Martin Chemnitz
Martin Chemnitz was born in Treuenbrietzen, Germany, on November 9, 1522. In 1545, he studied at the university in Wittenberg, where he met Philipp Melanchton and heard Martin Luther preach at the chapel. Though the university was disrupted by war, he completed his master’s in Königsberg in 1548 and later became a librarian from 1550 to 1552. It was not until 1553 that he returned to Wittenberg to complete his higher studies and transitioned to become a faculty member until his death on April 8, 1586.
According to the translator, J. A. O Preus, Chemnitz relied heavily on the early church fathers, several scholastics, and Martin Luther. Evidently, most of his theological comparison and citations are from John of Damascus, whom he called in this work as Damascenus. Moreover, he cited Augustine, Cyril, Tertullian, Athanasius, Basil, and other approved teachers, to which he noted that their teachings were the unbroken and unanimous consensus of the orthodox church (25). Consequently, as a Lutheran, he also faithfully noted Luther’s works.
Nevertheless, Chemnitz’s reliance on the patristic fathers did not overshadow his supreme dependence on the scripture. The translator notes that he quotes verses from memory and uses his translation or paraphrases. Indeed, Chemnitz warned his readers not to rely on human wisdom but only on the divine revelation—the Word of God (17).
The Two Natures in Christ
The book’s purpose is to give clear, biblical, theological, orthodox, and faithful instruction about the doctrine of the hypostatic union—the union of the two natures of Christ in one person. This doctrine had been made official at the Council of Chalcedon in A.D. 451. Though as proven by Chemnitz in his work, the doctrine had been evident in the teachings of the patristic fathers and even in the scriptures. However, in the Reformation period, this doctrine was challenged by different groups like a certain group of Anabaptists and all the unitarians.
This review focuses on the book’s first five chapters and jumps to chapters 26 to 29 for brevity purposes in the required reading for the seminar on Christology.
Chapters 1 to 5
Chapters 1 to 5 discuss the definition of terms that Chemnitz used throughout this work, the explanation of the divine and human natures, and then the nature and definition of the hypostatic union. Chemnitz prioritized clarity in his work by laying out the terminologies given and presented throughout the book. After clarifying the terminologies, in chapters 2 and 3, he presented the divine and human natures in each aspect before tackling the hypostatic union or the union of the two natures. In the chapter on divine nature, he argues for the full deity of Christ. He began by listing the prominent heretical Christological teaching about Christ’s divine nature.
Listed among the heretical teachings are the non-preexistence, that Christ did not exist before Mary’s virgin conception, that Christ became a deity by adoption due to high virtue, that Christ has a different substance or nature from the Father; and the modalistic aspect of Patripassianism. In each heretical teaching, Chemnitz responded through the use of scriptural truths—that Christ is preexistent, has true essence as the Father, and three persons in the Trinity. He stated, “For the same nature of the Deity is perfect and complete in the individual persons” (40). In the last part of this chapter, he stood firm that Christ’s nature is the same substance, not similar nor identical, as the Father.
While Chapter 2 was about the divine nature, the next one was about the human nature of Christ. Christ is fully, though he did not use the same term, human. Immediately, he refuted the heretical teaching of a form of Gnosticism that taught about Christ’s human-like phantasm. Chemnitz cited that Christ denied that he was a phantom when the disciples thought he was one when he walked on water. Christ grew in his physical well-being, partook in food and water, and lived among men. Also, he cited Thomas’ doubt of Christ’s bodily resurrection. More heretical teachings about Christ’s human nature were that he had alien-like flesh or heavenly-given flesh and was not the same as a human being. The Logos only dwelt in the mind or rational soul of the human body. Chemnitz clarified Christ’s impassibility that incorruptibility pertains to the full destruction and not the incapacity of suffering, beating, and even death. Lastly, he refuted the teaching that Christ has another nature resulting from combining the two natures.
Chapters 4 and 5 offer the nature and definition of the hypostatic union. In the former chapter, Chemnitz gave a scriptural grounding of the nature of the hypostatic union and summarized the definition in the last part. The latter chapter’s definition clarified that the “assuming nature is the divine and the assumed nature is the human” (75). Chemnitz’s definition of the hypostatic union (72):
The hypostatic union, or the incarnation, is a work of the entire Trinity by which the divine nature in the person of the Son alone assumed from the Virgin Mary a true human nature without transmutation and confusion. The two natures are inseparably connected, and from them, and in them is established one person in the incarnate Christ, in whom the assumed nature subsists and is sustained. This union took place for us men and for our salvation in order that the works of redemption by Christ, our King and High Priest, might be accomplished through the activities of each nature.
Chapters 26 to 29
After setting the background of the book’s purpose and definition, Chemnitz discussed how to teach the doctrine of the hypostatic union, the biblical foundations, and the testimonies of the patristic fathers in the terminologies of the first two genera, communication of the attributes—the distinction of each nature and what belongs to each nature. Chapter 26 focuses on the third genus, specifically the terminology of the communication of the majesty. In the previous chapters, Chemnitz presented the scriptural grounding of the third genus and the testimonies of the patristic fathers. It is the exaltation and glorification of human nature, and “His function as King and High Priest performs and carries on at the same time both in, with, and through the human nature” (165).
Chemnitz gathered all the terminologies from the ancient church and church fathers to analyze and consider a proposed term. He had argued for the use of communication of the majesty for the third genus. According to Cyril, the first is appropriating, the second is communicating, and the third is acquiring. The third genus, as a result of the hypostatic union, functions as King and High Priest (165). Hence, the term of communication of the majesty.
Chapter 27 reminds his readers not to separate the two natures in one person. It is not two natures in two persons, as Nestorius would term it. If Nestorius was correct, which he is not, it added another person to the trinity and made it quaternity. Chemnitz agreed with Augustine when he stated, “When the manhood was assumed, the number of persons in the Trinity was not increased, but the same Trinity remained. For just as the soul and body in man make one person, so also in Christ the Logos and manhood are one person” (404).
Christ’s hypostatic union of the divine nature and human nature posits consubstantiality, coeternal, and coequality. When stated in the Bible that Christ was “placed at the right hand of God” (407). According to Chemnitz in chapter 28, this phrase did not mean Christ’s nature is lesser than the Father nor inferior in relationship. The “right hand of God” points to the nature, not function. It is the exaltation from the poverty of human nature to the highest dignity (409).
Lastly, for this review, in chapter 29, when it comes to the object of worship, it ought to be the person and not one of the natures in Christ. It is the worship of the two natures of Christ. Chemnitz pointed out, “Worship which looks to Christ and apprehends Him whom it adores believes that according to both natures Christ hears our prayers, sees our sufferings, helps and aids us,” and access to the “Deity Himself” and has a “High Priest” who can sympathize “with our infirmities” (415). Overall, it is imperative that all followers of Christ believe in the two natures of Christ in one person—the doctrine of hypostatic union. For an advanced reading about this doctrine, read Chemnitz’s work. It is a great source of patristic fathers’ teachings, the church’s orthodox stand, and the scriptural groundings of this precious doctrine.
John&Paul's Reflections 