Atonement Theology and The Bachelor
“’Ashley,’ will you accept this rose?” – words familiar to every person who has ever spent any time watching the ABC reality television show, “The Bachelor.” The handing out of roses at the end of each episode during its 12 week run is the moment when viewers learn which of the bachelorettes/contestants are continuing their romantic journey with the bachelor and which ones he has decided to send home.
“The Bachelor” is a dating game show that began in March of 2002. The ultimate point of the show is for one man to meet 25 women, date them, and eliminate a pre-selected number of them each week until he is left with two women on the last episode. On this last episode each season, the bachelor sends one home and usually proposes marriage to the other woman. While the premise for the TV show is at the least entertaining in a voyeuristic manner, it is definitely an interesting social experiment in romantic relationships. One’s imagination doesn’t have to stretch very far to realize that the draw of the show is all the drama that happens between the girls themselves since they are all dating the same guy and the drama of the “break-ups.”
So what in the world does a show like “The Bachelor” have to do with Atonement Theology and Jesus Christ? More than one would originally think.
According to The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, atonement can be defined as “[humanity’s] reconciliation with God through the sacrificial death of Christ.”[1] The dictionary goes on to explain that
“Christ’s death and resurrection were the means by which we are redeemed from the effects of Law and its transgression, namely sin, from God’s condemnation, and from death. By Baptism the Christin mystically shares in Christ’s death and His victory over it (that is the resurrection), and acquires, by God’s free gift, a new status of sonship or justification; and peace was made between God and [humanity] ‘through the blood of His cross.’ (Col. 1:20)”[2]
Well, this explains everything as it relates to relationships and broken relationships. Or does it? Perhaps an overview of the theories of atonement will help. The commonly held theories of atonement are the Ransom Theory/Christus Victor, the Satisfaction Theory, the Moral Influence theory, and the Penal/Substitution theory. These theories attempt to understand Christ’s death as a way of reconciling our sins to God.
The Ransom Theory
The Ransom Theory states that the sin of eating of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil which was committed by Adam and Eve, or original sin, placed humanity under Satan’s control. The early church father, Origen of Alexandria believed that humanity’s reconciliation with God was a debt that must be paid to Satan. This debt was paid with Christ’s death on the cross thus giving God victory over evil and death. The problem with this theory is that it gives too much power to Satan and thus not allowing humanity to be accountable for actions which cause suffering for others. Two of my classmates, Alissa Anderson and Alex Barton shared this Vimeo about the Ransom Theory with our class.
The Satisfaction Theory
The Satisfaction Theory states since God created humanity then what would be required for humanity to be reconciled to God could only come from God. This was not a problem of paying a debt to another power, Satan. Because only God could solve the problem of sin and it was necessary that humanity take accountability for its actions, the solution was the Incarnation of Christ who was fully human and fully divine, thus fulfilling both requirements. St. Anselm (1033-1109 CE) stated in his work, Cur Deus Homo (Why Was God a Man?) “to sin is to fail to render to God what God is entitled to. What is God entitled to? Righteousness, or rectitude of will. … And what is satisfaction? It is not enough simply to restore what has been taken away; but, in consideration of the insult offered, more than what was taken away must be rendered back.”[3] However, Anselm’s argument for this theory posed a few problems. For one, he did not account for a Trinitarian view of God. In essence, by sending the God the Son, God the Father was actually sending God’s self. And in regards to understanding sin as a debt Anselm only allows for a one-time payment.[4] The following YouTube video may help in understanding Satisfaction Theory.
Penal/Substitution Theory
In another class presentation by classmate, Ann Urinoski, Penal/Substitution Theory is defined as Christ’s death on the cross was a substitution for our sins. God transferred the guilt of our sins onto Christ who bore our punishment. Even though we are the guilty ones, Christ pays for our sins. And yet we still need Christ to be innocent.
There is something unfair about this theory however. An innocent person sacrifices themselves for everyone else’s transgressions. This line of thought reminds me a quote from the movie, Star Trek, made by the character, Mr. Spock. Spock is dying after repairing the radioactive chamber of the starship Enterprise. Since he is exposed to the radiation there is no hope that he can emerge from the chamber and must sacrifice himself for the rest of the crew. <
So far, I am not running into any theory that truly addresses the transgressions that we commit against one another which involve interpersonal relationships. I mean, seriously, how does Jesus’ self-sacrifice atone for the pain and hurt that people put others through in issues of romantic break-ups or divorce? Perhaps the answer lies in the theory of Moral Influence. Based on this previous post which was contributed by classmate, Nancy Hennessey, I believe that I’ve found a theory which addresses these relationships. While this theory is appropriate for understanding reconciliation between parties in social issues, it’s focus on honest, open, and direct communication with one another is helpful in repairing individual personal relationships. Perhaps the best depiction of how this works is through the Truth and Reconciliation Commission process used in South Africa after apartheid had been abolished in the 1990’s.
So back to the original question. What in the world does a show like “The Bachelor” have to do with Atonement Theology and Jesus Christ? As strange a premise of airing a TV show which focuses on 25-28 women vying for the attention of one man might be, the reality of the emotions experienced whether through the break-ups or the drama/conflict created between the girls is true to the human experience when we hurt one another. Fortunately, the producers of The Bachelor recognize the need for peoples’ stories to be told, feelings to be shared, and transgressions between parties to be confronted. The week before the final week of each season is set aside for an episode entitled, “The Women Tell All.” Women who have had problems with, caused problems for, and in general caused unnecessary drama during the season (though great for the television watching audience) are given the opportunity to speak their minds and honestly address one another and then eventually the bachelor, himself. All of the women on this episode are women that he has sent home, in essence “broken-up with.” This tends to be an emotional and yet a quite cathartic episode.
So, does this translate to our own personal everyday lives? Of course, it does. While The Bachelor is an exaggerated dramatic depiction of dating and romantic relationships, our own relationships of dating, romance, and marriage carry with them struggles of hurting one another. Sure, we all dream of the happily ever after ending with the man or woman we feel compelled to spend our lives with but let’s get real. There is no way that any couple has perfect days every day. Someone is going to say something or not, do something or not that truly hurts their loved one. It is the response to this transgression that empowers all parties to participate in reconciliation with one another as Christ would have us to do. The Moral Influence theory offers a more pastoral relationship of reconciliation for humanity in its understanding that the “sacrifice Jesus made with his death on the cross as the compelling reason for us to change our sinful ways, to be and live more as Jesus. In other words, to demonstrate the same compassion and love for our fellow human being as Jesus showed for the marginalized, the poor, and the meek.”[5] We are called by Jesus’ loving sacrifice to show this love to one another, even when the romantic love is gone. I got divorced this year – something that was furthest from mind when I entered seminary Fall, 2013. I was truly in love. He was truly in love. But we were unable to come to seminary together. Our home obligations kept him at home and thus the distance became too great. So, yes, there’s been a great deal of pain for both of us. There have been times that I just couldn’t have any communication with him. And for a while he cut off communication with me as well. There have been hurtful words expressed back and forth. It is part of the pain of dissolving a 19-year relationship. But it all come together for me during Candidacy interview with my Diocese in March, 2015. The Commission on Ministry asked me how I reconciled with what was happening between myself and my soon-to-be ex-husband. All I can is that it must have been the Holy Spirit, because the words that I uttered next I had never uttered or thought before. My response? “He’s a good person, he’s just made a bad choice.” And that’s a true statement. That’s Moral Influence. Even pain, I can still see someone who hurt me as a child of God, worth loving – may be not the same anymore, but definitely worth loving. I have had the opportunity to speak my truth and he has as well. So again I ask, what in the world does a show like “The Bachelor” have to do with Atonement Theology and Jesus Christ? Everything. Jesus’ sacrifice for humanity was made in love to show us how we should love one another even in the hard times, even when we hurt each other. Jesus’ sacrifice leads us to remember our Baptismal Covenant and live into it every day, no matter what.
Bibliography
Cross, F L., ed. The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.
[1] F L. Cross, ed., The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, 3rd ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), 124.
[2] Ibid.
[3] Anslem, Cur Deus Homo, 1109.
[4] Class Presentation of Satisfaction Theory by Charlie Bauer and Gretchen Ratterree
[5] Class presentation of Moral Influence Theory by Nancy Hennessey
Atonement and The Bachelor 