Summa Theologiae, Fathers of the English Dominican Province (tr.) (Westminster MD: Christian Classics). [ST]Google Scholar
Garrigou-LaGrangeReginald, O.P. Reginald, O.P., (1998) [1939], Predestination: The Meaning of Predestination in Scripture and the Church, Dom Bede RoseO.S.B, D.D. O.S.B, D.D. (tr.) (Charlotte NC: TAN Books).Google Scholar
Stump, Eleonore (2004) ‘Personal relations and moral residue’, History of the Human Sciences, 17.2/3, 35–56.Google Scholar
Stump, Eleonore (2013) ‘Conversion, atonement, and love’, in Dalferth, Ingolf and Rodgers, Michael (eds) Conversion (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck), 115–133.Google Scholar
Stump, Eleonore (2016) ‘Love and forgiveness: Swinburne on atonement’, in Bergmann, Michael and Brower, Jeffrey E. (eds) Reason and Faith: Themes from Richard Swinburne (New York: Oxford University Press), 148–170.Google Scholar
Stump, Eleonore (forthcoming), ‘Guilt and forgiveness’, in McKenna, Michael (ed.) Forgiveness: Philosophical Essays (New York: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Swinburne, Richard (1989) Responsibility and Atonement (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar