The Son of God Beyond the Flesh

A Historical and Theological Study of the Extra Calvinisticum

Andrew M. McGinnis

• Publisher: T&T Clark
• Year: 2014
• Print ISBN: 9780567666734
• eBook ISBN: 9780567655813
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Theology & Religion
• Subtopic: Christian Theology

The so-called extra Calvinisticum -the doctrine that the incarnate Son of God continued to exist beyond the flesh-was not invented by John Calvin or Reformed theologians. If this is true, as is almost universally acknowledged today, then why do scholars continue to fixate almost exclusively on Calvin when they discuss this doctrine? The answer to the "why" of this scholarly trend, however, is not as important as correcting the trend. This volume expands our vision of the historical functions and christological significance of this doctrine by expounding its uses in Cyril of Alexandria, Thomas Aquinas, Zacharias Ursinus, and in theologians from the Reformation to the present. Despite its relative obscurity, the doctrine that came to be known as the "Calvinist extra" is a possession of the church catholic and a feature of Christology that ought to be carefully appropriated in contemporary reflection on the Incarnation.

1

Introduction

This study examines a significant, albeit somewhat obscure, aspect of Christian reflection on the person of Christ: the doctrine that has come to be known as the extra Calvinisticum. In brief, the extra Calvinisticum is the doctrine that the incarnate Son of God was not limited to fleshly, human existence but continued to exist etiam extra carnem (even beyond the flesh). In this work, I demonstrate that this doctrine had a significant role in the thought of three important theologians of the patristic, medieval, and Reformation eras—namely, Cyril of Alexandria (d. 444), Thomas Aquinas (1225–74), and Zacharias Ursinus (1534–83), and that the extra Calvinisticum, on the whole, passed from the theological scene by the end of the nineteenth century due in part to shifts in metaphysics and theological method and a growing weariness of theological divisions in the church. These historical arguments lead to an examination of contemporary efforts at recovering the extra Calvinisticum in which I suggest some ways forward for the use of the doctrine in Christian theology.

For Cyril of Alexandria, the transcendence of the incarnate Son serves as a tool with which to defend the complete deity of the Son and the Son’s continued personal divine activity beyond the flesh. Aquinas, however, employs the doctrine of the Son’s existence beyond the flesh to defend Christ’s true humanity in the case of his incarnational descent and descent into hell during the three days after his death. Aquinas also uses the traditional totus/totum distinction to distinguish how Christ remains present even when he is not present in a human way. While writing in the context of post-Reformation polemics, Zacharias Ursinus employs the extra for more than a polemical purpose and articulates the doctrine with an eye toward the benefits and comfort that it holds out to believers. After the eclipse of the extra Calvinisticum from the late seventeenth century to the end of the nineteenth century, Karl Barth and Helmut Thielicke open the way for twentieth-century and contemporary efforts at recovering the extra. For instance, since Thielicke, there has been an effort to use the extra as a methodological principle in theology or to extend the insights of the extra into other areas of theology beyond Christology. Additionally, very recently the extra has been brought into dialogue with some forms of kenotic Christology. These and other recent uses of the extra are evaluated and, ultimately, it is shown that the extra Calvinisticum remains a significant doctrine in Christian theology, though it ought to remain within the bounds of Christology.

Rationale and outline of the work

The doctrine of the extra Calvinisticum has received some scholarly attention in the modern era, but these studies have focused almost exclusively on the use of the doctrine by the sixteenth-century reformer John Calvin. Although it has been demonstrated that the extra Calvinisticum doctrine did not originate with Calvin but is present in ancient and medieval theology—a point we will return to later—little attention has been given to other sources, particularly premodern sources, and the ways in which, and the purposes for which, these writers utilized this doctrine. As to contemporary work on the incarnation, a handful of scholars have sought to reappropriate the extra Calvinisticum. Yet, even in these studies, the investigation of sources other than Calvin has been sparse.

Despite being published nearly half a century ago, E. David Willis’s monograph on Calvin’s Christology remains perhaps the most significant study of the extra Calvinisticum.¹ Although the bulk of Willis’s study looks at the function of the extra in Calvin’s theology, his discussion of the origins of the term extra Calvinisticum and his survey of the appearances of the extra in patristic, medieval, and early modern sources are indispensable contributions. In addition to Willis, many other authors have examined the extra in Calvin’s theology. These studies have ranged from specific explorations of the extra in Calvin’s thought² to shorter discussions of the extra in service of larger treatments of Calvin’s theology or Reformed theology more generally.³

Beyond the field of Calvin studies, aside from the one chapter in Willis’s book, and a short thesis that takes its cues from Willis’s work,⁴ there has been almost no examination of the extra in theologians prior to Calvin.⁵ As to the modern constructive appropriation of the extra, Calvin figures most prominently, if not exclusively, in those places where premodern precedents are utilized.⁶ The extra also appears briefly in several modern theology or Christology texts, if not in name, at least in concept, particularly in the midst of discussions of the communicatio idiomatum,⁷ and there are a few entries on the extra in some theological dictionaries and encyclopedias.⁸

Despite all of these contributions to our understanding of the extra, there has been no extended historical and constructive study of the extra that expounds and appropriates the doctrine as found in patristic, medieval, or Reformation sources other than Calvin. The dissertation by Theodore Zachariades comes closest to doing so,⁹ but his focus is specifically on the divine attribute of omnipresence and how the incarnate Son can be said to be omnipresent. Zachariades looks in detail at the biblical case for Christ’s omnipresence, which has a bearing on the extra and which is one of his most valuable contributions to the scholarly discussion.¹⁰ He also offers a historical survey of the Christology of some relevant patristic and medieval figures, together with a review of Calvin’s extra, although his sights are ultimately set on recent issues in American evangelical theology, particularly kenotic approaches to the incarnation and how an emphasis on the divine attribute of omnipresence—specifically Christ’s omnipresence—can address these debates.

Contrary to the trend in much of the previous scholarship, the present study demonstrates the significance of the extra apart from the motivations of modern Calvin studies and with only limited reference to Calvin himself. It pursues an in-depth analysis of patristic, medieval, and Reformation articulations of the extra and also examines the prospects of recovering the doctrine for contemporary Christology. As such, this work is a first step toward filling a gap in the scholarship on the extra Calvinisticum.

A comprehensive treatment of both the history and contemporary relevance of the extra Calvinisticum would be a valuable contribution to Christian theology but would also run the risk of being either superficial or voluminous. The present study, therefore, is selective both in the historical figures and in the contemporary theological issues that are treated, and as such, this study is not, and is not intended to be, a complete history of the extra Calvinisticum. This selective approach will, it is hoped, permit the pursuit of what is often lacking in current scholarship—namely, a detailed analysis of this doctrine in some historical figures with attention to relevant secondary literature as well as a constructive approach to reappropriating the doctrine.

While the largest portion of this study will be historical in nature and thus will exhibit a method appropriate to historical investigation, a more constructive theological approach will be pursued in the final two chapters. The historical chapters will focus on the writings of selected theologians who addressed Christology in general and, more specifically, those places where these writers articulate something like the extra Calvinisticum. This approach, however, presents a significant methodological problem since the extra Calvinisticum doctrine is seldom, if ever, given a separate and extensive exposition by theologians prior to the Reformation era. The extra Calvinisticum, or something like it, is usually mentioned only in passing and in the context of larger christological discussions in patristic and medieval theologians. In cases like this, the temptation to which theologians often succumb is to begin with a later formulation of a doctrine and then comb the earlier sources in search of statements that sound like the later formulation. Not only is this method anachronistic, but it also promotes a decontextualized reading of the earlier sources through a method of wrenching texts from their original literary and historical settings. Additionally, the term extra Calvinisticum, which will be discussed in more detail later, is of seventeenth-century origin and is anachronistic as applied to earlier figures. To avoid this kind of anachronistic and decontextualizing method, I will not impose later definitions and concepts onto earlier works but will focus on expounding the views of each author in his context. Although for the purposes of beginning the inquiry we must have some basic idea of what the doctrine of the extra is, our investigation of the original sources must be allowed to shape, correct, or even depart from this initial formulation. Attention to the broader christological debates and discussions of the authors under consideration will go a long way toward promoting proper exposition of the sources and resisting the imposition of later categories and ideas onto earlier works.

The historical figures under consideration in this study were selected both for their significant treatment of christological issues and because they speak in some detail of the concept of the extra, the Son of God’s existence beyond the flesh. Furthermore, the figures represent three major periods in the history of doctrine: patristic, medieval, and Reformation. I do not argue for any dependence or reliance of the later figures on the earlier ones, or any development of the doctrine from the earlier to the later figures, but I instead look at the way in which each figure individually presents and employs a christological idea that is common across the Christian tradition. The subjects of the historical part of this study are, from the patristic era, Cyril of Alexandria; from the medieval period, Thomas Aquinas; and from the Reformation era, Zacharias Ursinus.

Some may wonder why I have chosen specifically these three figures as the objects of my historical inquiry. The answer is, on the one hand, a pragmatic one. I simply cannot cover every theologian and work that has in some way articulated the extra. On the other hand, the answer is that these figures are from different eras in the history of the church and they are serious contributors to the theology of the church both in their own time and beyond. This is particularly the case with Cyril a...

Table of contents

• Cover-Page
• Half-Title
• Dedication
• Title
• Contents
• Acknowledgments
• Abbreviations
• Note on Translations
• 1 Introduction
• 2 Cyril of Alexandria on the Transcendence of the Incarnate Son
• 3 Thomas Aquinas on the Incarnational Descent and the Presence of the Whole Christ
• 4 Christology, the Lord’s Supper, and the extra Calvinisticum in Sixteenth- and Seventeenth-century Reformed and Lutheran Polemics
• 5 Zacharias Ursinus on the extra humanum and Its Benefits
• 6 The Eclipse of the extra in Modern Christology
• 7 Paths of Recovery: Contemporary Approaches to the extra Calvinisticum
• 8 Conclusion
• Bibliography
• Index
• Copyright