[See page image]

Page 209

Satisfaction

Gegenwart des verkllirten Leibes and Blutea Christi im heiligen Abendmahl (Stuttgart, 1855), and his polemic attitude toward the RomanCatholic Church, particularly in regard to justification, found expression in his last work, the Soli Deo gloria! vergleichende W6rdigung evangeliachlutheriacher urtd r6mwhrkatholmcher Lehre nach dam augsburgischen and tridentinischen Bekenntnis (Stuttgart, 1859). (DAVID ERDMANNt.)

BrsTdoaRAPBT: K. F. A. Kahnis. Lutheriache D opmatik. 3 vols., Leipsie, 1861-68; G. W. Frank, Geachichte der proteatantiechen T heologie, ib. 1862-75; A. Meeke, Die Dopmatik des 19. Jahrhunderta, Gotha, 1867; 1. A. Dorner, System der chriatl"en G laubenalehre, 2 vols., Berlin, 1879-81, Eng. tranal., 4 vols., Edinburgh, 1880-82; M. A. von Landerer, Neueste Dopmenpexhiehte, Heilbronn, 1881.

SARUM USE: The name given to the liturgy in use in the diocese of Sarum (i.e., Salisbury) before the Reformation of the Church of England. It consists of several books, the direct or mediate work of Saint Osmund (q.v.), bishop of Salisbury, via., the Portiforium or Breviary of Sarum (containing the Daily Services), the Sarum Missal (containing the Communion Service), and possibly the Sarum Manual (containing the Baptismal and " Occasional " Offices). The Sarum use was adopted in Salisbury in 10$5, and by the middle of the thirteenth century was the form of liturgy most used in England. The Portiforium was the basis of the Book of Common Prayer (see COMMON PRAYER, BooK oh, 11 1). Other "uses " were those of Lincoln, Hereford, Durham (7), Bangor, and York.

BaLIOas"Rr: F. Procter and C. Wordsworth, The Sarum Breviary. Cambridge, 1882; F. Procter and W. H. Frere, New Hist. of the Book of Common Prayer, passim, London, 1905; J. H. Blunt, Annotated Book of Common Prayer, pp. 2-3, 361-363, et passim, New York, 1908.

SATISFACTION: A doctrine which seeks to explain how the justice and the mercy of God are reconciled. The term "satisfaction" is traced to Tertullian, although its reference was to the penitence of man rather than the death of Christ. Man is "released from penalty by the compensating exchange of repentance." Origin held Various that God was rendered propitious by Theories. Christ's offering of himself. Gregory the Great taught that Christ assumed the penalty of sin and so appeased the wrath of God. Not until Ansehn (q.v.), however, does the idea of satisfaction become a dominant principle of religious thought. According to him (Cur Deus homo) the honor of God, immeasurably injured, demanded satisfaction-either punishment of the sinner or an equivalent. God chose the latter alternative. Wherefore, the God-man who alone could fulfil the perfect obligation and who needed not to die for his sins, could and did die in behalf of men and thus satisfied God for their debt and merited the salvation which God offers. Thomas Aquinas (1274), with other Seboolmen in distinction from Anselm, denied that satisfaction was the sine qua non for the forgiveness of sins; God might have redeemed men X.-14

in some other way than by the death of his Son, yet he adopted this method as more fitting. On account of the greatness of Christ's love, the dignity of his person, and the scope of his passion, the satisfaction was superabundant (Summa, pars. iii., qu. 46-49). Duns Scotus (d. 1308) argued that, since the merit of Christ belonged to his human nature, it was not infinite, yet it availed for as much as God was pleased to accept it (" Commentary on the Sentences of Peter Lombard," lib. iii., dist. 19-20). According to- the authoritative Roman Catholic doctrine, Christ merited j ustificatibn for us by his holy passion on the tree and made satisfaction to God the Father for us. This satisfaction extends, however, only to those sins committed before baptism and to those committed afterward which deserve eternal punishment. Christians themselves make satisfaction for sin as regards temporal punishment by punishments either inflicted by Christ, or voluntarily undertaken, or else enjoined by a priest according to their ability or the quality of their sins, the aim of which is to reduce the punishment which awaits the soul in Purgatory (Decrees and Canons of the Council of Trent, sess. VI., chap. vii., sesa. XIV., chap. viii.-ix.; cf. J. S. Hunter, Outlines of Dogmatic Theology, iii. 334-337). Faustus Socinus (1604) and the Socinians (Racovian Catechism, 1605) rejected the idea of satisfaction, on the ground of the mutual contradiction involved in satisfaction and remission, of the incompatibility of punishment with debt or with sufferings of the innocent, of the personal and non-transferable nature of obedience as well as of guilt and punishment, and of redemption as not satisfaction but emancipation. The death of Christ was only an example, a confirmation of divine promises, a condition of his entering into glory. In opposition to this view, Hugo Grotius (1645), in his "Satisfaction of Christ," declared that God who was the source of the law could not let its violation go unpunished. If, however, he rigorously and exactly enforced punishment upon sinners, he would destroy mankind from the face of the earth. In order, therefore, to maintain "rectoral justice," he sets forth a penal example in which he exhibits his judgment against sin, which, for the preservation of his government, is of equal value as the punishment of the sinner and is substituted for this. By this "singular method of relaxation" God is enabled to forgive sin. According to Curcellmus (d. 1659) in Institutio religionis Christian&,, V., xix., and Limborch (1712) in Theologia Christiana, III., xxii., Christ's oblation was not a full satisfaction for sin; he did not suffer all the punishment which we deserve. Sacrifice does not liberate from debts; but God graciously estimates Christ's sacrifice as sufficient, and on this ground remits the punishment due us.

The theory of penal satisfaction has had a long history. It differs from the view of Anselm in several particulars. The satisfaction was public or juridical, rather than offered to a person. The righteousness involved was the penal righteousness of God. Instead of the Anselmic alternative-satiafaction or punishment-satisfaction is by punishment. As far back as Wyclif (d. 1384) it was asserted that God's justice demanded that each