Epitome, Article VIII: Of the Person of Christ

From the controversy concerning the Holy Supper a disagreement has arisen between the pure theologians of the Augsburg Confession and the Calvinists, who also have confused some other theologians, concerning the person of Christ and the two natures in Christ and their properties.

p. 516 Statement of the Controversy

Chief Controversy in this Dissension

The chief question, however, has been whether, because of the personal union, the divine and human natures, as also their properties, have really, that is, in deed and truth, a communion with one another in the person of Christ, and how far this communion extends?

The Sacramentarians have asserted that the divine and human natures in Christ are united personally in such a way that neither has really, that is, in deed and truth, in common with the other that which is peculiar to either nature, but that they have in common nothing more than the names alone. For “union,” they plainly say,¹ “makes common names,” i. e. the personal union makes nothing more than the names common, namely, that God is called man, and man God, yet in such a way that God has nothing really, that is, in deed and truth, in common with humanity, and humanity nothing in common with divinity, as to its majesty and properties. Dr. Luther, and those who hold with him, have, against the Sacramentarians, contended for the contrary.

¹ See below, § 24-28. Borrowed by Sacramentarians from Theodore.

Affirmative

Pure Doctrine of the Christian Church concerning the Person of Christ

To explain this controversy, and settle it according to the p. 517 guidance [analogy] of our Christian faith, our doctrine, faith and confession is as follows:

Parallel passages: (Ecumenical Creeds: Augsburg Confession, III.; Apology, III.; Smalcald Articles, Part I.; Small Catechism, Creed, Art. ii.; Large Catechism, ib.; Formula of Concord, Sol. Dec., viii. Cf. Martin Chemnitz, De duabus naturis.

1. That the divine and human natures in Christ are personally united, so that there are not two Christs, one the Son of God, the other the Son of man, but that one and the same is the Son of God and Son of man (Luke 1:; Rom. 9:5).

2. We believe, teach and confess that the divine and human natures are not mingled into one substance, nor the one changed into the other, but each retains its own essential properties, which can never become the properties of the other nature.

3. The properties of the divine nature are: to be almighty, eternal, infinite, and, according to the property of its nature and its natural essence, to be, of itself, everywhere present, to know everything, etc.; which never become properties of the human nature.

4. The properties of the human nature are: to be a corporeal creature, to be flesh and blood, to be finite and circumscribed, to suffer, to die, to ascend and descend, to move from one place to another, to suffer hunger, thirst, cold, heat, and the like; which never become properties of the divine nature.

5. As the two natures are united personally, i. e. in one person, we believe, teach and confess that this union is not such a combination and connection that neither nature should have anything in common with the other, personally, i. e. because of the personal union, as when two boards are glued together, where neither gives anything to the other, or takes anything from the other.¹ But here is the highest communion, which God has truly with [assumed] man, from which personal union and the highest and ineffable communion that follows therefrom, all results that is said and believed of the human concerning God, and of the divine concerning the man Christ; as the ancient teachers of the Church explained this union and communion of the natures by the illustration of iron glowing with fire, and also by the union of body and soul in man.²

¹ Cf. Sol. Dec. viii.: 14, 15.

² So Gregory of Nyssa, Basil, John Damascenus. See Catalogue of Testimonies.

6. Hence we believe, teach and confess that God is a man and man is God, which could not be if the divine and human natures had, in deed and truth, absolutely no communion with one another.

For how could a man, the son of Mary, in truth be called or be God, the Son of the Highest, if his humanity were not personally united with the Son of God, and he thus had really, i. e. in deed and truth, nothing in common with him, except only the name of God?

p. 518 7. Hence we believe, teach and confess that Mary conceived and bore not a mere man, and no more, but the true Son of God; therefore she is also rightly called and is the mother of God.

8. Hence we also believe, teach and confess that it was not a mere man who, for us, suffered, died, was buried, descended to hell, arose from the dead, ascended into heaven, and was raised to the majesty and almighty power of God, but a man whose human nature has such a profound, ineffable union and communion with the Son of God that it is [was made] one person with him.

9. Therefore the Son of God truly suffered for us, nevertheless according to the property of the human nature, which he assumed into the unity of his divine person, and made it his own, so that he might suffer and be our high priest for our reconciliation with God, as it is written (1 Cor. 2:8): “They have crucified the Lord of glory.” And (Acts 20:28): “We are purchased with God’s blood.”

10. Hence we believe, teach and confess that the Son of man is really, that is, in deed and truth, exalted, according to his human nature, to the right hand of the almighty majesty and power of God, because he [that man] was assumed into God when he was conceived of the Holy Ghost in his mother’s womb, and his human nature was personally united with the Son of the Highest.

11. This majesty, according to the personal union, he [Christ] always had, and yet, in the state of his humiliation, he abstained from it, and, on this account, truly grew in all wisdom and favor with God and men;¹ therefore he exercised this majesty, not always, but when [as often as] it pleased him, until, after his resurrection, he entirely laid aside the form of a servant, and not the nature, and was established in the full use, manifestation and declaration of the divine majesty, and thus entered into his glory (Phil. 2: sqq.), so that now not only as God, but also as man, he knows all things, can do all things, is present with all creatures, and has, under his feet and in his hands, everything that is in heaven, and on earth, and under the earth, as he himself testifies (Matt. 28:18; John 13:3): “All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.” And St. Paul says (Eph. 4:10): “He ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.” Everywhere present, he can exercise this his power, and to him everything is possible and everything known.

¹ See Luke 2:52.

12. Hence, being present, he also is able, and to him it is very easy, to impart his true body and blood in the Holy Supper, p. 519 not according to the mode or property of the human nature, but according to the mode and property of the right hand of God, as Dr. Luther says in our Christian Faith for

Children [according to the analogy of our Christian faith comprised in his Catechism]; which presence [of Christ in the Holy Supper] is not [physical or] earthly, or Capernaitic; nevertheless it is true and substantial, as the words of his testament sound: “This is, is, is my body,” etc.

By this our doctrine, faith and confession the person of Christ is not divided, as it was by Nestorius, who denied the communicatio idiomatum, i. e. the true communion of the properties of both natures in Christ, and thus separated the person, as Luther has explained in his book concerning the Councils. Neither are the natures, together with their properties, confounded with one another [or mingled] into one essence, as Eutyches erred; neither is the human nature in the person of Christ denied, or extinguished, nor is either creature changed into the other;¹ but Christ is and remains, for all eternity, God and man in one undivided person, which, next to the Holy Trinity, is the highest mystery, as the Apostle testifies (1 Tim. 3:16), upon which our only consolation, life and salvation depend.

¹ Error of Monophysites, Schwenkfeldians. See below, xii.: 29.

p. 519 Negative

Contrary False Doctrines concerning the Person of Christ

Therefore we reject and condemn, as contrary to God’s Word and our simple [pure] Christian faith, all the following erroneous articles, when it is taught:

1. That God and man in Christ are not one person, but that the one is the Son of God, and the other the Son of man, as Nestorius raved.

2. That the divine and human natures have been mingled with one another into one essence, and the human nature has been changed into Deity, as Eutyches fanatically asserted.

3. That Christ is not true, natural and eternal God, as Arius held [blasphemed].

4. That Christ did not have a true human nature [consisting] of body and soul, as Marcion imagined.

5. That the personal union renders only the names and titles common.²

² See above, § 3. Cf. § 26.

6. That it is only a phrase and mode of speaking³ when it is said: God is man, man is God; for that the divinity has nothing in common with the humanity, as also the humanity p. 520 has nothing really, that is, in deed and truth, common with the divinity [Deity].

³ Zwingli termed it allæosis. Cf. Sol. Dec., viii., § 89 sqq.

7. That the communication is only verbal when it is said: “The Son of God died for the sins of the world;” “The Son of man has become almighty.”

8. That¹ the human nature in Christ has become an infinite essence in the same manner as the divinity, and from this, essential power and property, imparted and effused upon the human nature, and separated from God, is everywhere present in the same manner as the divine nature.

¹ Charged by Bullinger, Beza, Peter Martyr against the Wittenberg theologians. Cf. Sol. Dec., viii., § 63.

9. That the human nature has become equal to, and like the divine nature, in its substance and essence, or in its essential properties.

10. That the human nature of Christ is locally extended in all places of heaven and earth, which should not be ascribed even to the divine nature.

11. That, because of the property of his human nature, it is impossible for Christ to be able to be at the same time in more than one place, much less to be everywhere with his body.²

² “Let them no longer ascribe to the glorified body of Christ the property of being in many places at once.”—Calvin’s Institutes, iv.: 17, 29. “The body of Christ, since its resurrection, is limited, and received into heaven till the last day.”—Ib. 26.

12. That only the mere humanity has suffered for us and redeemed us, and that the Son of God in suffering had actually no participation with the humanity, as though it did not pertain to him.³

³ Cf. Sol. Dec., viii.: 40 sqq.

13. That Christ is present with us on earth in the Word, the sacraments and all our troubles, only according to his divinity, and this presence does not at all pertain to his human nature, according to which he has also nothing more whatever to do with us even upon earth, since he redeemed us by his suffering and death.⁴

⁴ Calvin. Cf. Sol. Dec., viii.: 78 sqq.; 87 sqq.

14. That the Son of God, who assumed human nature, since he has laid aside the form of a servant does not perform all the works of his omnipotence in, through and with his human nature, but only some, and those too only in the place⁵ where his human nature is locally.

⁵ I. e. in heaven. Cf. above, vii.: 32. Also note to vii.: 14.

15. That, according to his human nature, he is not at all capable⁶ of omnipotence and other attributes of the divine nature p. 521 against the express declaration of Christ (Matt. 28:18): “All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.” And [they contradict] St. Paul [who says] (Col. 2:9): “In him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.”

⁶ Beza in Mompelgard Colloquy: “The finite is not capable or participant of the infinite.”

16. That to him [to Christ according to his humanity] great power is given in heaven and upon earth, namely, greater and more than to all angels and other creatures, but that he has no participation in the omnipotence of God, and that this also has not been given him. Hence they devise an intermediate power, that is, such power between the almighty power of God and the power of other creatures, given to Christ, according to his humanity, by the exaltation, as is less than God’s almighty power, and greater than that of other creatures.¹

¹ Cf. Sol. Dec., viii.: 54, 55. Errors 16–19 were held by some of the Calvinists.

17. That Christ, according to his human spirit, has a certain limit as to how much he should know, and that he knows no more than is becoming and needful for him to know for [the execution of] his office as judge.

18. That not even yet does Christ have a perfect knowledge of God and all his works; of whom, nevertheless, it is written (Col. 2:3): “In whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.”

19. That it is impossible for Christ, according to his human mind, to know what has been from eternity, what at the present time is everywhere occurring, and will be yet to [all] eternity.

20. When it is taught, and the passage (Matt. 28:18): “All power is given unto me,” etc., is thus interpreted and blasphemously perverted, viz. that to Christ according to the divine nature, at the resurrection and his ascension to heaven, was restored, i. e. delivered again all power in heaven and on earth; as though, in his state of humiliation, he had also, according to his divinity,² divested himself of this and abandoned it. By this doctrine, not only are the words of the testament of Christ perverted, but also the way is prepared for the accursed Arian heresy, so that finally the eternal divinity of Christ is denied, and thus Christ, and with him our salvation, are entirely lost where this false doctrine is not [constantly] contradicted from the firm foundation of God’s Word and our simple Christian [Catholic] faith.

² The Crypto-Calvinists taught that Christ was exalted according to both natures.