Program / Course 9: Christology and Pneumatology / Lesson 4.2
What you will learn
- Define the communication of properties and give the basic rule for using it.
- Explain how Scripture speaks of the Lord of glory being crucified.
- State the questions about divine impassibility that the doctrine raises.
- Compare Catholic, Orthodox, Lutheran and Reformed ways of applying the doctrine.
The big idea
The communication of properties (in Latin, communicatio idiomatum) is the rule that, because the two natures belong to one person, what is true of either nature can be said of the person. So Christians can say that God was born of Mary, and that the Son of Man came down from heaven. Scripture itself speaks this way. The hard question follows: if God the Son suffered and died, did God suffer? The traditions answer with care, and they differ on how far the properties of one nature may be said to pass to the other.
Key terms
- Communicatio idiomatum
- Latin for communication of properties (Greek idiomata). The practice of attributing to the one person of Christ what belongs to either of his natures.
- Property (idioma)
- A characteristic belonging to a nature. Being hungry is a property of human nature. Being eternal is a property of divine nature.
- Impassibility
- The teaching that God cannot suffer or be changed by anything outside himself. It has been central to classical theism, but its meaning is disputed.
- Theopaschism
- From Greek for God suffered. The teaching, in various forms, that God the Son suffered. The church accepted one form of it and rejected others.
- Extra Calvinisticum
- A name, given by Lutheran critics, for the Reformed teaching that the Son was fully present in the man Jesus but not contained by his body and still ruled the universe.
- Genus majestaticum
- A Lutheran term for the teaching that the divine nature shares its majesty with the human nature of Christ.
- Trisagion
- Greek for thrice holy: Holy God, Holy Mighty, Holy Immortal. A hymn used in the Eastern liturgies.
Background
The communication of properties is a rule about speech. It follows from the hypostatic union: if there is one person, then whatever is true of him by either nature can be said of him by name. The rule is old. Early Christian preaching already says the Lord of glory was crucified, and the councils from Ephesus on make it a test of sound teaching.
At the same time, the rule has to be used with care. It does not say that the divine nature suffers or that the human nature is omnipotent. It says that the person who has both natures is the subject of both kinds of statements. How that is understood is where traditions part.
Step-by-step explanation
Step 1: The rule in Scripture
The New Testament contains sentences that join the natures. Paul says that the rulers of this age “crucified the Lord of glory” (1 Corinthians 2:8). Acts 20:28 speaks of “the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.” In John 3:13 Jesus says that no one has ascended to heaven except “the Son of man which is in heaven.” In John 8:58 he says, “Before Abraham was, I am.”
Each sentence names the person by one title and gives a predicate that belongs to the other nature. The Lord of glory is divine, yet crucifixion is human. Readers of these verses have never thought that Paul meant glory itself was nailed. They see a way of speaking that follows from the unity of the person.
Step 2: The basic rule
The common rule is this: what belongs to either nature may be said of the person, but not in a way that says the nature itself has the other nature’s property. So it is right to say that God the Son died on the cross, because he died as man. It is wrong to say that the divine nature died or that the human nature is everywhere present.
This allows the church to say God was born and God died while still saying that God is eternal and cannot die as God. Cyril used the phrase that the Word suffered impassibly in the flesh. Some find this paradoxical language profound, and others find it evasive.
Step 3: Can God suffer?
Classical theology held that God is impassible: he is not changed or harmed by creatures. The early church used this to rule out any picture of a god buffeted by passions. Yet the church also confessed that the Son became man and died. Councils such as Constantinople II said that one of the Trinity suffered in the flesh.
Modern theology has debated the matter heavily. Some, such as Jürgen Moltmann in the twentieth century, argued that the cross shows suffering in God himself. Others defend classical impassibility, saying that God’s love does not require passion in the divine nature, and that the Son suffers in his human nature. Many try a middle path. This is an active debate within every tradition.
Step 4: The traditions apply the rule differently
Catholic theology, following Aquinas, holds that the properties of both natures are said of the person, not of the natures themselves. Orthodox theology says the same and adds that the human nature is made divine by grace through the union. Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox liturgies sing that the Son was crucified for us, and a dispute in the fifth and sixth centuries concerned adding that phrase to the Trisagion.
Lutheran theology goes further. It teaches that the human nature of Christ truly shares in divine majesty, so that his body can be present in the Lord’s Supper wherever it is celebrated. Reformed theology replies that the human nature stays finite and in heaven, while the Son, who is infinite, is also present everywhere (the extra Calvinisticum). The two views divide over how Christ is present in the Supper.
Step 5: The point of the doctrine
The communication of properties protects two things. It keeps the incarnation real, since the one who suffers is God the Son. And it keeps the two natures distinct, since divine properties are not claimed for the human nature on its own. Where either of these is lost, the doctrine becomes a version of an earlier error.
It also shapes worship and preaching. Hymns that say God was nailed to a tree, and prayers to the child as Lord, use the rule without explaining it. Students learn to read such language neither as crude nor as literal, but as the speech the doctrine allows.
- Why can a Christian say that God died, and what must be added to avoid error?
- What does 1 Corinthians 2:8 show about the way New Testament authors speak?
- What are the strengths and weaknesses of the claim that God is impassible?
- How does the Lutheran use of the doctrine differ from the Reformed?
- What might be lost if Christians stopped speaking of the death of God the Son?
- How would you explain the rule to someone using an everyday example?
Examples
The speech of everyday life
A person says, “The president was born in a small town.” Strictly, it was the baby who was born, long before he was president. The title names the person and the predicate describes an earlier stage. The doctrine uses a similar structure, though the case of Christ is not the same. (A constructed illustration.)
The Trisagion dispute
In the fifth century Peter the Fuller, a bishop of Antioch, added the words who was crucified for us to the Trisagion. Some took the addition as a confession that the Son was crucified, and others as a claim that the whole Trinity suffered. The dispute shows how sensitive the question was.
Lutheran hymns
Lutheran hymns often speak of God dying. Lutheran writers defend such language as a statement about the person, since the person is God. Reformed readers worry that this goes too far if it implies the human nature takes on divine qualities.
Different perspectives
Catholic
Catholic theology states the rule as a way of speaking about the person, following Aquinas. It holds that God the Son truly suffered in his human nature and that the divine nature remains unchanged. Some modern Catholic theologians, such as Hans Urs von Balthasar, explore suffering in the Trinity, which others criticize.
Orthodox
Orthodox teaching affirms that God the Son suffered in the flesh and that God remains impassible in nature. It stresses the mystery of this paradox and sings it in the liturgy. Many Orthodox theologians resist theories that make suffering part of God’s essence.
Lutheran
Lutheran theology teaches the genus majestaticum: the human nature of Christ, by union, shares in the majesty of the divine nature. This supports belief in the real presence of Christ’s body and blood in the Supper and in the ubiquity of his human nature.
Reformed
Reformed theology teaches that the natures stay distinct and that the finite does not contain the infinite. The Son is fully present in Jesus but also beyond him. Reformed writers hold that the Lutheran view confuses the natures.
Modern theology
Many modern theologians in all traditions question classical impassibility, and others defend it as protecting God’s freedom. The question is open and takes different forms in different traditions.
Why it matters
Every prayer, hymn and sermon about the cross uses the communication of properties, knowingly or not. The doctrine tells a student what can be said about the death of Christ without error, and shows the fault lines among traditions on questions as different as God’s suffering and the Lord’s Supper.
Common misunderstandings
Misunderstanding: The church teaches that the divine nature died.
Correction: It teaches that the Son died in his human nature. The divine nature cannot die. The rule is about the person.
Misunderstanding: If God cannot suffer, then Christ’s suffering was not real.
Correction: Christians who hold to impassibility say that the Son suffered truly in his human nature. Those who question impassibility argue that this is not enough, and the matter is debated.
Misunderstanding: The communication of properties is a late scholastic invention.
Correction: The Latin name is later, but the practice is found in Scripture and the Fathers, and the rule was used at Ephesus and Chalcedon. The Reformation churches developed it in new directions.
Knowledge check
State the communication of properties in your own words.
Because the two natures of Christ belong to one person, the properties of either nature can be said of that person. So one may say that the Son of God was born, hungry and crucified, and that the Son of Man came from heaven. The properties are not said of the natures themselves in the same way.
Give two New Testament verses that use this way of speaking.
First Corinthians 2:8 says the rulers crucified the Lord of glory, and Acts 20:28 says the church was purchased by God with his own blood. John 3:13 speaks of the Son of Man in heaven. In each, the person is named by one nature and the predicate belongs to the other.
How do Lutheran and Reformed views differ?
Lutherans teach that the human nature shares in divine majesty, so Christ’s body can be present in the Supper everywhere. Reformed theologians teach that the human nature remains finite and in heaven, while the Son is also present beyond it. The disagreement concerns the nature of Christ’s presence in the Supper.
What is impassibility and why does it matter here?
It is the teaching that God cannot suffer or be changed by creatures. It matters because the church also says that God the Son died. The classical reply is that he suffered in his human nature. Some modern theologians suggest that God shares in suffering. This is debated in all traditions.
Think it through
- How do you speak about the death of Jesus in prayer, and does it match this rule?
- What do you think of the claim that God is unaffected by suffering?
- Why might the Supper be the place where Lutherans and Reformed most disagree about this doctrine?
- What does this lesson suggest about the difference between a way of speaking and a theory?
Independent assignment
Sentences about Christ
In your own notebook, write 400 to 600 words. Write ten sentences about Christ, five true of his humanity, five of his divinity, and five mixed ones that use the communication of properties (for example, God the Son was crucified). Mark which are acceptable by the rule and which are not, and explain one borderline case. Do not send this to anyone.
Further study
- Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae Read selectively in the third part on what may be said of Christ.
- John of Damascus, An Exposition of the Orthodox Faith Read the chapters on the mutual sharing of the natures.
- John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion Read the section on the person of the Mediator for the Reformed account.
- Martin Luther, The Small Catechism Read the explanation of the Second Article for a Lutheran confession of Christ.
- 1 Corinthians 2:8 They crucified the Lord of glory.
- Acts 20:28 The church of God purchased with his own blood.
- John 3:13 The Son of man which is in heaven.