This final post from the Atonement Motifs series wrestles with the Moral Exemplar model. This post is significantly longer than the others from this series for two reasons:
- I struggled to see the biblical validity of this model. Yes, Jesus provides us an example, and we’re called to live like Him. But how does that bring salvation? So I grappled with this idea.
- I wrote this post initially as an essay in 2021 for Bible College. But I think it highlights some key aspects and goes into depth which this topic requires. The essay has been adapted to suit this purpose here though.
God bless.
In the Gospel of Matthew, Jesus commands his disciples to:
“Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you.”
Matthew 28:19-20a ESV.
It is a Christian mandate to spread the Gospel to those that aren’t saved. But how should a Christian communicate the Gospel to such people? That is the purpose of soteriology; the study of the salvific benefits entailed through the life, passion, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Over the past two thousand years since the Christ event, many different models of atonement have been presented, with this post focusing specifically on the Moral Exemplar model (often referred to as the Moral Influencer model). According to this model, Jesus Christ functions as a “demonstration of divine love”[1], empowering believers to “complete all things by his love rather than by fear”[2]. To analyse this model, three important questions need to be asked:
- What is the problem with humanity and what, therefore, does Christ save humanity from?
- How does this model affect the current postmodern, Western culture?
- What impact does this model have on Christian discipleship?
Through exploring this model of atonement, this piece seeks to understand the aim and relevance of its use for all Christians.
The Atonement Process:
To begin this exploration, there is an important question that must be asked: what is the Moral Exemplar model?
The model originates from the Scriptures (See Matthew 16:24; John 10:27; Ephesians 5:1-2; 1 Peter 2:21; & 1 John 2:3-6), with more engagement occurring through the patristic period[3]. But it was in the 12th Century that Peter Abelard received credit for the model, proposing and expanding upon it as an alternative to the dominant Christus Victor and Satisfaction models. The moral exemplar model supposes that:
“Christ’s suffering and death has for its salvation-historical purpose to convince sinful human beings of God’s love and as a result influence them towards confession of sin, seeking forgiveness and moral improvement.”
Barry D. Smith, The Meaning of Jesus’ Death: Reviewing the New Testament’s Interpretations, (London, UK: Bloomsbury Publishing Plc, 2017), 158.
In its simplest form, this model can be described in this manner: because God loved the world so much, he sent his Son to show us His love. As a result, we can now follow in His footsteps, loving the world as God initially intended.
Initially, this sounds orthodox because Christians are to be transformed, renewing their minds (Romans 12:2) to love God and their neighbours (Matthew 22:37-39) at all times (Proverbs 17:17 and 1 Thessalonians 5:17). But this initial definition does not explain the crux of the model: what is it that humanity needs saving from?
According to Abelard, the saving work of Christ is not objective, rather, it was to be seen as primarily subjective, appropriating a “change that occurs within humans”[4]. Therefore, in this model, Abelard does not perceive an objective problem that humanity requires saving from. As the problem is subjective in nature, the issue becomes a matter of human awareness of God’s love and its inability to replicate such love without the initial example found in Christ. Afterall, how can the sheep follow the shepherd, if there was not a shepherd to follow (John 10:3-5, 14, 16, 27)? As such, humanity needs saving from itself; it needs a moral antidote, rather than a legal one[5].
Since Abelard’s contribution, the moral exemplar model has progressed significantly. Being spoken of as a concept of moral self-transcendence, this model of atonement is now seen to have an authentic nature when it “results in action and not just knowledge”[6]. According to Lonergan, “that capacity becomes an actuality when one falls in love. Being-in-love is therefore the fulfilment of ones capacity for self-transcendence”[7].
“Being-in-love is therefore the fulfilment of ones capacity for self-transcendence.”
Bernard Lonergan, Method in Theology, (London: Darton, Longman and Todd, 1972), 104.
As with all atonement models, the Moral Exemplar model does have an inherent weakness within its primarily subjective nature; it does not speak about the objective problem that sin holds over humanity. What Abelard did well with this model, however, is focus on a key concept that had largely been overlooked by others: an emphasis upon the love of God.
In direct response to the question surrounding the saving work of Christ and its relevance within the framework of the moral exemplar model, Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit can be seen as the catalyst for evoking love within humanity. Through the cross, God demonstrated his love; after all, the Apostle John emphasised that “God is love” (1 John 4:8b). Through witnessing and attesting to this act of divine love, humanity can then respond (1 John 4:19); living out the divine command to love God and humanity above all things (Matthew 22:37-40; Mark 12:30-31; and Luke 10:27). Therefore, sin can be seen as humanity’s inability to love the Lord, it is only through divine intervention that redemption can occur.
According to Schleiermacher, moral exemplarism requires the:
“Entrance of the living influence of Christ, [so that] the individual on whom this influence is exercised attains a religious personality not his before.”
Friedrich Schleiermacher, The Christian Faith, 3rd ed. (London, UK: Bloomsbury Publishing, 2016), 500 of 786, Perlego.
Such divine intervention stands firm when compared with Jesus’ own words to his disciples:
“I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper, to be with you forever, even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him. You know him, for he dwells with you and will be in you (emphasis mine).”
John 14:16-17 ESV.
The final negative of the moral exemplar model regards what it fails to speak about. In the Scriptures, there are instances where the Apostles speak of the atonement in ways that the other models integrate well. The Apostle Paul says that “In all these things we are more than conquerors” (Romans 8:37a ESV), alluding to the victory seen in the Christus Victor model. This same verse concludes with “through him who loved us” (Romans 8:37b ESV), alluding to the Moral Exemplar model. Perhaps this verse indicates that individual atonement models do not suffice to describe what occurred through Jesus Christ. Rather, it is through a corporate merging of all models that a more accurate understanding can be found. In writing his model, Abelard wrongly claimed it ought to receive ascendence from its contemporaries. In contrast, “for Augustine, this was but one element in a Christian understanding of the cross”[8]. The Patristic’s clearly understood that the work of Christ could not be put in a square box; there needed to be freedom to explore the depths of its salvific ramifications[9]. This lesson, that all models are important for consideration, is important for all theologians and students of the word to grasp.
It is through a corporate merging of all models that a more accurate understanding can be found.
Connection with Contemporary Culture:
With an understanding of how the moral exemplar model functions, its ability to connect with the current Western, postmodern culture must be analysed. Is it a model encouraging people to respond to Jesus’ calling to “repent and believe in the gospel” (Mark 1:15b)?
It will be; the answer is that it always does have relevance. However, the discussion pertains more specifically to the manifestation and the level of success it produces. In what ways can this model be useful in the current culture? To whom does it speak most vividly? How could it be altered to increase its pool of influence? This section of discussion will elaborate further on each of these questions.
In its earliest days, Abelard constructed the moral exemplar model to have: “an almost timeless quality that would allow it to be understood equally in most, if not all, settings”[10]. This model speaks well to a Western, postmodern audience. Current culture praises the notion of love, which this model does in abundance. It is easy to understand and almost effortless to describe. However, because it is so simple, it is not tied to one particular culture. The consequence is that in its simplest form, it may not deeply resonate with people, failing to deeply stir the unsaved soul.
The moral exemplar model does have a genuine strength: despite its simplicity, when altered, it can speak directly into social and cultural contexts, providing a deeper connection with the proposed audience. In this manner, it can increase the pool of people it can potentially impact. A fantastic example of such an alteration comes from Juana de la Cruz Vázquez Gutiérrez, a 16th Century theologian from Spain. She wrote the following statement:
“Christ gave birth to us all with very great pains and torments at the time of his cruel and bitter passion. And since we cost him so dearly and the labor through which he gave birth to us was so grueling that it made him sweat drops of blood, he can do nothing but pray and please for us before the father, like a very compassionate mother, desiring that we should be saved and that our souls should be enlightened, so that he might not have suffered his pain and torment in vain.”
Juana de la Cruz, Libro de conorte, fol. 451v, as referenced in Ronald E. Surtz, The Guitar of God: Gender, Power, and Authority in the Visionary World of Mother Juana de la Cruz (1481-1534), (Philadelphia: University of Philadelphia Press, 1990), 42.
Whilst feminism in its current form was not around in the 16th Century, through this example of adaptation, Juana shows that the moral exemplar atonement model can be adapted to a wide variety of cultures and times.
Christian Discipleship:
As described earlier, the moral exemplar model is very successful in describing the love that God shows to humanity. With regards to this model’s implications for Christian Discipleship, they are quite significant. In this model, a Christian can find acceptance, love and forgiveness that frees them from the bondage of sin. In reference to Jesus’ baptism found in Luke 3, Nouwen furthers the sentiment of Jesus’ belovedness to the Father, claiming:
“There is in each of us an inner voice of Love that says: “You are the Beloved of God!” I want you to claim your Belovedness.”
Henri J. M. Nouwen, Michael J. Christensen, and Rebecca J. Laird, Spiritual Direction: Wisdom for the Long Walk of Faith, (New York, NY: HarperCollins Publishers, 2006), 28.
Through recognising and seeing how unique and loved Christians are by their Father, a sense of awe and love emerges from the Christian, furthering their walk of spiritual transformation and their ability to pass the love received onto others. The Apostle John reinforces this concept by advising that “we love because He first loved us” (1 John 4:19).
While the initial love event of the cross is imperative to this model, it must be reinforced that spiritual transformation does not occur without stimulation from the Holy Spirit. Both the instigation of the Spirit and desire of the Christian are imperative for Christian discipleship and transformation to occur. Dallas Willard agrees, stating:
“Reliance upon what the Spirit does to us or in us, as indispensable as it truly is, will not by itself transform character in its depths. The action of the Spirit must be accompanied by our response, which … cannot be carried out by anyone other than ourselves.”
Dallas Willard, The Divine Conspiracy: Rediscovering our Hidden Life in God, (New York, NY: HarperCollins Publishers, 1997), 16 of 23, Perlego.
Christian discipleship, affected by the moral exemplar model, requires that action be provided by both the Holy Spirit and Christians themselves. It is a partnership with the divine that enacts the transformation occurring within believers.
Conclusion:
In conclusion, the moral exemplar moral of atonement can be seen as a reaction within the human spirit to the divine display of love portrayed through the life, passion and resurrection of Jesus Christ. This love evoked within Christians, instigated by the Holy Spirit, spurs believers to love others with the same heart that the divine displayed. This model speaks to a wide audience, especially when adapted to individual cultures. It tells of God’s love, providing a path forward for redemption. This model also improves the dialogue surrounding Christian discipleship; the transformation of the believer into Christ-likeness. The astute theologian should not perceive this model as the answer; rather, it is only one piece of the puzzle surrounding the salvific benefits of Christ’s work.
I will finish with the following quote from N.T. Wright:
“the first moment [model] is the claim that the long-promised exile-undoing new exodus has arrived. This brings, second, God’s kingdom-establishing victory over the dark powers that had usurped this role. This is effected, third, through the representative, substitutionary death of Israel’s Messiah, which dealt with the sin through which the powers had consolidated their grip over idolatrous humankind. Thus… fourth, the cross simultaneously provides the moral example of suffering love and also reveals, in a dark blaze of glory, who the Creator God really was, is, and will be. Thus, fifth, Jesus’ death launches, as a great act of cosmic and global revolution, the new world in which… freedom, forgiveness, and new creation can flourish and abound… assuring the world of God’s ultimate victory over death itself.”
N. T. Wright, Simon Gathercole, and Robert B. Stewart, What Did the Cross Accomplish? A Conversation about the Atonement, (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2021), 10 of 14, Perlego.
All atonement models have validity in understanding what Christ achieved for humanity; indeed, it is only through seeing all of them together, that humanity can grasp the scope and veracity of God’s grace and love displayed to us.
[1] Alister E. McGrath, Christian Theology: An Introduction, (West Sussex, UK: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 2017), 264.
[2] Peter Abelard, Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, translated by Steven R. Cartwright, (Washington D.C., WA: The Catholic University of America Press, 2011), 48.
[3] Clement of Alexandria (c.150-c.215) & Augustine of Hippo (c.354-c.430) both argued the cross to be a measure or demonstration of God’s love, a precursor for Abelard’s expanded model as stated in McGrath, Christian Theology, 264.
[4] Joel B. Green and Mark D. Baker, Recovering the Scandal of the Cross: Atonement in New Testament and Contemporary Contexts (Bletchley, Bucks: Paternoster Press, 2003), 138.
[5] Larry R. Shelton, Cross and Covenant: Interpreting the Atonement for 21st Century Mission, (Milton Keynes, UK: Paternoster, 2006), 49, as referenced in Stephen Burnhope, Atonement and the New Perspective: The God of Israel, Covenant, and the Cross, (Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2018), 6 of 10, Perlego.
[6] Peter Laughlin, Jesus and the Cross: Necessity, Meaning, and Atonement, (Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2014), 9 of 16, Perlego.
[7] Bernard Lonergan, Method in Theology, (London: Darton, Longman and Todd, 1972), 104.
[8] McGrath, Christian Theology, 264.
[9] Perhaps this was another consideration of the Patristic’s in their formulation of the creeds; no specific boundaries were created for the salvific benefits found in Christ.
[10] Green and Baker, Recovering the Scandal of the Cross, 138.
Leave a Reply