In Christ Alone

Stanza 2:
In Christ alone! who took on flesh
Fulness of God in helpless babe!
This gift of love and righteousness
Scorned by the ones he came to save:
Till on that cross as Jesus died,
The wrath of God was satisfied -
For every sin on Him was laid;
Here in the death of Christ I live.

By vote in 2006, the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) authorized publishing a new hymnal. In 2008 a committee of 15 was formed and drew up two guiding statements, which, like the denomination itself, lean to the liberal end of the theological spectrum.

Along the way, the hymnal committee decided to use the popular hymn titled “In Christ Alone” by Keith Getty and Stuart Townend (2001). This decision sparked a committee controversy and in the end “In Christ Alone” was rejected. In a May Christian Century report, committee chair Mary Louise Bringle tells some of that story in her article Debating hymns. She says the “most animated disagreements we experienced within our group were over matters of theology” and gives two examples, one being “In Christ Alone.” Though the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) descends in the tradition of John Calvin and John Knox, they were troubled by the expression in the hymn about “the wrath of God.” Perhaps they no longer believe in the wrath of God against sin, or else they don’t want to offend anyone by mentioning it.

The committee requested permission to alter the hymn’s lyrics. They proposed “Till on that cross as Jesus died, the love of God was magnified” in place of “Till on that cross as Jesus died, the wrath of God was satisfied.” The authors of the hymn, however, would not authorize this change in wording. This left the committee to decide whether they could use "the wrath of God was satisfied.” According to Bringle, some argued for inclusion because “…the words expressed one view of God’s saving work in Christ that has been prevalent in Christian history...” and “it is…a view held by some members of our family of faith...” While seeking for diversity in other areas, the majority was not impressed, noting “…that a hymnal does not simply collect diverse views, but also selects to emphasize some over others as part of its mission to form the faith of coming generations.” Simply put, they did not want to perpetuate to their churches a view that the cross satisfied the wrath of God.

In No Squishy Love Timothy George wrote, “Sin, judgment, cross, even Christ have become problematic terms in much contemporary theological discourse, but nothing so irritates and confounds as the idea of divine wrath.”

I don’t know anything about the authors, but I like the song. I was stirred to see that standing by their theology was more important than getting published in the Presbyterian hymnal.

Not only Getty and Townend, but also the prophet Isaiah saw God’s wrath poured out of the “man of sorrows” and satisfied by His death on the cross:

Isaiah 53:3-11 He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not. Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all. He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth. He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken. And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth. Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand. He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities.

The New Testament interpretation is beyond question. This is the Christ!

Acts 8:27-35 "...a man of Ethiopia...had come to Jerusalem for to worship, Was returning, and sitting in his chariot read Esaias the prophet...The place of the scripture which he read was this, He was led as a sheep to the slaughter; and like a lamb dumb before his shearer, so opened he not his mouth: In his humiliation his judgment was taken away: and who shall declare his generation? for his life is taken from the earth. And the eunuch answered Philip, and said, I pray thee, of whom speaketh the prophet this? of himself, or of some other man? Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus.

See also:
The Constitution of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.): Part I, Book of Confessions
Whatever happened to the wrath of God?

Note

Like the Presbyterians USA, the UK Methodist committee for their 2011 hymn book Singing the Faith was also conflicted by the Townend/Getty song “In Christ Alone.” A report to the Conference highlights some of their thought process (See 3.3 and 3.4). Unlike the PCUSA, the British Methodists did include the song in their hymnal. They objected to three things:

“… for many Methodists it presents problems. Firstly it speaks of ‘the wrath of God’ being ‘satisfied’ by the crucifixion. Secondly, it says ‘sin’s curse has lost its grip on me.’ Thirdly, it uses male language when it speaks of humanity: ‘no scheme of man.’ The MRG considered each of these issues and requested permission from the copyright holder to vary the words to make them more inclusive of Methodist belief and practice in each instance. Such permission was refused.”

They seemed able, unlike the Presbyterians, to overcome their objections because (1) this represented “a view of the atonement…held by some within the Church and can be found in Charles Wesley’s hymns” (2) “where we would have preferred sin’s power…rather than sin’s curse…was not felt to be critical” and (3) even though “diametrically opposed to Church policy on inclusive language” it was judged that an exception could be made for such a song that was “deeply meaningful to many in the Church.” According to this report the inclusion of “In Christ Alone” was “one of our most difficult decisions.”