Theological Term of the Week

Second Helvetic Confession
The “Reformation statement of faith written by Heinrich Bullinger in 1562, which became popular in many Reformed congregations in geographical areas such as Switzerland, Scotland, and France.”1

• From the Second Helvetic Confession: 

  CHAPTER I
  
  Of The Holy Scripture Being The True Word of God
  
  

  CANONICAL SCRIPTURE. We believe and confess the canonical Scriptures of the holy prophets and apostles of both Testaments to be the true Word of God, and to have sufficient authority of themselves, not of men. For God himself spoke to the fathers, prophets, apostles, and still speaks to us through the Holy Scriptures.

  And in this Holy Scripture, the universal Church of Christ has the most complete exposition of all that pertains to a saving faith, and also to the framing of a life acceptable to God; and in this respect it is expressly commanded by God that nothing be either added to or taken from the same.

  SCRIPTURE TEACHES FULLY ALL GODLINESS. We judge, therefore, that from these Scriptures are to be derived true wisdom and godliness, the reformation and government of churches; as also instruction in all duties of piety; and, to be short, the confirmation of doctrines, and the rejection of all errors, moreover, all exhortations according to that word of the apostle, “All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof,” etc. (II Timothy 3:16-17). Again, “I am writing these instructions to you,” says the apostle to Timothy, “So that you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God,” etc. (I Timothy 3:14-15). 

  SCRIPTURE IS THE WORD OF GOD. Again, the selfsame apostle to the Thessalonians: “When,” says he, “You received the word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it, not as the word of men but as what it really is, the Word of God,” etc. (I Thess. 2:13) For the Lord himself has said in the gospel, “It is not you who speak, but the Spirit of my Father speaking through you”; therefore “He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me” (Matt. 10:20; Luke 10:16; John 13:20)

• From Reformed Confessions Harmonized edited by Joel R. Beeke and Sinclair B. Ferguson:

The Second Helvetic Confession … began life in the form of a personal confession and testimony written by Heinrich Bullinger in 1562. In 1564, during the plague which Bullinger contracted when it ravaged Zurich, he revised his earlier work in anticipation of his death. Although his wife and three daughters died, Bullinger survived. Asked by Frederick III, Elector of the Palatinate, to provide an exposition of the Reformed faith, Bullinger provided him with a copy of his work. Frederick had it translated into German before his appearance to defend himself against Lutheran criticism at the Imperial Diet of 1566. …

The Second Helvetic Confession is in fact a compact manual of Reformed theology, containing thirty chapters and extending to some twenty thousand words. … Beginning with Scripture it moves through the loci of systematic theology, striking characteristic Reformed and Calvinian notes: the preaching of the Word of God is the word of God (ch. 1); Christ is the mirror in which we are to contemplate our election (ch. 10); providence and predestination are given separate treatments; the body and blood of Christ are received not carnally but spiritually, that is by the Holy Spirit. But practical religious issues are also of major concern; prayer and singing, the question of holy days, catechizing, visitation of the sick, and burial of the dead are discussed (chs. 23—26) as well as issues surrounding marriage and celibacy and the role of the magistrate (chs. 29—30). 

The Second Helvetic Confession was thus a mature statement of Reformed theology for the second half of the sixteenth century. Well-received internationally, it was translated into Dutch, English, Polish, Italian, Magyar, Turkish, and Arabic. It stands as a worthy testimony to the labors and faith of Heinrich Bullinger.

Learn more:

1. Christian Classics Ethereal Library: The Second Helvetic Confession
2. Philip Schaff: Notes on the Second Helvetic Confession
3. Believe Religious Information Source: The Second Helvetic Confession of Faith

Related terms:

• Belgic Confession
• Heidelberg Catechism
• Canons of Dort 
• Westminster Confession 
• London Baptist Confession

Filed under Creeds and Confessions.

1From The Christian Faith by Michael Horton.

Do you have a term you’d like to see featured here as a Theological Term of the Week? If you email it to me, I’ll seriously consider using it, giving you credit for the suggestion and linking back to your blog when I do.

Clicking on the Theological Term graphic at the top of this post will take you to a list of all the previous theological terms in alphabetical order.

Theological Term of the Week

consubstantial
Of the same nature; of one essence; an equivalent for the Greek term homoousios.

• From The Nicene Creed:

We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and invisible.

And  in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the only-begotten of the Father.

That is, of the substance of the Father; God of God and Light of light; true God of true God; begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father.

By whom all things were made, both which are in heaven and on earth: who for the sake of us men, and on account of our salvation, descended, became incarnate, and was made man; suffered, arose again the third day, and ascended into the heavens, and will come again to judge the living and the dead.

We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father [and the Son].
With the Father and the Son
he is worshipped and glorified.
He has spoken through the Prophets.
We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church.
We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
We look for the resurrection of the dead,
and the life of the world to come. Amen.

• From The Chalcedon Creed:

We, then, following the holy Fathers, all with one consent, teach men to confess one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, the same perfect in Godhead and also perfect in manhood; truly God and truly man, of a reasonable (rational) soul and body; consubstantial (coessential) with the Father according to the Godhead, and consubstantial with us according to the Manhood; in all things like unto us, without sin; begotten before all ages of the Father according to the Godhead, and in these latter days, for us and for our salvation, born of the Virgin Mary, the Mother of God, according to the Manhood; one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, Only-begotten, to be acknowledged in two natures, inconfusedly, unchangeably, indivisibly, inseparably; the distinction of natures being by no means taken away by the union, but rather of the property of each nature being preserved, and concurring in one Person and one Subsistence, not parted or divided into two persons, but one and the same Son, and only begotten, God, the Word the Lord Jesus Christ; as the prophets from the beginning (have declared) concerning him, and the Lord Jesus Christ himself has taught us, and the Creed of the holy Fathers has handed down to us.

• From James E. Keifer’s comments on The Nicene Creed: 

  This line: “of one essence with the Father, of one substance with the Father, consubstantial with the Father,” (in Greek, HOMO-OUSIOS TW PATRI) was the crucial one, the acid test. It was the one formula that the Arians could not interpret as meaning what they believed. Without it, they would have continued to teach that the Son is good, and glorious, and holy, and a Mighty Power, and God’s chief agent in creating the world, and the means by which God chiefly reveals Himself to us, and therefore deserving in some sense to be called divine. But they would have continued to deny that the Son was God in the same sense in which the Father is God. And they would have pointed out that, since the Council of Nicea had not issued any declaration that they could not accept, it followed that there was room for their position inside the tent of Christian doctrine, as that tent had been defined at Nicea. Arius and his immediate followers would have denied that they were reducing the Son to the position of a high-ranking angel. But their doctrine left no safeguard against it, and if they had triumphed at Nicea, even in the negative sense of having their position acknowledged as a permissible one within the limits of Christian orthodoxy, the damage to the Christian witness to Christ as God made flesh would have been irreparable.

Learn more:

1. Encyclo: Definitions of Consubstantial
2. basictheology.com: Homoousios
3. James E. Keifer: Notes on the Nicene Creed

Related terms:

• Nicene Creed
• Chalcedonian Definition
• essence
• Arianism

Filed under Christ’s Nature and His Work.

This week’s term was suggested by Staci Eastin. Do you have a term you’d like to see featured here as a Theological Term of the Week? If you email it to me, I’ll seriously consider using it, giving you credit for the suggestion and linking back to your blog when I do.

Clicking on the Theological Term graphic at the top of this post will take you to a list of all the previous theological terms in alphabetical order.

Theological Term of the Week

kenosis theory
The teaching that Christ, when he become human, voluntarily gave up some or all of the powers and attributes of God, yet remained God; also called kenosis or kenotic theology.

• Scripture used to support kenosis theory: 

  [Christ Jesus] emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men (Philippians 2:7 ESV). 

• From The Westminster Confession of Faith, a declaration that excludes kenosis theory:

Chapter VIII 

Of Christ the Mediator

II. The Son of God, the second person of the Trinity, being very and eternal God, of one substance and equal with the Father, did, when the fullness of time was come, take upon Him man’s nature, with all the essential properties, and common infirmities thereof, yet without sin; being conceived by the power of the Holy Ghost, in the womb of the virgin Mary, of her substance. So that two whole, perfect, and distinct natures, the Godhead and the manhood, were inseparably joined together in one person, without conversion, composition, or confusion. Which person is very God, and very man, yet one Christ, the only Mediator between God and man.

III. The Lord Jesus, in His human nature thus united to the divine, was sanctified, and anointed with the Holy Spirit, above measure, having in Him all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge; in whom it pleased the Father that all fullness should dwell; to the end that, being holy, harmless, undefiled, and full of grace and truth, He might be thoroughly furnished to execute the office of a Mediator and Surety. Which office He took not unto Himself, but was thereunto called by His Father, who put all power and judgment into His hand, and gave Him commandment to execute the same.

• From Systematic Theology by Wayne Grudem: 

  Beginning with [Philippians 2:7], several theologians in Germany (from about 1860-1880) advocated a view of the incarnation that had not been advocated before in the history of the church. This new view was called the “kenosis theory,” and the overall position it represented was called “kenotic theology.” The “kenosis theory hold that Christ gave up some of his divine attributes while he was on earth as a man. … According to the theory Christ “emptied himself” of some of his divine attributes, such as omniscience, omnipresence, and omnipotence, while he was on earth as a man. This was viewed as a voluntary self-limitation on Christ’s part, which he carried out in order to fulfill his work of redemption.

  …

  It is important to realize that the major force persuading people to accept kenotic theory was not that they had discovered a better understanding of Philippians 2:7 or any other passage of the New Testament, but rather the increasing discomfort people were feeling with the formulations of the doctrine of Christ in historic, classical orthodoxy. It just seemed too incredible for modern rational and “scientific” people to believe that Jesus Christ could be truly human and fully, absolutely God at the same time. 

Learn more:

1. Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry: Kenosis/What Is Kenosis?
2. Bible.org: Jesus Incarnation
3. Bible.org: Will you comment on the kenosis heresy?
4. Charles T. Buntin: The Empty God
5. Dan Musick: Christ “Emptied” Himself (Phil. 2:7)
6. Martin Downes quoting B. B. Warfield: The Cost of Kenosis Theory

Related terms:

• Arianism
• deity of Christ
• humanity of Christ
• hypostatic union
• incarnation

Filed under Defective Theology.

This week’s term was suggested by Diane Bucknell. Do you have a term you’d like to see featured here as a Theological Term of the Week? If you email it to me, I’ll seriously consider using it, giving you credit for the suggestion and linking back to your blog when I do.

Clicking on the Theological Term graphic at the top of this post will take you to a list of all the previous theological terms in alphabetical order.