Category: Pieper 1968

Justification by Faith

10/31/2022

Pieper, Francis. Christian Dogmatics: Volume 2. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1968.
“Justification by Faith” (Loc. 11414).

In this lengthy last chapter, Pieper discusses justification under twelve headings.

“Justification by Faith,Without the Deeds of the Law” (Pieper 1968, Loc. 11414). Justification of the sinner is appropriated solely by faith. It is not based on works of any kind. Pieper observes this is radically different from any human ideas, which always compel works (Ibid., Loc. 11423).
“The Strong Language Used by Scripture Against the Workmongers” (Ibid., Loc. 11453). The Bible clearly condemns the idea that good works lead to justification.
“The Postulates of Justification by Faith, Without Works” (Ibid., Loc. 11471). If Christ had not accomplished “objective justification” the offer of subjective justification would be worthless.
“Justification the Central Doctrine of the Christian Religion” (Ibid., Loc. 11545). Pieper along with the Lutheran Reformers finds justification absolutely central. He provides many biblical reasons.
“All Christians Believe in Justification by Faith” (Ibid., Loc. 11602). Without this doctrine one cannot be said to be a Christian. Pieper illustrates the concept from Scripture.
“The Disastrous Results of the Denial of Justification by Faith” (Ibid., Loc. 11633). Pieper contends that denial of justification by faith precludes having saving faith. It makes the individual into the source of salvation. It also clouds our view of distinctive doctrine (Ibid., Loc. 11655), making all religions seem adequate.
“The Terminology Employed in Presenting the Doctrine of Justification” (Ibid., Loc. 11681). Pieper lists several ways the Church has reliably presented the doctrine. Specifically he unpacks “by grace for Christ’s sake, through faith.” Pieper cites numerous ways in which various traditions fall short of this standard.
“Justification on the Basis of Works” (Ibid., Loc. 11919). This is a civil justification recognized by our neighbors as we do the works of faith.
“The Doctrine of Justification and the Distinction Between the Law and the Gospel” (Ibid., Loc. 11983). Pieper observes that justification is entirely a matter of Gospel.
“The Assurance of Justification” (Ibid., Loc. 12018). Anyone who believes Christ has every reason for certainty.
“The Papacy and the Doctrine of Justification” (Ibid., Loc. 12051). The Roman Church condemns justification by grace through faith, according to Pieper. It requires that works be mixed in (Ibid., Loc. 12064).
“Modern Protestant Theology and the Doctrine of Justification” (Ibid., Loc. 12104). Pieper sees modernist theology as also reverting to justification by works.

In conclusion, Pieper views justification by grace through faith as central to all Christian faith.

0 Comments

Conversion

10/28/2022

0 Comments

Pieper, Francis. Christian Dogmatics: Volume 2. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1968.
“Conversion” Loc. 10240.

In this lengthy chapter with many discursive footnotes Pieper ties the doctrine of conversion to the doctrine of justification. Luther rejected the idea found in the Roman church that “man still retains the faculty of applying himself to the gracious work of God” (Pieper 1968, Loc. 10245). If man is able to cooperate with God’s grace for salvation then salvation is not of God. It is by works (Ibid., Loc. 10257). Pieper labels Melanchthon as having capitulated to a synergistic message and portrays him and Calvinists as finally believing salvation by works (Ibid., Loc. 10261). He moves on with ten points describing a Scriptural doctrine of conversion.

The Nature of Conversion (Ibid., Loc. 10266). This is a turning from one’s own morality and accepting the grace of God. It is not a work of moral purification but is a reception of forgiveness.
The Efficient Cause of Conversion (Ibid., Loc. 10297). There are three possible ways to see conversion. It may be done by man alone, by man and God together, or by God alone. Pieper asserts that “Scripture and our Lutheran Confessions teach divine monergism “ (God alone) (Ibid., Loc. 10302). This idea is absolutely foreign to us by nature (Ibid., Loc. 10338).
The Means Through Which God Effects Conversion (Ibid., Loc. 10355). This is the word of the Gospel, which creates faith.
The Inner Motions in Conversion (Ibid., Loc. 10368). Pieper points out a troubled conscience followed by a heartfelt trust in Christ.
Conversion Is Instantaneous (Ibid., Loc. 10390). There may be time for preparation but we do not find a period of time between unbelief and belief.
Man Can Prevent His Conversion (Ibid., Loc. 10445). Many passages of Scripture speak of resisting and rejecting God’s grace. This does not mean God is not omnipotent. When he works through means he can be resisted (Ibid., Loc. 10459).
Transitive and Intransitive Conversion (Ibid., Loc. 10463). These terms describe one action from two perspectives. Intransitive: God turns the sinner. Transitive: the sinner turns.
Continued Conversion (Ibid., Loc. 10481). “Conversion continues throughout the life of the believer” (Ibid., Loc. 10481, Matt. 18:3). We daily seek God’s forgiveness and renewal. This is distinguished from the initial conversion which starts the Christian life (Ibid., Loc. 10494).
Re-Conversion (Ibid., Loc. 10498). “Scripture clearly teaches that a true believer may lapse from grace and lose his faith . . . they who have fallen from faith may be re-converted” (Ibid., Loc. 10510).
Objections to Divine Monergism in Conversion (Ibid., Loc. 10541). There are two basic categories of objections, “ostensible” and “real.” Pieper here deals with “ostensible reasons, which argue in the name of logic. All in all, human logic is inadequate to deal with divine wisdom and God’s sovereignty (Ibid., Loc. 10549). Pieper draws multiple illustrations from typical arguments against monergism.

0 Comments

Order of Events in Salvation

10/27/2022

0 Comments

Pieper, Francis. Christian Dogmatics: Volume 2. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1968.
“Orderly Arrangement of the Doctrines Pertaining to the ‘Ordo Salutis’” Loc. 9396.

Many will say the Lutheran Confessions do not present a way of salvation in order. Pieper says this is not the case (Pieper 1968, Loc. 9401). Though the Confessions were not written as a dogmatics text there is an order expressed in Formula of Concord Solid Declaration III.41 (Ibid., Loc. 9406). The first step is faith created by hearing the Gospel. Faith holds God’s grace and justifies. Then the person is sanctified, from which good works follow. Luther also uses the same order in his catechisms when explaining the Third Article of the Creed (Ibid., Loc. 9411). In any case, the center of a biblical view of salvation is saving faith in Jesus (Ibid., Loc. 9448). This leads Pieper to discuss multiple facets of saving faith, as he finds it poorly defined and easily misunderstood in the Church. I enumerate his headers in his words.

The Sole Object of Saving Faith is the Gospel (Ibid., Loc. 9478). This is distinct from trusting “the Bible.” It is specifically the substitutionary atonement of Christ.
Saving Faith Is “Fiducia Cordis” (Ibid., Loc. 9520). The heart relies on the Gospel’s promises of grace.
Saving Faith Is “Fides Specialis” (Ibid., Loc. 9596). By this Pieper means it is personal faith, appropriated to oneself.
Saving Faith is “Fides Actualis” (Ibid., Loc. 9627). There is an element of “apprehension of the divine promises of the Gospel by an act of the intellect and will” (Ibid.)
The Function of Faith in Justification (Ibid., Loc. 9690). Pieper reiterates that faith is merely the instrument for apprehending justification. It is not a work of goodness in itself.
Saving Faith is “Fides Directa” (Ibid., Loc. 9796). It is directed toward Christ, not faith in faith itself.
Saving Faith Embraces the Assurance of Grace. Faith and the Testimony of the Holy Ghost (Ibid., Loc. 9817). There is an assurance of grace from the Holy Spirit.
Saving Faith is Trust in the Grace That is Offered to Us in the Gospel (Ibid., Loc. 9842).
The Faith of Infants (Ibid., Loc. 9866). Scripture says children can have faith and eternal life regardless of their capacity to reason.
On the Meaning of the Term “Faith” (Ibid., Loc. 9886). Sometimes the Bible uses “faith” to refer to faithful behavior. This behavior does not justify. It is the belief that Jesus’ death was for the believer which justifies.

0 Comments

Salvation Comes to Us

10/26/2022

0 Comments

Pieper, Francis. Christian Dogmatics: Volume 2. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1968.
“The Application of Salvation (Soteriology).” Loc. 9026 “Preliminary Survey”

Pieper begins his survey of the application of salvation by observing there are many terms which may be used to describe it. All speak of an analysis of how salvation is brought to specific individuals. Pieper’s concern is that the Scripture be the basis for all understanding, especially what the Scripture says about Christ’s vicarious satisfaction. He has brought salvation by himself and can declare how it is applied (Pieper 1968, Loc. 9031). Pieper is clear that salvation must be understood as appropriated by faith alone, nothing else (Pieper 1968, Loc. 9036). As taught in 2 Cor. 5:19; Rom. 5:18 5:10; 4:25 God provided forgiveness and announced it clearly to mankind (Pieper 1968, Loc. 9062). This announcement comes to men “whether it be spoken or read or pondered in the heart” (Pieper 1968, Loc. 9077). The news of salvation must be believed to produce salvation in the individual (Pieper 1968, Loc. 9088). This belief, which applies salvation, ultimately results in the evidence of some sort of good works, the result, rather than the cause, of salvation (Pieper 1968, Loc. 9115). Pieper considers words such as illumination, awakening, regeneration, and calling to be used synonymously. Attempts to divide salvation and harmonize the terms generally are frustrating and confusing (Pieper 1968, Loc. 9125).

Pieper continues to discuss the importance of justification by grace through faith, explaining that faith is not seen as a good work and that the justification is not earned by faith but applied by faith (Pieper 1968, Loc. 9142).

Not only is this justification the heart of Christian doctrine, it gives many blessings. Pieper observes that justification gives us grace and peace (Pieper 1968, Loc. 9175). It also brings the presence of God into the life of the believer (Pieper 1968, Loc. 9216) in a way specific to Christians. Again, Pieper emphasizes that this new life leads to good works (Pieper 1968, Loc. 9239). Finally, Pieper observes the eternal aspect of salvation. It leads to a very positive promise of eternal bliss (Pieper 1968, Loc. 9310). This election of God to eternal life is done from the beginning of time, mysteriously assuring the salvation of all who believe (Pieper 1968, Loc. 9336). The “why” question is not answered in Scripture (Pieper 1968, Loc. 9361). Yet it is clear that all who believe are considered to be believers by the eternal mercy of God.

0 Comments

Christ As Prophet, Priest, and King

10/25/2022

0 Comments

Pieper, Francis. Christian Dogmatics: Volume 2. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1968.
“The Threefold Office of Christ.” (Loc. 7592)

Pieper observes that the work of Christ is differentiated from his person. “The Christian Church has from the earliest days divided the office, or work, of Christ into the prophetic, the high-priestly, and the kingly office” (Pieper 1968, Loc. 7598). At times Jesus is functioning in multiple offices at once. “All actions performed by our Prophet, Priest, and King are theanthropic actions” (Pieper 1968, Loc. 7608). The prophetic office is performed as Jesus teaches, in person and now through servants of the Gospel. Unlike other prophets, Jesus taught the things he knew from his divinity (Pieper 1968, Loc. 7621). He therefore surpassed all other prophets. Pieper illustrates this concept, comparing Moses’ and Jesus’ knowledge of God’s means of grace. Does Jesus’ prophetic work continue? “At His ascension to heaven Christ did not abdicate His prophetic office, but He still performs it - mediately” (Pieper 1968, Loc. 7677). He now uses the Church and his ministers.

As Priest, Christ purchased for us the grace he proclaims to us as prophet (Pieper 1968, Loc. 7718). Pieper emphasizes that Jesus’ role as prophet is directly dependent on his work as priest. In the state of humiliation Jesus reconciled the world to God (Pieper 1968, Loc. 7728). Pieper discusses the term vicarious satisfaction at some length. The essence is that Jesus was able to satisfy God’s anger at sin in the place of mankind. Pieper sees this as a very objective work, accomplished by God and applied to us subjectively as we believe (Pieper 1968, Loc. 7823). Pieper brings up a variety of objections to the sufficient vicarious atonement but consistently claims Scripture, not man’s reason, as the authority, This concept continues for some time in his discussion. It is essential, in his view, that salvation be completely the work of Christ without any hint of it depending upon our obedience. Rather, all salvation depends entirely on Christ’s obedience (Pieper 1968, Loc. 8240).

Pieper goes on to discuss the Old Testament sacrifices. While the pagans trusted that their sacrifices would appease wrath in the Old Testament the sacrifices looked forward to Christ who would bring forgiveness (Pieper 1968, Loc. 8263). Christ in his death pays the ransom to God for all mankind’s sin (Pieper 1968, Loc. 8291). Likewise in his priestly office Christ prays for all people and especially believers (Pieper 1968, Loc. 8313). In his exaltation he continues as a priest (Pieper 1968, Loc. 8318).

Finally, Christ as king is sovereign over all (Pieper 1968, Loc. 8355). his realm is invisible. It can be divided into his realm of power and of grace. It is always present and is quite real.

0 Comments

Christ As Office Holder

10/24/2022

0 Comments

Pieper, Francis. Christian Dogmatics: Volume 2. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1968.
“III The Doctrine of Christ’s Office (De Opere Sive Officio Christi)” Loc. 7558.

Not only is the person of Christ wonderful, so is the work he performed, the salvation of mankind (Pieper 1968, Loc. 7558). This work is often referred to as the “office” of Christ. This work began at his conception as he became “the Christ for us” (Ibid., Loc. 7567). Taking on our frail life is the whole point of Christ’s incarnation. Pieper observes that a view of Jesus perfecting the creation by his incarnation is not correct (Ibid.,Loc. 7579) because God had already declared all creation “very good.”

Pieper will go on to discuss the various separate offices of Christ as prophet, priest, and king at length. We will make notes in relatively small chunks.

0 Comments

He Ascended into Heaven

10/21/2022

0 Comments

Pieper, Francis. Christian Dogmatics: Volume 2. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1968.
“Christ’s Ascension.” (Loc. 7268) “Christ’s Session at God’s Right Hand.” (Loc. 7360)

Pieper contrasts the resurrection to the ascension of Christ. The resurrection took place in private and was followed by numerous appearances of Christ. The ascension, on the other hand, was a public, witnessed event. There have not been further appearances. In Acts 1:9 Jesus rises and a cloud receives him. This was a visible act, as opposed to his disappearance recorded in Luke 24:31 (Pieper 1968, Loc. 7277). According to Mark 16:19 and 1 Peter 3:22 the purpose of the ascension is primarily to fulfill his position of reign and authority (Ibid., Loc. 7285). In the ascension we find Christ, still in his divine and human nature, taking a place of universal dominion, the illocal presence denied by the Reformed theologians (Ibid., Loc. 7305). Pieper discusses Acts 3:21 at some length, focusing on a misreading, “Christ must be received” rather than “Christ must occupy” heaven. His argument, based on the voice of the infinitive verb (Ibid., Loc. 7322), overlooks the fact that the Greek infinitive is a deponent verb and cannot be adequately rendered with a passive. Regardless, the point of the argument is that, according to the test of Scripture, Jesus takes his authority. It is not given to him by heaven.

“The sitting of Christ at the right hand of God designates the unending dominion upon which Christ entered by His ascension” (Ibid., Loc. 7360). Pieper demonstrates from various Scriptures that the right hand of God is used to signify God’s power to accomplish His will (Ibid., Loc. 7364). The Lutheran confessions and theologians continue to affirm that Christ is working in His human and divine natures in heaven.

Pieper cuts off his discussion prior to the second advent of Christ, which he categorizes under eschatology.

0 Comments

He Rose Again from the Dead

10/20/2022

0 Comments

Pieper, Francis. Christian Dogmatics: Volume 2. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1968.
“The Resurrection of Christ.” (Loc. 7200)

The Scripture both says the Father raised Christ and that he raised himself. Pieper observes that when the Scripture talks about the Father raising Christ from the dead it is always viewing Jesus as the mediator (Pieper 1968, Loc. 7211).The rising from the dead as described in Romans 4:25”means the act of divine justification executed through God’s act of raising Christ from the dead, and it is for this reason called the objective justification of all mankind” (Ibid., Loc. 7211. Counter to this is “subjective justification” where we believe in the effectiveness of Christ’s resurrection. The Bible teaches a true bodily resurrection. Jesus shows himself to his disciples now, but he is able to do things in the resurrection which are “illocal” such as appear and disappear (Ibid., Loc. 7254). Jesus continued to be with the disciples for forty days.

0 Comments

He Descended Into Hell

10/19/2022

1 Comment

Pieper, Francis. Christian Dogmatics: Volume 2. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1968.
“Christ’s Descent into Hell.” (Loc. 7074)

The descent of Christ into hell, confessed in the Apostles’ Creed, comes from 1 Peter 3:18ff. The sequence of the passage makes it clear that Christ’s descent was after he returned to life in the tomb. The Formula of Concord (Solid Declaration IX.2) affirms that Christ descends in both his human and divine natures. The verb used for his activity is to proclaim, ἐκήρθξεν. This, Pieper observes, does not imply whether the content was Law or Gospel (Pieper 1968, Loc. 7095). Yet the people who hear Jesus seem to be those who would have heard and rejected. Pieper therefore views this not as a preaching of the Gospel but a proclamation that he would come soon as their judge (Ibid., Loc. 7117). Pieper then rejects four views of Christ’s descent.

Christ offered salvation in hell (Ibid., Loc. 7128).
Christ continued suffering in hell (Ibid., Loc. 7140).
The descent is figurative (Ibid., Loc. 7147).
Peter is merely speaking of Noah (Ibid., Loc. 7155).

Comments on the datives “to the flesh” and “to the spirit” suggest that Peter is contrasting flesh, which passes away, to spirit, which lasts forever. He is not removing bodily existence. There is a bodily resurrection. But the resurrection lasts forever (Ibid., Loc. 7167).

1 Comment

Stages of Humiliation and Exaltation

10/18/2022

0 Comments

Pieper, Francis. Christian Dogmatics: Volume 2. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1968.
“The Several Stages of Christ’s Humiliation and Exaltation.” (Loc. 6915)

Pieper, along with most theologians, divides the work of Christ into humiliation and exaltation. “Christ’s humiliation includes all events of His earthly life, from His conception to His burial” (Pieper 1968, Loc. 6915). Pieper has previously discussed the idea that incarnation itself is not part of humiliation. However, the mode of incarnation chosen was part of the humiliation. “This lowly mode is characteristic of the official work which Christ was to perform as the Redeemer of mankind” (Ibid., Loc. 6932). Jesus, with his goal of being a substitute for us, shared our development.

Pieper discusses the importance of not creating additional explanations of Jesus, such as childhood miracles. He grew as we do. He also emphasizes holding to the Scriptural idea of the virgin birth even though it does not make logical sense. The Scripture tells us what we need to know about this situation, not needing to be decreased or supplemented.

Pieper continues by discussing the debate over Mary’s perpetual virginity. Many have suggested that Mary did not have other children and that those called Jesus’ siblings were cousins or children of Joseph from a prior marriage. Pieper (Ibid., Loc. 6972ff) finds that there is not a biblical reason to accept or reject any of the possibilities.

According to Luke 2:52 Jesus, though sinless, did grow and learn. He took upon himself the same need to learn that we have. “Christ’s appearance in visible fom among men was in itself not a humiliation, for on Judgment Day He will appear visibly, as we learn from Matt. 25:31ff.; 1 Pet. 4:13; 2 Thess. 1:7, and other passages” (Ibid., Loc. 6994).

Having discussed incarnation and birth, Pieper turns to Christ’s suffering, which does extend to the entirety of his humiliation. The last two days, including Jesus’ death, has been called the Great Passion (Ibid., Loc. 7014). His greatest suffering was his taking on the sin of the world and knowing the rejection of the Father. “When Christ was forsaken of God, He felt the sin and guilt of all men in His soul as His own sin and guilt” (Ibid., Loc. 7014). This forsakenness, in the case of Jesus, was only temporary, as the redemption of mankind is also realized by him (Ibid., Loc. 7034). Likewise, Christ on the cross did not despair, for that is sin, but wondered at the agony of abandonment (Ibid., Loc. 7054).

0 Comments

Verbal Traps

10/17/2022

0 Comments

Pieper, Francis. Christian Dogmatics: Volume 2. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1968.
“On the Terminology Used in Describing the Humiliation and Exaltation.” (Loc. 6852)

Pieper states that the Formula of Concord uses “concealment” and “non-use” synonymously. “To say that Christ concealed His divine majesty is the same as saying that He did not use it . . . Christ was true God and yet did not act as God” (Pieper 1968, Loc. 6852). Pieper continues by listing several facets of Jesus’ life in which his divine power and majesty are concealed. This should not have led to theological debate, but it did. “The confusion which characterized the Crypto-Kenotic Controversy sprang largely from the fact that concealment and non-use were regarded as opposites” (Ibid, Loc. 6865). The difficulty that leads to arguments and to apparently self-contradictory statements, including within individual writings of Reformers, is that Jesus did lay aside his divine majesty but at the same time retained it. Pieper cites John 3:13 where Jesus on earth claims to be “on high.” By laying aside his authority we mean Jesus did not use that authority. The result is that the Son of God works “in et cum carne but not always through the human nature” Ibid., Loc. 6915).

0 Comments

Christ as King in State of Humiliation

10/14/2022

0 Comments

Pieper, Francis. Christian Dogmatics: Volume 2. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1968.
“The Crypto-Kenotic Controversy, 1619-1627” (Loc. 6772)

In the early 17th century a question of “how Christ executed His royal office in the state of humiliation” was arising (Loc. 6776). The two sides were roughly aligned with the faculty at Tuebingen and Giessen. The Tuebingen faculty, led by Theodor Thummius, articulated a crypticist position, saying that Jesus retained his omnipotence but hid it so it was not perceptible. Pieper points out, “The language of Tuebingen, which puts Christ at the right hand of God in the state of exinanition, was not Scriptural. It confused their thinking and even more so that of others” (Loc. 6789). On the other side of the debate, the Giessen faculty refused Christ’s omnipresence and tended to remove his human nature from ruling the world. “Since the humanity was received into the Person of the Son of God, it is eo ipso at every place where t he Son of God is” (Loc. 6798). To make this separation divides the Son of God into two persons. Jesus showed himself all-powerful in his human nature at various points. “Chemnitz rightly teaches that everything given to Christ through the will of God or through his exaltation does not come ‘from elsewhere and outside,’ . . . but only through the unio personalis” (Loc. 6818). Pieper concludes that on both sides of the controversy there were errors. “-Kenotic Controversy should never have taken place. It occurred only because both parties temporarily forgot the Lutheran principle so earnestly inculcated by the Formula of Concord (Trigl. 1033, Sol. Decl. VIII, 52-53) that we must not go beyond the ‘clear, certain testimonies in the Scriptures’” (Loc. 6830). Pieper further thinks both sides of the dispute finally contradicted what they believed to be true (Loc. 6838). This controversy did, however, bring criticism upon the Lutherans from both Reformed and Roman camps (Loc. 6843).

0 Comments

Wrong Views of Christ's Humiliation

10/13/2022

1 Comment

Pieper, Francis. Christian Dogmatics: Volume 2. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1968.
“False Views of the Humiliation of Christ” (Loc. 6699).

On one level Pieper acknowledges that the Incarnation is a humiliation. However, “this cannot be called a humiliation in the proper sense, for then Christ would have had to lay aside His human nature in the state of exaltation” (Pieper 1968, Loc. 6699). Pieper discusses various groups of “kenoticists” who take Jesus’ emptying himself to various degrees. The reasoning is that if Jesus maintained his deity he could not be a real man or that the deity would destroy the humanity. Jesus, however, asserts his eternity, his power, and his omniscience (Ibid., Loc. 6716). Pieper continues to make an argument that the kenoticists overthrow the Trinity as they deny one person of the Trinity divine attributes (Ibid., Loc. 6728). The conclusion then is that Jesus, in emptying himself, did not lose divine attributes but chose not to use them (Ibid., Loc. 6750).

1 Comment

Humiliation and Exaltation

10/12/2022

0 Comments

Pieper, Francis. Christian Dogmatics: Volume 2. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1968.
“The Doctrine of the States of Christ” (de statibus exinanitionis et exaltationis) (Loc. 6488).

In this second major section of his book Pieper will present several chapters about the humiliation and exaltation of Christ. This is laid out for us in both the Old and New Testaments. “What Scripture says concerning the lowliness of Christ . . . is advanced by the Unitarians and also the Reformed in argumentation against His deity, or at least against the communication of the divine attributes and works to the human nature.” (Pieper 1968, Loc. 6497).

“The Nature of the Humiliation and the Exaltation”

Even in his time of humiliation, Christ possessed the glory of God. “Accordingly, the humiliation of Christ consists in this, that He refrained, during His earthly life, from the full use of the divine glory communicated to His human nature” (Ibid., Loc. 6509). The laying aside of divine glory may be called exinanition (Ibid., Loc. 6515). “If the exinanition consists in a partial non-use of the divine majesty by the human nature, the exaltation consists in the full use of the divine majesty” (Ibid., Loc. 6523).

Pieper is clear that the Formula of Concord affirms humiliation and exaltation affecting only Christ’s human nature, that he always possesses a divine nature, that he really put aside use of divine majesty, but was able to use it had he desired (Ibid., Loc. 6544). Pieper brings in numerous Scripture passages to affirm that the Bible presents Christ as being both the possessor of divine majesty and someone who has poverty and limitations (Ibid., Loc. 6577).

Pieper discusses Philippians 2 at length, observing that though Christ humbled himself we are never told to be like him but rather to have his mind. We do not have the divine nature. Even if we wished, we could not take up the divine glory, which was an option open to Jesus (Ibid., Loc. 6624). Pieper’s final observations are that it was exactly in this garb of weakness that Christ overcame death (Ibid., Loc. 6661).

0 Comments

A Full Incarnation and Nature

10/11/2022

0 Comments

Pieper, Francis. Christian Dogmatics: Volume 2. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1968.
“Summary Critique of Reformed Christology” (Loc. 6221).

Pieper asks if Reformed theology denies the incarnation and atonement. “In so far as Reformed theology is inconsistent and ignores its basic error that the human nature of Christ is not capable of divinity, and especially, inasmuch as it maintains, over against Socinianism, the incarnation of the Son of God and the vicarious satisfaction of Christ as possessing infinite value, it returns to the Christian faith” (Pieper 1968, Loc. 6231). Pieper does not consider the dispute “mere logomachy” (Ibid., Loc. 6231). The problem he sees is primarily rooted in a Reformed use of “rationalistic axioms” (Ibid., Loc. 6235). These pull Reformed thought away from traditional Christian doctrine. Their denial of the infinite dwelling in the finite ultimately denies the union of God and man in Christ. Attempts to be consistent in the doctrine finally fail. The Lutheran understanding of the Genera cannot be reconciled with the Reformed position. However, Reformed theology “teaches both the incarnation of the Son of God and the infinite value of Christ’s merit. This is indeed an inconsistency, but one that is gratifying to sincere Christians” (Ibid., Loc. 6259). Pieper defends the Reformed as holding a high view of Christ, though it is inconsistent with some of their logical stance.

0 Comments

Natures As Distinct But Inseparable

10/10/2022

1 Comment

Pieper, Francis. Christian Dogmatics: Volume 2. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1968.
“Eutychianism and Nestorianism Repudiated in the Third Genus (Genus Apotelesmaticum)” (Loc. 6165).

“As in Christ the natures themselves are not transformed, but are and remain distinct, so also the actions of those natures are and remain distinct” (Pieper 1968, Loc. 6165). Since “all fullness of the Godhead” dwells in Christ’s human nature, each nature can act with the other being united to it. Each nature participates in the works which are proper to the other.

1 Comment

Defining Terms Is Essential

10/7/2022

0 Comments

Pieper, Francis. Christian Dogmatics: Volume 2. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1968.
“Lutherans and Reformed Use the Same Terms of the Third Genus in a Different Sense” Loc. 6014.

Pieper observes that the same terms may be used in different senses. “This is true, especially of such terms as “organ,” “official act,” and “personal union.” (Pieper 1968, Loc. 6014). Pieper begins exploring these terms. Luther began using the word “organ” to describe the human nature of Christ in performing his ἀποτελέσματα. This was the instrument used by God the Son to accomplish his work of salvation. The Lutheran view has been that in Christ the human nature is firmly joined to the divine nature, not like in other humans through whom God works, using a nature not joined to Him. The Reformed (Ibid., Loc. 6026) see “no difference between the organic relation of Christ’s human nature and the organic relation of merely human workers of miracles. “By ‘official act’ the Lutherans understand the joint action, or working, of both natures, so that every redemptive action of Christ is neither purely divine, nor purely human, but always theanthropic (actio). The Reformed, however, allege that the communion pertains not to the action, but to the result of the action” (Ibid., Loc. 6085). Scripture teaches that the activity, not just the result, comes from the divine nature working through the human nature.

Finally, Pieper points out that Reformed concepts of the union of God and Man in Christ is the same as with all believers (Ibid., Loc. 6144). This effectively denies all communication of attributes since it requires Christ to be, in fact, completely human at times and completely divine at times but never both.

0 Comments

Communication of Attributes as Early Christian Understanding

10/6/2022

0 Comments

Pieper, Francis. Christian Dogmatics: Volume 2. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1968.
“The Genus Apotelesmaticum and the Ancient Church” (Loc. 5962)

Pieper asserts that “The Reformed Confessions, just as also the Reformed theologians, ardently affirm their full agreement with the traditional doctrine of the Ancient Church” (Loc. 5962). Thgey assert the communication of attributes as affirmed in Chalcedon. Yet they do not allow for the two natures of Christ to act together. The divine nature acts only in the divine sphere and the human nature acts only in the human sphere. The ancient Church confessed that God did his divine works through the human nature of Christ without any harm (Loc. 5996).

0 Comments

Lutherans Are Not Zwinglian Or Reformed

10/5/2022

0 Comments

Pieper, Francis. Christian Dogmatics: Volume 2. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1968.
“The Practical Importance of the Genus Apotelesmaticum” (Loc. 5848)

In discussing the genus apotelesmaticum Pieper observes that “the first two genera, the genus idiomaticum and the genus maiestaticum, are its necessary presuppositions, so that the Church contends for them in the interest of the third” (Loc. 5848). This third genus demonstrates that “all actions of Christ are theanthropic and so of a unique, saving, and truly consoling nature” (Loc. 5848). This genus gets its name from the “work” (apotelesma) of the Christ (Loc. 5857). Jesus, true man and true God, remains man and God. His divine nature receives nothing from the human nature (Loc. 5883). Being truly divine and truly human is at the heart of his ability to atone for our sins. Luther’s criticism of Zwingli was largely based on Zwingli’s separation of the natures. By denying the suffering of the divine Zwingli leaves us with a mere man dying for us, which is ineffective. Pieper does observe that many Reformed theologians are inconsistent and admit both divine and human natures in the atonement (Loc. 5910). The desire of God to take on a human nature and thereby be able to suffer as we do has often been treated as a matter of great comfort (Loc. 5935).

0 Comments

Christ Doesn't Separate His Natures

10/4/2022

2 Comments

Pieper, Francis. Christian Dogmatics: Volume 2. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1968.
“The Third Genus of the Communication of Attributes (Genus Apotelesmaticum)”

“The Reformed theologians and their followers are guilty of burdening the discussion of the communication of attributes with a third genus, namely the so-called genus apotelesmaticum, for they demand that the human nature of Christ be kept apart in its activity or operation from the activity and operation of the divine nature, since the human nature as something that is finite is not capable of being the organ of the acts of the infinite divine nature” (Loc. 5679). Pieper goes on to cite several Reformed theologians in stating that the human and divine natures in Christ are separate. The human nature, not being capable of the divine, cannot participate in divine works. Pieper continues to show implications. “Wherever an official act is to be performed whose performance demands divine omnipotence, there, according to the Reformed view, the human nature as a finite creature cannot cooperate” (Loc. 5697). The human nature of Christ is thus seen as uninvolved in anything miraculous. The genus apotelesmaticum counters that all Christ does he “performs according to both natures, by each nature doing what is proper to it, not by itself and apart from the other nature, but in constant communion with the other” (Loc. 5759).

2 Comments

Jesus Can Be Both Eternal and Eight Days Old

10/3/2022

0 Comments

Pieper, Francis. Christian Dogmatics: Volume 2. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1968.
“All Divine Attributes are Communicated to the Human Nature” (Loc. 5538)

Pieper now cites a last Reformed objection to the communication of attributes. “Either all divine attributes must be predicated of Christ according to His human nature or none at all, since the divine attributes cannot be separated from one another” (Loc. 5538). This argument is focused on “quiescent” divine attributes, such as eternity, incorporeality, immensity, etc. The most common objection is against eternity. Jesus is referred to as, for instance, eight days old. The distinction made by the Lutherans is that the attributes are communicated to the humanity but not to his flesh. While the Son is eternal his body was born at a particular time. The nature of the Son is not an “either-or” but a “both-and.” Furthermore, Chemnitz and others make Scriptural arguments that not all the attributes are communicated in the same way.

0 Comments

No Change in Nature, Simply Attributes

9/30/2022

0 Comments

Pieper, Francis. Christian Dogmatics: Volume 2. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1968.
“In the Second Genus the Divine Attributes are Not Separated from the Divine Essence” (Loc. 5023)

“Against the Lutheran teaching of the communication of divine attributes to Christ’s human nature Reformed and Roman Catholic theologians have raised the following objection: If the divine attributes belong as communicated attributes also to the human nature, then the Lutherans teach a separation of the divine attributes from the divine essence” (Loc. 5033). The argument then is that the human nature is converted into the divine. Pieper observes that a denial of communication doesn’t permeate the Reformed camp, as they all want “a real communication of the Person of the Son of God to the human nature” (Loc. 5033). He explains that the human nature itself does not change but that the attributes which that nature possesses change.

An important application of this idea is that the divine is not present apart from the presence of Christ. For instance, the body and blood of Christ are not present in all bread and wine but only in consecrated bread and wine.

Pieper also points out (Loc. 5129ff) that the communication of attributes is not reciprocal, despite the demands of Reformed logic. In the state of humiliation Jesus is fully divine and fully human.

0 Comments

Divine Honor in Christ's Humanity

9/29/2022

0 Comments

Pieper, Francis. Christian Dogmatics: Volume 2. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1968.
“The Communicated Divine Honor” (Loc. 4851)

When considering divine honor Pieper observes that “some Reformed theologians at this point set aside their principle that ‘the finite is not capable of the infinite’ and ascribe to the human nature of Christ divine honor” (Loc. 4851). He thus receives divine honor though not other attributes of deity. Pieper views the honor of the man Jesus to be divine and that to be self-evident as Jesus is presented as Son of God AND Son of Mary, receiving worship as one person. Pieper cites numerous Lutheran theologians as insisting that the man Jesus has divine honor, not as, for instance, a ruler’s garments are honored but as the ruler is honored. It is also inconsistent to allow some communication of attributes but not all.

Pieper explains (Loc. 4957ff) that this is the essence of the genus maiestaticum, that Jesus has divine attributes (majesty) in his human nature, not as an accessory but as an integral part of his being.

0 Comments

Omnipresence in the State of Humiliation

9/28/2022

0 Comments

Pieper, Francis. Christian Dogmatics: Volume 2. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1968.
“The Communicated Omnipresence in the State of Humiliation and Exaltation” (Loc. 4675)

Pieper tells us, “According to Col. 2:9, divine omnipresence was imparted to the human nature in the very moment when the fullness of the Godhead began to dwell bodily in Christ” (Loc. 4675). Jesus has all the abilities of divinity even dwelling in humanity. Pieper discusses the rejections of Jesus possessing omnipresence. First, it can blend the ideas of humiliation and exaltation. Yet the Scripture pictures Jesus as incarnate both in humiliation and glorification. Second, it could mean Jesus was not really human. Yet the man Jesus did not always use his divine authority. He was able to choose what to do or not do.

Beginning at Loc. 4749 Pieper makes an argument that Calvin would assert Christ remaining present in heaven while being on earth. This suggests the presence of both natures in heaven and on earth. Luther’s affirmation was that Christ was consistently present according to both natures. According to Luther (Loc. 4819 et passim) John 3:13 refers to Christ being divine and human in heaven and on earth. As to Jesus having both natures available, “if He can be united with God into one person without His becoming a phantasm, there is no danger of His becoming one by His being on earth and in heaven at the same time” (Loc. 4841).

0 Comments

Christ's Physical Presence in the Eucharist

9/27/2022

0 Comments

Pieper, Francis. Christian Dogmatics: Volume 2. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1968.
“The Communicated Omnipresence and the Lord’s Supper” (Loc. 43778).

Reformed theology asserts that Luther devised communication of attributes to make his view of the Lord’s Supper work. Yet Luther maintained the real presence based on the Words of Institution. “Indeed, Luther declares that the doctrine of Christ’s Person, in particular that of the communication of attributes, is not really a part of the doctrine of the Lord’s Supper, so far as the Scripture proof for the real presence of Christ’s body in the Sacrament comes into question” (Loc. 4401). Luther’s view was that Christ has a local, illocal, and repletive presence as he may choose. Pieper makes clear (Loc. 4454) that the Lutheran view of ubiquity does not mean Jesus is bodily present in all things but only where he says he will be.

Pieper goes on to discuss the fact that there is broad agreement among Lutherans about communicated omnipresence. There have been some suggestions especially of Chemnitz breaking with the view, but those are based on inaccurate views of the historic documents. Pieper quotes Chemnitz extensively to demonstrate his view.

0 Comments

<<Previous

Justification by Faith

Conversion

Order of Events in Salvation

Salvation Comes to Us

Christ As Prophet, Priest, and King

Christ As Office Holder

He Ascended into Heaven

He Rose Again from the Dead

He Descended Into Hell

Stages of Humiliation and Exaltation

Verbal Traps

Christ as King in State of Humiliation

Wrong Views of Christ's Humiliation

Humiliation and Exaltation

A Full Incarnation and Nature

Natures As Distinct But Inseparable

Defining Terms Is Essential

Communication of Attributes as Early Christian Understanding

Lutherans Are Not Zwinglian Or Reformed

Christ Doesn't Separate His Natures

Jesus Can Be Both Eternal and Eight Days Old

No Change in Nature, Simply Attributes

Divine Honor in Christ's Humanity

Omnipresence in the State of Humiliation

Christ's Physical Presence in the Eucharist

Help Fuel This Ministry by Clicking Here!

About Throwing Inkwells

Blog Feeds

Categories