Calvin and the Development of the Doctrine of Union with Christ

By: Josh Skinner, JS-HTH-407

The lack of a consensus on an issue does not mean that it is unimportant or that it should
remain unexplored. The modern Christian tendency to sweep discussion and debate under the rug
of unity is not the least bit healthy or helpful. While unanimity on crucial issues is desirable, it is
rarely achieved. This is especially the case when a doctrine is derived from Scriptural truths
rather than explicitly set forth. These important issues become the subject of intense debate and
divergent positions even amongst people who are relatively in step with one another on most
issues. The interpreter of Scripture desires to open the word of God to the people of God in a
clear and lucid manner, but different interpreters interpret different issues in different ways. The
doctrine of union with Christ is an example of one of these ever-important and ever-debated
issues. Lane Tipton succinctly described the importance of this doctrine when he said that there
are no benefits of the gospel apart from union with Christ.1 And it would be far from
anachronistic to put these words, or at least the sentiments behind them, into the mouth of John
Calvin. Calvin placed a great importance upon the doctrine of union, as did many before and
after him. Union with Christ was a pivotal doctrine for John Calvin and those that followed him
up until this very day.
Mark Garcia stresses the importance of seeing the context of Calvins writing by
recognizing the various views of union during the times immediately preceding Calvin and the
writings that would have influenced the reformer. The idea of union had different connotations
before the 16th century. People like Athenagoras, Irenaus, and Gregory of Nysaa wrote on the
1 Robert Letham, Union with Christ: In Scripture, History, and Theology (Phillipsburg, NJ:

Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing, 2011) digital.

topic with the term unification (henosis). Their language of union typically belongs to a
Christological discussion of the relation of Christs divinity and humanity, or more generally, of a
union of humanity with the eternal word.2 So the union these men focused on was mainly of the
hypostatic variety. They were concerned with the truth that Christ was Word made flesh, both
God and man.
Another Christological focus of union language was from Basil. He wrote about
junction/conjunction (synapheia). His writing was typical of the Antiochene perspective on how
the flesh is assumed to divinity in Christs person. 3 Again, this language was far more
concerned with the hypostatic union of Christ than with the believers union with him.
Closer to how Calvin and those later would speak of union was the idea of communion
(koinonia). This was used to indicate a relationship within the Trinity, but more often used for
the fellowship enjoyed by the faithful with God or Christ. 4 While not entirely like union as it is
being examined here, this usage is much closer.
Eastern fathers often wrote of being united to God in terms of deification (theosis). This was in
reference to a communication with the divine nature and based upon a passage in 2 Peter 1:3-4:
His divine power has granted to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through
the knowledge of him who called us to his own glory and excellence, by which he has
granted to us his precious and very great promises, so that through them you may become
partakers of the divine nature, having escaped from the corruption that is in the world
because of sinful desire.5

2 Mark Garcia, Life in Christ: Union with Christ and Twofold Grace in Calvins Theology

(Milton Keynes: Paternoster, 2008) p. 49.

3

Ibid., p.50.

Ibid., p.50.

Much like the terms already discussed, theosis was used in reference to the
Christological relationship of humanity and divinity, but is more often applied to the faithful who
are deified.6 Clement of Alexandria and Origen were both writers who used this term
frequently. Coming out of late medievalisms four-fold emphasis on union as
natural/incarnational, baptismal, justifying/purifying, and the transformation from burdened
conscience to intimate communion, Martin Luther presented a doctrine of union that was legal,
mystical, and a result of justification.
Calvins emphasis on the doctrine of union is hard to overstate, and it is beneficial to
keep the context of his writing, as presented above, in sight when studying his position on union.
Some have gone as far as claiming that union is the central doctrine of his work. While this
appears to be an overstatement, it is not difficult to see from where that sentiment arises. Calvins
references to union in his Institutes are strong and many. Emphasizing the centrality and great
importance of this doctrine he writes, that joining together of Head and members, that
indwelling of Christ in our heartsin short, that mystical unionare accorded by us the highest
degree of importance, so that Christ, having been made ours, makes us sharers with him in the
gifts with which he has been endowed.7

5 All Scripture quotations

are taken from the English Standard Version unless otherwise

noted, Standard Bible Society, 2001.

6 Garcia, p. 51.
7 John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion 1 & 2, ed. John T. McNeill, trans. Ford

Lewis Battles, vol. 1, The Library of Christian Classics (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox
Press, 2011), p. 737.

Contrary to Luther, Calvin saw union with Christ as the root of the believers blessings,
including the blessing of justification. Calvin exhorted the reader in his Institutes to recognize
that, we must understand that as long as Christ remains outside of us, and we are separated from
him, all that he has suffered and done for the salvation of the human race remains useless and of
no value for us. Therefore, to share with us what he has received from the Father, he had to
become ours and to dwell within us. 8
Later in the Institutes, Calvin seems to place justification in a causal relationship with
union when he writes,
Thus, him whom he receives into union with himself the Lord is said to justify, because
he cannot receive him into grace nor join him to himself unless he turns him from a
sinner into a righteous man. We add that this is done through forgiveness of sins; for if
those whom the Lord has reconciled to himself be judged by works, they will indeed still
be found sinners, though they ought, nevertheless, to be freed and cleansed from sin. It is
obvious, therefore, that those whom God embraces are made righteous solely by the fact
that they are purified when their spots are washed away by forgiveness of sins.
Consequently, such righteousness can be called, in a word, remission of sins.9
Writing about baptism as more than merely a symbol, Calvin reiterates that all of the
believers blessings are a result of being united with Christ:
Lastly, our faith receives from baptism the advantage of its sure testimony to us that we
are not only engrafted into the death and life of Christ, but so united to Christ himself that
we become sharers in all his blessings. For he dedicated and sanctified baptism in his
own body [Matt. 3:13] in order that he might have it in common with us as the firmest
bond of the union and fellowship which he has deigned to form with us. Hence, Paul
proves that we are children of God from the fact that we put on Christ in baptism [Gal.
3:2627].10
Calvins teaching on union has produced many differing perspectives that all claim
allegiance to the Genevan reformers general understanding. That there would be divergence
8 Calvin, p.537.
9 Calvin, p. 751.
10 Calvin, pp. 13071308.

among those who followed after Calvin in this area is not too suprising given the complexity of
the doctrine and the multiple layers of nuance involved in the time of Calvins writing. There are
at least three distinct forms of the doctrine found within the reformed camp that would claim
allegiance to either Calvins position on union or, if not Calvins union explicitly, Calvins
doctrine as a whole. William Evans has labelled these the bifurcation model, Pneumatological
realism, and Pneumatological-incarnational realism.
The bifurcation model of union is advocated by many associated with Westminster
California, especially in the writings of Michael Horton. Horton argues for a union doctrine that
focuses on the priority of the forensic and causal character of justification in effecting
sanctification / transformation.11 Drawing heavily on the speech-act theory of Kevin Vanhoozer,
Horton argues for a forensic ontology in which the declaration of the believers righteousness
produces righteousness in the believer. The believer becomes righteous by means of divine fiat.
Much like creation where God said Let there be and there was, Horton argues that Gods
proclamation of the believers righteous status creates the reality of sanctified believer. For
Horton, justification produces faith, mystical union, and sanctification (Evans 18)12 through the
simulataneous locutionary (communicative) act of the Father proclaiming the believer to be
justified, the illocutionary act of seeing the Son in the place of the sinner, and the perlocutionary
effect of effectual calling. Many criticisms have been levelled against this position. The two most
concerning are the possibilities for antinomianism and the seeming reversal of faith and
justification in the order of salvation.
11 William B. Evans Three Current Reformed Models of Union with Christ in Presbyterion

Vol. XLI Numbers 1-2. (St. Louis, MO: Covenant Theological Seminary, 2015), p. 16.
12 Ibid.,

p. 18.

The second model that professes allegiance to the teaching of Calvin is what Edgar calls
Pneumatological realism. This is the position held to by, among many others, Geerhardus Vos,
W.G.T. Shedd, and, more recently, Richard Gaffin. This model heavily emphasizes the priority of
mystical union. Vos argued that the entire ordo saludisis bound to the mystical union with
Christ.13 Fundamental to this position is the redemptive-historical association of Christ and the
Holy Spirit.14 Vos goes as far as to say that the pneumatic life of the Christian is a
product and a reflex of the pneumatic life of the Christ.

15

In this model, the reception

of the Spirit is forensically significant because (j)ust as Christ is the justified one by virtue of
his Spirit-wrought resurrection and resurrection life, so also the believer is justified by the
reception of this same Holy Spirit who is the Spirit of Christ.16 Gaffin argues with Vos against
the Lutheran model of making union a subsidiary blessing of justification and, as noted by
William Evans, insists that this spiritual union also communicates both the transformative and
the forensic benefits of salvation.17 Gaffin writes that, both, the forensic and the
transformative, justification and sanctification, are functions or manifestations of the relational.
Concretely, both are manifestations or aspects of union with Christ. Christ in us continues to
13 Geerhardus Vos, The Pauline Eschatology (Princeton, NJ: Geerhardus Vos, 1930), p. 149.
14 Evans,

p. 20.

15 Geerhardus Vos, The Collected Articles of Geerhardus Vos (Bellingham, WA: Lexham

Press, 2013), digital.

16 Evans,

17 Ibid.,

p 23.

p. 24

be, and is as such also, Christ for us. In union with us Christ has a significance that is
decisively forensic as well as powerfully transforming.18 This model seems more in line with
Calvin and, significantly more importantly, with the Scriptures, but has not been spared criticism
of its own, both in regards to its allegiance to Calvin and its interpretation of Scripture.
A third model is pneumatological-incarnational realism. This modern movement claims
allegiance to Calvin and is advanced by William Evans, Robert Letham and others, although the
label appears to be that of Evans. Moving one step beyond Vos and Gaffin, advocates of
pneumatoligical-incarnational realism insist that this relationship of union with Christ involves
a realistic connection with Christs incarnate humanity through the Spirit and not merely the
reception of the Spirit.19 None of these positions are without confusion or concern, to one
degree or another. All three claim allegiance to Calvin and the Scriptures, but also admit that
Calvin specifically is a bit tricky on this issue.
What should not be the result of this doctrines inherent difficulties and debates is a
dismissal of its importance and power. This is a doctrine that more than many warrants attention
and study. Neglecting the doctrine of the believers union with Christ has grave consequences.
First, it does not give God the full honor he deserves. Taking any part of the Word of God and
dismissing it because of its difficulty is disrespectful and foolish. Neglecting this doctrine also
removes one of the greatest comforts for the Christian. Calvin writes of the believers union with

18 Richard B. Gaffin, By Faith, Not by Sight: Paul and the Order of Salvation (Milton Keynes:

Paternoster, 2006), p. 41.

19 Evans,

p. 27.

Christ as the assurance of hope because such a union when present will bring everlasting
salvation with it.20
The debate over the doctrine of union with Christ will continue, due in large part to its
necessity and the incredible benefits it offers the church. What is beyond debate is how important
union was in the theological framework of the Reformers and those that followed, specifically in
the teaching of John Calvin. Calvins emphasis on union with Christ and the benefits of that
union are hard to overestimate.

20 John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion 1 & 2, ed. John T. McNeill, trans. Ford

Lewis Battles, vol. 2, The Library of Christian Classics (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox
Press, 2011), p. 435.

Bibliography
Calvin, John. Institutes of the Christian Religion 1 & 2, ed. John T. McNeill, trans. Ford Lewis
Battles, vol 1, The Library of Christian Classics. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox
Press, 2011.
---. Institutes of the Christian Religion 1 & 2, ed. John T. McNeill, trans. Ford Lewis Battles, vol
2, The Library of Christian Classics. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2011.
Evans, William B. Three Current Reformed Models of Union with Christ in Presbyterion Vol.
XLI Numbers 1-2. St. Louis, MO: Covenant Theological Seminary, 2015.
Gaffin, By Faith, Not by Sight: Paul and the Order of Salvation. Milton Keynes: Paternoster,
2006.
Garcia, Mark. Life in Christ: Union with Christ and Twofold Grace in Calvins Theology. Milton
Keynes: Paternoster, 2008.
Letham, Robert. Union with Christ: In Scripture, History, and Theology. Phillipsburg, NJ:
Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing, 2011.
The Holy Bible: English Standard Version. Wheaton: Standard Bible Society, 2001.
Vos, Geerhardus. The Pauline Eschatology. Princeton, NJ: Geerhardus Vos, 1930.
---. The Collected Articles of Geerhardus Vos. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2013.