Lane asks one very brief but very loaded question for these three chapters of the Institutes, “How does Calvin portray the person of Christ?” The short answer to this would be that Christ is both fully human and fully divine. His one being is a storehouse of qualities that can be attributed to his divine nature and his human nature. All of these qualities are at the same time separated and united in a paradox Calvin calls “the communicating of properties.”
Calvin uses Chapter 12 of Book 2 to discuss three main reasons that God took on the person of Christ. The first reason he notes is that humanity is steeped in sin. Calvin says that because each of us are so far gone and so unclean, we would never reach God without someone to mediate. The next reason Calvin gives that God took on the person of Christ is simply because God wanted to do it. Calvin summarizes here that Christ is the total package, and that he contains at the same time God qualities and human qualities; he’ll list each of these qualities in the next chapter. While it is true that Christ had a threefold task - to blaze the path to eternal life, to show us how to live a life free from sin, and to save us from our own destruction - we should not be too prideful to think it was necessary for Christ to be born. This all happened because God wanted it to happen. The third reason is to teach us how to be obedient to God. The only way to counter disobedience is with obedience, and so Christ was a hundred percent obedient to God.
Chapter 13 is mainly a list of scripture references that point to the ways that Christ is human, followed by a list of passages that point to the ways Christ is Divine. In the first section, Calvin discusses Christ’s human attributes. There is a lot of evidence in Scripture for this, and Calvin takes great notes. A few of the many the examples that Calvin lists: Christ was born of a virgin’s womb, he was the seed of David, and he was subjected to hunger, thirst, and cold. These are only a few references; Calvin lists many more. Then, Calvin shifts focus to discuss Christ’s Godlike qualities. Calvin calls special attention to the fact that Christ was conceived by the Holy Spirit. He notes other Godly qualities of Christ can be found in Romans 5:12,18; 1 Corinthians 15:47 Rom. 8:3-4; and John 17:19.
Chapter 14 discusses the interesting and wonderful paradox of the God-man. Having well established in the previous chapter that Christ the Mediator has both human and divine qualities rolled into one package, Calvin is careful to note that none of these qualities co-mingled. At the end of the first section, he introduces the idea of “communicating of properties.” This is the ultimate paradox: Christ’s human properties and divine properties are completely separate but completely combined. Calvin concludes the last chapter in this portion of the Institutes by discussing how to rightly interpret scripture.
Chapter 14 discusses the interesting and wonderful paradox of the God-man. Having well established in the previous chapter that Christ the Mediator has both human and divine qualities rolled into one package, Calvin is careful to note that none of these qualities co-mingled. At the end of the first section, he introduces the idea of “communicating of properties.” This is the ultimate paradox: Christ’s human properties and divine properties are completely separate but completely combined. Calvin concludes the last chapter in this portion of the Institutes by discussing how to rightly interpret scripture.
I think this topic that Calvin discusses in these chapters must still be relevant today. As Christ is the central figure and ultimate reason that Christianity exists, we should understand who he is and the gravity of what it means for God to be incarnate.
A friend of mine who identifies as an atheist once asked me how it makes sense for the son of God to be murdered (a breach of the sixth commandment) as a sort ransom for fallen humanity. What advice would you give me for engaging in this conversation?
Wow, an amazingly concise and clear post, I appreciate your writing on these chapters of the Institutes, thank you.
ReplyDeleteIn answer to your question, I am first drawn to Christ's obedience which counters our (Adam's, Eve's, our) disobedience. And so, some prior conversation of our sad state would need to be acknowledged, then the concept of undoing a wrong. Jesus takes on the sin of the world, the walk Jesus takes to the Cross is a walk of anguish and as I see this a gradual taking on of the sin of the world, consummated in the greatest sin of all, that of humanity's blindness, pride and anger toward this man of God who claims to be of God, and as the Gospel proclaims is indeed God. Humanity, the authorities both political and religious come against Jesus and all that he stands for and humiliates, names him corrupt and puts to death Jesus. It is by Jesus' commitment, self-denial, and obedience to God and to us (as this is for our redemption) that He allows the gruesome act to unfold and come to fruition. It is murder in one sense (as this was the heart of those who clamored for it, and made it so) and it is also a willful act in which Jesus gave himself. This action was to cover all sins, and by being obedient to the Sin of All Sins, the conviction and death of Jesus (of God) on the Cross all sin is covered in one redemptive act.
I am sure this isn't sufficient, but it is how my mind thinks and addresses this, wonderfully difficult question!
Claire, you said in part, "...it is also a willful act in which Jesus gave himself." I think this is a key piece of the puzzle, and I think Calvin would agree with that statement. Thank you for underlining this.
DeleteOne of the blessings of this class for me is that I am using a copy of the Institutes that once belonged to my former pastor, Rev. Nancy Becker. She was the first female pastor I had ever known. And although it is sure that Calvin would have never approved of an ordained woman, Nancy has left no doubt in my mind that she was truly called by God to teach and preach the Gospel. The reason I mention this is because she has given me her copy of the Institutes that she used in seminary and I have the benefit of following the places that she had underlined as well as her notes in the margins.
ReplyDeleteWritten in the section 2.12.1 where Calvin writes “The situation would surely have been hopeless had the very majesty of God not descended to us, since it was not in our power to ascend to him” she has written in the margin one word, ‘accommodation’.
As a person with a visual disability the word accommodation is a powerful word because of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Under this Act the disabled can expect that all public places and institutions of business must make accommodations for us to participate in all the opportunities available to others.
This is what God has done for us through Jesus Christ. We now can get to that place where we could not get to before. Now as to your friend I might say that, Christ was not murdered, but willing gave his life to make us whole and that our Christian journey is a surrender of the heart and mind through humility. If you seek God in this way… You will find the answers.
Thank you for highlighting the accommodation. I am also using a donated copy of the Institutes. Unlike your copy, mine was donated with just the name of the previous author (in pencil). I really appreciate your willingness to share. You made an accommodation to us. Thanks.
DeleteTim, thank you for sharing Rev. Becker's note. I love that word, "accommodation." I think that you and she are both on to something here. It is through Christ's willingness to give his life that we are accommodated. "Murder" didn't sit well with me, but in the moment I couldn't come up with the "willingly gave" language that you offered. Thanks again, Tim!
ReplyDeleteGreat job summarizing these chapters of the Institutes, Wil. One of the things I found interesting in Calvin is the difference he has with Anselm. Anselm in his "On the Incarnation" indicates God was forced to send Jesus Christ as a solution to an "absurd" dilemma. Calvin, as you indicate, did it because of the Lord's compassion and Grace. Although I had accepted Anselm's view on this, Calvin has me rethinking that.
ReplyDeleteYou definitely pose a difficult question. I don't think Christ's death on the cross can be construed as murder as your friend would have it. In a sense it is both a legalistic act of reconciliation, and as you and Claire note above a willing act of love. It would be like a parent taking the blame for a crime of a child and accepting the punishment for that crime.
Bill, my mind went to the same place. It is so tempting to think that Jesus was sent because there was no other way to finally get through to that obstinate lot of people! However, when I think about it, it seems that in several points in history (hundreds, actually) that the world could have used Jesus Christ. Which leaves me in Calvin's camp, thinking that God willed it to happen at exactly that time (2.12.1).
DeleteCalvin is so eloquent at certain points in his Institutes. In describing the reason for Jesus' presence in humanity, he says, "Otherwise the nearness would not have been near enough." (2.12.1) I keeps me going to think that some day, the nearness might get that near again.
Bill, are you maybe conflating Athanasius and Anselm? In church history we read Athanasius, On the Incarnation, in which Athanasius tried to explain why it was OK for God to take a human body--a real mind-bender for someone, like him, steeped in Platonism. Athanasius talked about the "divine dilemma" of humans, created for immortality, being cursed by corruption and death instead. This dilemma was unfitting, irrational, so God had to do something extraordinary about it: become incarnate. Athanasius also talked about Christ wielding the body as an instrument to accomplish salvation and to get the attention of humans, who weren't seeing God in creation, even though they should have been able to.
DeleteWe also read Anselm, Cur Deus Homo (Why God Became Man), and there the focus was on the apparent injustice of Christ's death--a subject closer to the question posed by Wil's friend. Anselm offered the very nuanced explanation that God didn't kill Christ, but demanded his obedience, which Christ owed him on account of his humanity. The consequence of this obedience, in Christ's particular circumstance, was death on the cross. A relevant quote from Anselm, Book 1, section 9: "God, therefore, did not force Christ to die, there being no sin in him. Rather, he underwent death of his own accord, not out of an obedience consisting in the abandonment of his life, but out of an obedience consisting in his upholding of righteousness so bravely and pertinaciously that as a result he incurred death."
Long story short, the puzzle of Christ's divinity and humanity had a long history before Calvin took it up. For those of you who have taken the first semester of church history, this section of Calvin is a bit of a review; for those of you who haven't, it's a preview.
I did mix them up. I think it is the "A" at the beginning of their names. Sorry about the mix up. It is errors such as these that sere such facts into my memory. Thanks for setting me straight, and the review.
DeleteGreat job Will on summarizing and capturing a glimpse of Christ's character - as both human and divine! I think that as we think of how to respond to your friends question of the "murder" of Jesus it is helpful to consider that it is easy for us to separate Christ the man and Christ as God. It is easy to consider these two aspects of Christ's being separately. When one thinks of murder, perhaps this friend is only seeing the "human" side of Christ. Also it depends on the perspective or viewpoint from which the question is asked. When we think of the crowds, murder is quite appropriate. When we see it from the saving work accomplished by God through Christ, this act of love is nothing less than a gift of grace. Calvin does a wonderful job as you said of reminding us that these two natures of Christ cannot be separated but do not combine.
ReplyDeleteRic - well - stated. I have been thinking about the humanity of Jesus for sometime. It seems that because Christ is fully human and fully divine that we don't actually see him as fully human because he is so perfect. Yet, I think Christ's death on the cross is that very human part of him and so to the concept of murder posed by Will's friend. What is more heinous in the human condition than murder, and what could best embody Christ's experience of being fully human?
DeleteWil you did a wonderful job of summarizing the chapters, answering the question and stating the relevance of this section of the Institutes. You not only posed a thought-provoking, relevant question, you have also modeled for me how to respond to most of the comments on this post. Thank you!
ReplyDeleteI agree with what our classmates wrote about the “willful act” of Jesus and I too, love that word “accommodation.” I wonder if it is appropriate to take your friend from Good Friday all the way to Easter. “O death, where is your sting?” Jesus accepted the will of the Father and died an excruciating death, perhaps feeling abandoned and despised. Yet this same Father raised Jesus from the dead and now everything is different. Jesus is seated on the right hand of the Father and he sent his Holy Spirit to be among us as a counselor and comforter. If Jesus would have stayed dead, it would have been difficult to see the love, grace and mercy of this sacrifice.
It's not murder, its love. And I'm with Calvin on this - man is so totally depraved. Yet, God still chooses to love us. Then, He provides the only means possible to be reconciled to us. All in God's amazing plan and all in God's perfect timing. Wonder what more could He do to get our attention?
ReplyDeleteYes, Pam! One would think that this act would be enough to get our attention. This should be easy! Thank you for your insight!
DeleteI thank you for the clear and concise summary Lane’s chapter 13. It included three chapters of the Institutes. I think the beginning to your question is this summary. You wrote, it is true that Christ had a threefold task - to blaze the path to eternal life, to show us how to live a life free from sin, and to save us from our own destruction. The conversation with your atheist friend is surely not going to be easy. But, if we believe that God uses messengers (as we read in Calvin Institutes Book 1), you may be the person to the messenger. There are books that have been written by former atheists that are now Christians that may be able to help.
ReplyDeleteI think we are all on a mission (more than just a Calvin class). Christ had a threefold task according to Calvin. We have the gift of the Holy Spirit to help us teach that to others. The truth is you may never be able to convert the atheist, but with God’s help (maybe even a messenger or two) anything is possible.
Having been in the atheist camp for a while, I can try to input here. Atheists, who claim not to believe in God, are usually seeking desperately to discover what they do believe and it usually takes root in a Descartes "I think therefore I am" and they reconstruct a world based on me, so all reality is based largely on what they see, hear, rationally understand etc. If there is purpose, it is in the purpose of me. In this construct, then, they cannot visualize reality outside of a personal experience. Therefore, things or experiences that hurt the self are to be avoided, they are intrinsically bad and therefore how could anyone willingly go to his death especially for others if it could be stopped. Radical selfless love is not part of the atheist reality. They are stung by Jesus words, "For those who want to save their life will lose it, and those who lose their life for my sake, and for the sake of the gospel, will save it. For what will it profit them to gain the whole world and forfeit their life." (Mark 8:35-36) - This passage terrified me! We as Christians know, however, a world based on individual reality only fuels human sin. As Christians, we understand that life in much bigger than our individual earthly reality, and Christ, even though he feared death, understood that he had to experience human "me"-ness, die the most humanly self-serving death ever (murder), and rise from the dead to save us. It is the most selfless act of Jesus ever by both God, who gives his son over to human sin and by Jesus who willingly goes to the cross.
DeleteChristy, I love this perspective, especially your words, "radical selfless love." I think you are right to feel that this is a very difficult concept for an atheist to grasp. Their world is indeed "me"-centric. You've highlighted something here that I hadn't thought of before...Jesus' own willingness is a response to human sin, both metaphorically and literally.
DeleteSome atheists describe experiences of selflessness: http://www.faithstreet.com/onfaith/2007/01/08/consciousness-without-faith-1/8436
DeleteBut the death of Christ is hard for anyone to understand, really.
My comment to this article is in the author's final statement which is a measure of happiness as the ultimate purpose in life. Contemplation, even if you can experience selflessness ultimately is for determining what makes you happy. He is spending a lot of effort contemplating why God doesn't exist and how to find purpose within life and he discovers the most egocentric purpose of all - happiness (measured ultimately by HIM).
DeleteGod had to come in human form as Calvin call us to mind “that the Mediator was to accomplish was no common thing” (Institutes, 2.12.2). To restore God’s grace on fallen man and bring us back to God. I agree with Calvin and like the language Calvin uses to describe the Son – “who could have done this had not the self same Son of God become the Son of man, and had not taken what was ours as to impart what was his to us, and to make to us, and to make what was by his nature ours by grace?” (Institutes, 2.12.2).
ReplyDeleteCalvin clearly explains why it is important that self-same Son was the only one who could take away our sins and restore us to God’s grace. The mode of atonement is only by the Father and not human.
Kwasi as I reading your post the age old question comes to my mind, 'Why couldn't have God just forgiven us? The answer is that this is not justice. The only way for forgiveness to come is for the Son of God to become the son of man. He went to the cross as our Mediator. This is the only way there is both justice and grace.
DeleteYes! Thanks Tim!
DeleteI agree, Tim, there is a justice element to all of this. Thanks for raising this point.
DeleteWil,great summary. Lets always remember it was a double transaction. He paid our debt but even a greater wonder to me is we receive his righteousness even as an equal heir. "how unsearchable are his judgments' and how inscrutable His ways.
ReplyDeleteWow Will, thanks for the excellent summary of the Christ's nature. I tried to respond to ideas of others above. I think it is really hard for us to wrap our brains around being human and being divine at the same time. One of God's mysteries. Calvin discuss these 2 natures in chapter 14 where he is clear to tell us that there is no mingling between word and flesh. I think this explains why Christ refers to himself as Son of Man as he is fully human, yet recognizes his responsibility to God. (Calvin discusses this as well) I think it also explains Christ's fear and sense of abandonment at death - these are fully human experiences. Maybe because I'm a historian and came to Christ through the historical Jesus, but I like to think about the human Christ, the one who wept.
ReplyDelete