1. What is Christ?

Christ is the second person of the Godhead, the Son of God; God of the essence of the Father, begotten before the worlds; and Man of the substance of his mother born into the world. (Athanasian Creed.)

2. Why is Christ called Jesus or Saviour?

The answer is given by the angel in Matt. 1:21: “Thou shalt call his name Jesus; for he shall save his people from their sins.”

3. Why is he called Christ?

Because according to his human nature, he was anointed with infinite fulness of the Holy Ghost.

Ps. 45:7. Thy God hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows. This passage, Heb. 1:9, applies to Christ.

Upon Christ our Lord, according to his human nature (since according to his divine nature, he is of one essence with the Holy Ghost), there rests “the Spirit of wisdom and understanding, the Spirit of counsel and might, the Spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the Lord” (Col. 2:3; Isa. 11:2; 61:1): and that, too, not in the same manner as in other holy men, whose knowledge and power depend upon the working in them of created gifts by the agency of the Holy Ghost. For, since Christ, according to his divine nature, is the second person of the Holy Trinity, and from him, not less than from the Father, the Holy Ghost proceeds (for the Spirit belongs to both Father and Son, and so remains to all eternity, nor is ever separated from the Son), through the personal union the whole fulness of the Spirit has been communicated to Christ, according to his flesh, which was personally united with the Son of God. This freely asserts all its power in, with and through the human nature of Christ, not in such a manner that Christ, according to his human nature, knows only some things, while he is ignorant of others, and can accomplish some things while he cannot accomplish others; but, according to his assumed human nature, both his knowledge and power extend to all things. For the Father has without measure poured upon the Son the Spirit of wisdom and strength, so that through the personal union he, as man, has really and truly received all knowledge and power. On this account all the treasures of knowledge are hidden in Christ; in this manner all power in heaven and earth has been given to him, and thus he sits at the right hand of the majesty and power of God. (Form of Concord, Sol. Dec., Art. viii, 72.)

4. Are there then two natures in Christ?

Yes. For since the Son of God in the fulness of time has become man, there are in this one and undivided person of Christ, two distinct natures: the divine, which is from eternity; and the human, which in time was assumed in the unity of the person of the Son of God. And these two natures in the person of Christ are never either separated or commingled with each other, neither are they mutually interchanged, but each nature in the person of Christ retains its own essence and properties to all eternity. (Form of Concord, Sol. Dec., Art. viii, 9.)

5. How do you prove that Christ is true God?

First. Scripture calls him Jehovah, which is the essential name of God.

Jer. 23:6. And this is his name whereby he shall be called, the Lord our righteousness.

Secondly. He is expressly called God.

John 20:28. And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.

Rom. 9:5. Whose are the fathers, and of whom, as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed forever.

Thirdly. Not only religious worship, but also such works are ascribed to Christ, as can be referred in no manner to a creature, but only to God.

Ps. 97:7. “Worship him all ye gods” (i.e., angels).

Heb. 1:16, tells us that this passage refers to Christ. “When he bringeth the first-begotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.”

John 1:1, 2, 3. In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him, and without him was not anything made, that was made. (Hunnius.)

6. Did the Son of God assume a true human nature, of the same substance as ours?

In every respect, except that it was without sin. Hence our churches utterly reject and condemn the figment of Marcion, which teaches that Christ did not possess a true human nature consisting of soul and body. (Form of Concord, Epitome, viii.)

John 1:14. The word was made flesh.

Gal. 4:4. God sent forth his Son made of a woman.

Heb. 2:14. Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same. V. 16. He took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.

John 10:18. No man taketh my life (i.e., soul) from me, but I lay it down of myself.

Matt. 26:38. My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death.

Luke 23:46; Matt. 27:50. Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said this he gave up the ghost.

Athanasian Creed. Perfect God and perfect man, consisting of a reasonable soul, and human flesh.

7. How did the Son of God assume our nature?

By being conceived by the Holy Ghost, without the interposition of man, and being born of Mary, a virgin, ever pure and holy. (Smalcald Articles, Part i, Art. 4.)

8. If there are two entire natures in Christ, does he not therefore possess two persons, and do you not thus admit that there are two Christs?

By no means. For since the incarnation, each nature in Christ, does not in any manner subsist by itself, so that either is separate, or constitutes of itself a separate person; but these natures are so united, as to constitute one person only, in which both the divine and the human natures are united and subsist together; so that since the incarnation, not only the divine, but also the assumed human nature, belong to the entire person of Christ; and just as the person of the incarnate Son of God cannot be entire without his divinity, so also it cannot be entire without his humanity. For just as a rational soul and a body are one man, so also God and man are one Christ. (Form of Concord, Sol. Dec., viii, 11. Athanasian Creed.)

9. How are the two natures in Christ united?

This union is not such a connection or combination that one nature cannot personally (i.e., through the personal union) possess a property belonging to the other, as when two pieces of wood are glued together, in which case neither piece imparts or receives anything. This was the error of Nestorius and Paul of Samosata, who taught that the two natures communicate nothing the one to the other. By this false dogma the natures are regarded as separate, and thus two Christs are constituted, one of whom is the Christ, but the other God the Word dwelling in Christ. (Form of Concord, Epitome and Sol. Dec., Art. viii.)

10. What then is the personal union?

It is a most intimate communion, by which Christ’s divine and human natures are so united as to have a real participation with one another; from which union and communion proceeds all that is said and believed concerning God as man, and concerning the man Christ as God. (Form of Concord, Epitome, and Sol. Dec., Art. viii.)

That is a most intimate communion which God has with assumed humanity; and from the personal union, and this most intimate and unspeakable communion which results therefrom, all that follows which is believed and declared concerning God as man, and concerning the man Christ as God. The ancient teachers of the church used to illustrate this union and communion of the natures by the similitude of iron glowing with heat, and likewise by the union of the body and soul in man. (Form of Concord, Epitome, Art. viii, 9.)

Against this condemnable heresy, the catholic church of Christ has, with great simplicity, believed and maintained, that the human and divine natures in the person of Christ, are so united that there is a true communion between them. Yet these two natures meet and participate with one another not only in one essence, but also, as Dr. Luther says, in one person. On account of this personal union and communion, the ancient orthodox teachers of the church very frequently, not only after, but even before the Council of Chalcedon, employed the word mingling, yet in a correct sense and with a proper distinction. In confirmation of which many passages might be adduced from the church fathers, which can be found here and there in the writings of our teachers. Learned antiquity has indeed declared this personal union and communion of the natures by the similitude of the soul and body, and likewise in another manner by that of glowing iron. For the soul and body (and so also fire and iron) have a communion with each other not merely nominally or verbally, but truly and really, yet in such a manner that there is no confusion or equalization of the natures, as when a mixture of honey and water produces mead; for such a drink is neither pure honey, nor pure water, but a mixed drink composed of both. Far otherwise is it in the union of the divine and human nature in the person of Christ; for the union and communion of the divine and human in the person of Christ is far more exalted and inexpressible, on account of which union and communion God is man, and man is God. Yet by this union and communion of natures, neither the natures themselves, nor their properties are confounded, but each nature retains its own essence and properties. (Form of Concord, Sol. Dec., Art. viii.)

11. Are the effects of this union of but one kind?

They are not, but can and should be distinguished into two classes; the former of which is the most intimate communion or participation of the natures with each other, and the latter the true and real participation of the properties or the attributes of the one nature with the other.

On account of this personal union (without which a participation of the natures with each other, neither can exist, or be conceived of), it was not a mere human nature, one of whose attributes it is to suffer and die, which suffered for the sins of the whole world, but it was the Son of God (yet according to his human nature) who truly suffered, and, as the Apostles’ Creed testifies, truly died, although a divine nature can neither suffer nor die. This Dr. Luther fully and firmly declares in his Larger Confession concerning the Lord’s Supper, where he rejects as a mask of the devil, and condemns in unmeasured terms the blasphemous allœosis of Zwingle, who maintained that one nature was taken and understood for the other. (Form of Concord, Epitome, Art. viii, 20.)

12. How do these natures participate with one another?

The manner in which the natures participate with one another is such that God is truly man, and man is truly God; which could not at all be, if the human and divine natures had no real participation. For how could man, the Son of Mary, truly be, or with truth be called the Son of God, the Most High, if his humanity were not personally united with the Son of God, and if he thus actually had nothing in common with the latter, except the mere name? (Form of Concord, Epitome, Art. viii, 10.)

13. But do the Holy Scriptures make statements of this kind?

They do. Compare Jer. 23:5 with 23:15.

Matt. 16:16. Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

Matt. 22:45. The Son of David is David’s Lord.

Luke 1:31, 32. Thou shalt bring forth a son, and shall call his name Jesus; he shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest.

Rom. 1:3. His Son Jesus Christ, which was made of the seed of David, according to the flesh.

1 Cor. 15:47. The second man is the Lord from heaven.

For this reason, the Form of Concord correctly infers that the Virgin Mary did not conceive and bring forth a mere man; and hence she is correctly called the mother of God, which she truly is. (Form of Concord, Epitome, Art. viii, 12.)

14. Before proceeding to the consideration of the communicatio idiomatum, let us first inquire what are the idiomata or attributes of the divine nature?

The attributes or properties of the divine nature are these: to be omnipotent, eternal, infinite, and, according to the properties of its own nature, and its natural essence, to be of itself omnipresent, and to know all things. All these are not attributes of the human nature, neither can they ever become such.

15. What are the attributes of the human nature?

To possess a body, to consist of flesh and blood, to be finite and circumscribed, to suffer, to die, to ascend, to descend, to move from place to place, to hunger, to thirst, to experience cold, heat, and similar things. These neither are, nor ever can become, attributes of the divine nature. (Form of Concord, Epitome, Art. viii, 8.)

16. What is the character of the communicatio idiomatum?

It is not a communication of essence or of substance; for this would be nothing else than a mingling of the attributes, resulting in such an equalization of the natures, as was taught by Eutyches.

We believe, teach, and confess, that the divine and human natures are not mingled in one substance, or changed into one another, but that each nature retains its own essential properties, which cannot become the properties of the other nature. (Form of Concord, Epitome, Art. viii, 6.)

17. What then is its nature?

It is such as is taught by the Scriptures, namely, a true or real communication, which results from the personal union and communion of the natures in Christ, concerning which the Apostle says, in Col. 2:9, “In him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily,” i.e., in his assumed flesh, as in his temple.

18. Are there firm and reliable Scriptural proofs for the communicatio idiomatum?

That this communication is not merely a form of speech, but that it has a real and true existence, can be shown by three incontrovertible arguments.

19. What is the first?

First, there is a universal rule approved by the whole orthodox church, which declares that whatever Scripture affirms Christ has received in time refers not to his divinity, according to which from eternity he possessed all things; but that reference is made to the person of Christ, who, in respect to his assumed human nature, was made the recipient of these objects. (Form of Concord, Sol. Dec., Art. viii, 57.)

20. What is the second?

The Scriptures clearly testify that the power to quicken and to judge is given to Christ, because he is the Son of man, and because he has flesh and blood. (Ib., 58.)

John 5:27. And hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man.

John 6:51. I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any man eat of this bread he shall live forever.

21. What is the third?

Scripture makes mention of the Son of man not only in general terms, but, as it were, points its finger towards his assumed human nature, when it says, 1 John 1:7, The blood of Jesus Christ, his Son, cleanseth us from all sin. (Ib., 59.)

22. What is the meaning of this passage of Scripture?

It refers not merely to the merit of Christ’s blood, which once for all was acquired on the cross; but John likewise here tells us that in justification not only Christ’s divine nature, but also his blood has efficacy to cleanse us from all sin. Thus the flesh of Christ is quickening food. (Ib., 59.)

23. Is this communicatio idiomatum of but one kind?

Three different kinds are mentioned in Scripture: The first is when the properties of only one nature are ascribed to the other nature, not separately, but in the whole person, which is at the same time both God and man, whether it be called God or whether it be called man; yet so that it is distinctly declared, according to which nature the property is ascribed to the whole person.

24. Please to give some examples of this kind from Scripture.

Rom. 1:3. The Son of God made of the seed of David, according to the flesh. Luke 1:31. The Son of God born of the Virgin Mary. To this head belong also all those passages of Scripture which show that the Son of God, by assuming human nature, assumed and actually appropriated to himself all its attributes. For this reason the Holy Scriptures ascribe to the Son of God attributes which belong to his humanity.

Acts 20:28. Feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

Gal. 2:20. The Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.

Rom. 8:32. God spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all.

Gal. 4:4. God sent forth his Son, made of a woman.

1 John 1:1. The Word of life, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled.

In the first place, since there are in Christ two distinct natures, which, in their essences and properties, are neither changed nor confounded, and yet the two natures have but one person; those properties which belong only to one nature are attributed not to that nature only as if separated, but to the whole person (which is at the same time God and man), whether called God or man.

But from this manner of speaking, it does not follow that those properties which are ascribed to the whole person, belong to both natures; but it is to be distinctly declared according to which nature anything is ascribed to the entire person. The Apostle Paul speaks in this manner when he says, concerning Christ, Rom. 1:3, that he was of the seed of David, according to the flesh. Peter, likewise, says, concerning Christ (1 Ep. 3:18; 4:1), that he was put to death in the flesh, and that he suffered in the flesh.

But, since both open and secret sacramentarians conceal their pernicious error under the rule, that “what is the property of one nature is ascribed to the whole person,” when they name the whole person, they nevertheless understand only the one nature, and that, too, merely as it exists in itself, but entirely exclude the other nature, as if only a mere human nature suffered for us. We desire to repeat at this place the words of Dr. Luther, from his Larger Confession concerning the Lord’s Supper, in which he treats of the allæosis of Zwingle, in order that the church of God may be secured in the best manner against this error. These are his words:

“Zwingle names that an allæosis which ascribes an attribute of the human nature to the divine nature of Christ, and the reverse. For example, where Scripture says, Luke 24:26, ‘Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?’ There, Zwingle triflingly declares that the word Christ refers to his human nature. Beware! beware! I say, of that allæosis, for it is a mask of the devil, which will at length fashion such a Christ, according to which I am sure that I do not wish to be a Christian. For its design is that Christ should be nothing else than any other sanctified one, and that his passion and life should accomplish nothing more than would that of such a person. For, if I permit myself to be persuaded that the human nature alone suffered for me, Christ is not to me a Saviour of great worth, for he himself stands in need of a Saviour. In a word, language cannot express what the devil designs to accomplish by means of this allæosis.” Again, a few sentences after: “If this old sorceress, Dame Reason, the grandmother of this allæosis, attempts to cry back, saying, Divine nature can neither suffer, nor die; reply, That is, indeed, true; yet, because the divine and human natures in Christ constitute one person, Scripture, on account of the personal union, ascribes all that to the divine nature which befalls the human nature, and, in turn, all to the human, which belongs to the divine nature. This, too, is true. For when Christ is presented to you, you must say, This person suffers and dies; but this person is true God: and hence it is correctly said, The Son of God suffers. For although one part of him (so to speak), namely, his divine nature, does not suffer; yet that person which is God suffers in his other part, namely, in his human nature. For the Son of God, i.e., the person which is God, was truly crucified for us. For this person, this person I say, was crucified according to his human nature.”

And again after some other things: “If there be such an allæosis as Zwingle proposes, in Christ, there will be of necessity two persons, namely, a divine and a human, inasmuch as all passages of Scripture which treat of the passion, Zwingle refers only to the human nature, and altogether separates them from the divine nature. For where the works are torn asunder and separated, there also we must divide the person, since all works and all sufferings are ascribed not to the natures, but to the person. For it is the person itself which does and suffers all these things, this, indeed, according to this nature, and that according to the other nature; all of which is fully known to our learned men. Wherefore we recognize our Lord Jesus Christ as God and man in one person, not confounding the natures nor dividing the persons.”

Likewise, in his work Concerning the Councils and the Church, Dr. Luther writes: “We Christians must know that, if God were not on the other side of the balance, and did not overcome by his weight, we, on our side, would be borne down to ruin. By this I mean, that if God had not died for us, and if man alone had died for us, then, indeed, we would be utterly undone. But if the death of God, and the fact that God died for us, is placed on the other scale, then he is borne downwards; but we, like the empty and lighter scale, rise aloft. He can, indeed, rise upwards, or leave the scale; but he could not descend and occupy the scale, unless he had been like us, i.e., he became man in order that it might truly and correctly be said concerning him, ‘God died,’ ‘the passion of God,’ ‘the blood of God,’ ‘the death of God.’ For God could not die in his own nature. But, since God and man have been united in one person, it is right to say, ‘God died,’ since that man died, who is one thing, or one person with God.”

So far we have quoted Luther. From this it is evident, that they err who have said and written that the propositions which we have mentioned (God suffered, God died) are only verbal expressions, i.e., mere words, without any corresponding reality. For our simple Christian faith teaches, that the Son of God, who became man, suffered and died for us, and redeemed us with his blood. (Form of Concord, Sol. Dec., Art. viii, 36-45.)

25. What is the second kind of communicatio idiomatum?

The second kind has respect to the office of Christ, where the person acts and operates, not in, with, through, or according to one nature only; but, on the contrary, in, with, according to and through both natures; or, as the Council of Chalcedon says: “Each nature does or performs whatever belongs to each, with communication of the other.” (Form of Concord, Sol. Dec., Art. viii, 47.)

26. What propositions in the Scriptures refer to this kind of communicatio idiomatum?

Those that declare that Christ is our Mediator, Redeemer, King, High-Priest, Head, Shepherd, etc., not only according to one nature, whether his divinity or humanity, but according to both natures.

27. Prove this from Scripture.

Scripture clearly affirms that Christ, both according to his human and his divine nature, is our Mediator. The following passages show that Christ’s work of mediation was performed according to both natures:

Jer. 23:6, and 33:16; 1 John 3:8. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil.

Gen. 3:15. The seed of the woman shall bruise the serpent’s head.

Luke 9:56. The Son of man is not come to destroy men’s lives, but to save them.

1 Tim. 2:5. There is one Mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself a ransom for all.

28. What is the third kind of communicatio idiomatum?

Under the third kind are classed those propositions in which the Holy Scriptures expressly testify that the human nature in Christ, because of its personal union with the divine nature, has received, over and above its natural, essential, and permanently inherent human properties, also special, high, great, supernatural, inscrutable, ineffable and heavenly prerogatives of majesty and glory, of power and might, over everything that is named not only in this world, but also in the world to come. (Form of Concord, Sol. Dec., Art. viii, 61.)

29. Cite from Scripture such passages as confirm this statement.

Matt. 11:27. All things are delivered unto me from the Father.

Matt. 28:18. All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

John 3:34. God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto him.

John 5:27. And hath given him authority to execute judgment also; because he is the Son of man.

Eph. 1:20, 21. God raised Christ from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named not only in this world, but also in that which is to come.

In this we advance nothing new, but embrace and repeat the declaration which the ancient orthodox church has drawn from the holy Scriptures, and transmitted uncorrupted to us, namely, that this divine virtue, life, power, majesty, and glory, have been given to the assumed human nature in Christ. But this has not been effected in the same manner as the Father from eternity has communicated his own essence and his properties to the Son, according to his divine nature; on which account the Son is of the same essence with the Father, and equal to him. For it is only in his divine nature that Christ is equal to the Father; in his human nature he is beneath God. From this it is evident that we do not maintain any confusion, equalization, or abolition of the natures in Christ. Hence, the power of quickening does not belong to the flesh of Christ in the same manner as it does to his divine nature, of which this is an essential property. But this communication was not effected by any essential or natural emptying of the properties of the divine nature into the human nature, as if Christ’s human nature had these properties in itself, and when separate from the divine essence: or, as if through that communication the human nature in Christ entirely laid aside its natural and essential properties, and either by being changed into the divine nature, or by having these its own properties communicated to this nature, in and of itself became equal to the divine; or that the natural and essential properties and works of both natures were the same or equal. For in ancient and approved councils these and like errors have been justly rejected and condemned from the holy Scriptures. In no manner dare we make or admit either a conversion, a confusion, or an equalization of the natures or essential properties in Christ.

And, indeed, by these words (real communion, to be really communicated) we by no means wish to teach any physical communication or essential transfusion (by which the natures might be confounded in their essences or essential properties), as some have not hesitated, by a false interpretation, contrary to their own conscience, craftily and maliciously to pervert these words and expressions, in order to heap upon the pure doctrine grave suspicions. By these words and expressions we oppose a mere verbal communication, since some imagine that the communicatio idiomatum is nothing else than an expression and form of speech, i.e., only mere words, names, and empty titles; and they press this verbal communication so far that they do not wish to hear of any other. Therefore, in order to declare aright the majesty of Christ, we have used the words real communication to signify that a communication truly and actually occurred, although without any confusion of natures or essential properties.

We therefore hold and teach, with the ancient orthodox church, as it declared the doctrine of holy Scripture, that the human nature in Christ has received its majesty after the manner of the personal union, namely, that since the whole fulness of the Godhead dwells in Christ, not indeed as in holy men and angels, but bodily, as in its own body, it shines forth in the assumed human nature in all its majesty, virtue, glory, and operation, voluntarily when and as it seems good to Christ, and in, with and through this assumed human nature exercises, employs and fulfils its virtue, majesty, and efficacy; and this it does in somewhat the same manner in which the soul acts in the body, and fire in iron glowing with heat. For by this similitude, as we have previously shown, all learned and pious antiquity has set forth this doctrine. But during this state of humiliation this majesty was for the most part hidden and concealed. Now, however, since the form of a servant has been laid aside, the majesty of Christ exerts itself fully, effectively and manifestly before all the saints in heaven and on earth; and in that other and most blissful life we will see this his glory face to face, as we are told in John 17:24. (Form of Concord, Sol. Dec., Art. viii, 61-65.)

30. What is the character of this communication?

It is true and real; through it the human nature in Christ has received this majesty by reason of the personal union. For since all the fulness of the Godhead dwells in Christ, not as in holy men and angels, but bodily, as in its own body; on this account, the human nature is truly and really endowed with all majesty, power and glory, and the Word or the Son of God, in, with and through it, exercises, employs and fulfils his own power, glory and efficiency. (Form of Concord, Sol. Dec., Art. viii, 64.)

31. Do the Holy Scriptures particularize any divine attributes which are especially conspicuous in and through the assumed humanity?

They do. For although all the fulness of the Godhead dwells in the assumed human nature, as in its own temple (Col. 2:9), yet Scripture particularizes some divine attributes, which through the human nature especially perform their operations. These are:

1. Omnipotence. Matt. 28:18. All power is given unto me in heaven, and in earth. Heb. 2:8. Thou hast put all things in subjection under his feet; for in that he put all in subjection under him, he left nothing that is not put under him.
2. Omniscience. Col. 2:3. In whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. John 2:25. And needed not that any should testify of man; for he knew what was in man.
3. The power to impart life. John 6:51. I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any man eat of this bread, he shall live forever; and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world. 1 Cor. 15:45. The last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
4. The power to forgive sins. Matt. 9:6. The Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins. Compare Mark 2:10; Luke 5:24.
5. The power to judge. John 5:27. And hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man.
6. Worship. Phil. 2:9, 10. That at the name of Jesus, every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. Heb. 1:6. And let all the angels of God worship him.
7. Omnipresence. Matt. 18:20. Where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them. Matt. 28:20. I am with you alway even unto the end of the world. Eph. 1:23. And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be head over all things to the church, which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all. Eph. 4:10. He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.

Wherefore those passages of Scripture which speak concerning the majesty to which the human nature in Christ has been exalted, we should not understand as meaning that the divine majesty which belongs to the divine nature of the Son of God, is to be ascribed only to that nature in Christ, or that that majesty exists in the human nature of Christ in such a manner that this nature has only the bare title and name of majesty, but in truth has no communication with it whatever. For since God is a spiritual, indivisible essence, everywhere present in all creatures, and especially so in believers and saints, in whom he dwells in a peculiar manner, and as wherever he is there he has with him his majesty; then according to this false hypothesis, it could be said that the whole fulness of the Godhead dwells bodily in all creatures whom God inhabits, but especially in the elect who are the temples of God, then also in them all treasures of wisdom and knowledge are hid, and to them all power in heaven and earth is given, since the Holy Spirit who has all power in heaven and earth is given to believers. But in this manner there would be no distinction between Christ in his human nature, and other holy men; and he would be deprived of that majesty which as a man or in his human nature he received above all other creatures. For no creature, whether man or angel either could or should say, “All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.” Although God is in the elect in all the fulness of his divinity, which he has everywhere with him, yet he does not dwell in them bodily, nor is he personally united with them, as he dwells bodily in Christ. For on account of the personal union, Christ in his human nature says, Matt. 28:18, “All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.” And again John 13:3, Jesus knew that the Father had given all things into his hand. So also, Col. 2:9, In him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead. Ps. 8:6, Heb. 2:7 sq.; 1 Cor. 15:27. (Form of Concord, Sol. Dec., Art. viii, 67-70. See also note to Question 3.)

32. But did Christ according to his human nature always exert and make use of that divine glory which had been communicated to him?

Although Christ, according to his assumed human nature, even in its conception and in the womb of his mother, possessed this communicated divine glory; and although he never lost it or laid it aside, yet, as the Apostle testifies, he “made himself of no reputation,” and, in the state of humiliation held it concealed, and made use of it not always, but only as often as seemed good to him. (Form of Concord, Sol. Dec., Art. viii, 26.)

33. Does Christ now use his state of humiliation?

No. For now he has ascended to heaven, not merely as every saint has done, but as the Apostle testifies, he ascended above all heavens that he might fill all things, and therefore he reigns not only as God, but also as man everywhere present, and rules from sea to sea and to the ends of the earth; as the Prophets foretell concerning him, and the Apostles bear witness that Christ everywhere worked with them. Mark 16:19, 20. (Ib., 27.)

Mark 16:19, 20. So then after the Lord had spoken to them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God; and they went forth and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following.

34. But does not this conflict with the assertion that Christ ascended into heaven, and sitteth at the right hand of God?

In no way. For Christ ascended into heaven to sit at the right hand of God, and to reign over all creatures; yet these things did not occur in an earthly manner, but as Dr. Luther has explained it, in a way corresponding to the manner of the right hand of God, which is not a particular circumscribed place in heaven; but is the almighty power of God, which fills heaven and earth, the possession of which Christ truly assumed in his human nature. (Augsburg Confession, Art. iii; Form of Concord, Art. viii, 28.)

35. What yet concerning Christ remains for us to consider?

As we have hitherto been considering the person of Christ, we must yet treat of his office, which is twofold, viz.: kingly and priestly.

36. What is Christ’s priestly office?

It is that in which he offered himself to God the Father, as a sacrifice for the sins of the whole world, not only for the guilt of original sin, but also for all the actual sins of men; and by which he has freed us from the captivity of sin, of death, and of the devil, and has introduced us into the liberty of adoption.

Heb. 9:12. Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood, he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.

1 John 2:1, 2. If any man sin we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous; and he is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

A sacrifice not only for original guilt, but also for all the actual sins of men. (Augsburg Confession, Art. iii.)

When now it is asked, What do you believe in the second article concerning Jesus Christ? reply briefly, thus: I believe that Jesus Christ, the true Son of God, became my Lord. What is meant then by becoming Lord? It is this: that by his own blood he has delivered me from sins, the devil, death, and all evil. For, before I had neither a King nor Lord, but was held captive under the power and sway of the devil, condemned to death, and bound in sins and blindness.

The sum of this article is, that the word Lord simply signifies Saviour or Redeemer, i.e., he who leads us back from the devil to God, from death to life, and from sins to righteousness, in which he likewise preserves us. (Larger Catechism, Part ii, 27, 31.)

37. What is Christ’s kingly office?

It is that in which Christ ascended to heaven, and received dominion at the right hand of the Father, so that the devil and all powers being thrust beneath his feet might be forced to obey him; until, ultimately, on the last day, he will separate and divide us from this wicked world, from the devil, death, and sins, and will crown us with eternal glory and honor, as Dr. Luther declares in the Larger Catechism. (Larger Catechism, Part ii, 31.)

Ps. 110:2. The Lord shall send the rod of thy strength out of Zion; rule thou in the midst of thine enemies.

Acts 3:15. And killed the Prince of life.

Heb. 2:10. For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through suffering.

38. What is the character of Christ’s kingdom?

It is spiritual and eternal. John 18:36. My kingdom is not of this world. Luke 1:33. He shall reign over the house of Jacob forever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.

39. What benefits do both kingdoms of Christ confer upon us?

1. Faith;
2. The forgiveness of sins;
3. Justification;
4. Reconciliation with God; Salvation and eternal glory.