New directions in Spirit Christology: A foundation for a charismatic theology

Introduction

It used to be common to read of theologians complaining that there was never enough attention paid to the Holy Spirit. Finally, it appears, however, that the Holy Spirit’s reputation as the ‘Cinderella’ of the Trinity (the last, the lowest and the least) has been well and truly shaken off. The Holy Spirit’s work and person is now commonly celebrated and even on occasion elevated to a primary position in theological discussion. One of the main reasons for this move in academic circles is, I believe, the burgeoning Pentecostal Church and the spread of the Charismatic movement worldwide and across the denominations. The ‘experience’ of the Holy Spirit in the lives of Christians is acting as a catalyst and foundation for theological reflection, and influencing the theological agenda. In addition to this, the study of pneumatology (a theology of the Holy Spirit) is being viewed as a potentially fruitful point of departure for a theology of religions and interreligious dialogue, a topic that has increasing relevance for people of all faiths as we learn to live in pluralist societies. Moreover, there is a growing interest in many academic disciplines in the notion of ‘spirit’ as a category, which has contributed to the contemporary discussions on what it means to consider the question of the S/spirit in the theological world. As has always been the case, developments in both the Church and the surrounding culture mould and shape theological reflection and debate.

This interest in the Holy Spirit has had an impact upon thinking in all the major doctrines as theologians revisit Christian beliefs in the light of a greater appreciation of the role and power of the Spirit. Two doctrines that have been affected by this shift in thinking are those of the Trinity and Christology. It would be a mistake to say, as some imply, that the Spirit’s role has been totally overlooked in the development of doctrine. The Cappadocian Fathers are famed for their emphasis on the co-equal and co-eternal nature of the Spirit. The Father is God. The Son is God. The Spirit is God. In the Creed of Constantinople in ad 381, the Spirit is named explicitly as ‘the Lord, the giver of life’, who is ‘worshipped and glorified’ with the Father and the Son. Augustine famously referred to the Spirit as the ‘bond of love’ between the Father and the Son, spelling out a role for the Spirit in the Trinity that identified the Spirit as the essence of God’s love. For hundreds of years, however, explanations of the person and of the work of Jesus Christ were developed without any real reference to the Holy Spirit. The Son was defined in relation to the Father, not necessarily to the Spirit. As Western and Eastern theology began to develop with different emphases, the Johannine Logos Christology, the ‘Word made flesh’ (John 1.14) became the dominant Christological model in the West.

The decision in the Western Church to include the filioque, the affirmation that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son continues to be criticized by Eastern theologians as being the source of an inappropriate emphasis on the Son over and above the Spirit (Christomonism) and of subordinating the person of the Spirit to the Father and the Son (subordinationism), with too little emphasis on the co-equality of the Spirit as the Third Person of the Trinity. Many Western theologians are looking to the East in a bid to redress the balance, and there is some form of synthesis of Western and Eastern thought being developed around the doctrine of the Holy Spirit. Thus, events and theological thinking together are pushing theologians to reflect on how we may articulate who this Holy Spirit is and what this Spirit does. In respect of Christology, the question is being asked, ‘What is the Spirit’s role in relation to the Son?’ Answers to this question have been formulated in proposals for a ‘Spirit Christology’, a Christology in which we are able to articulate a role for the Holy Spirit in the person and work of Jesus Christ.

Advocates of Spirit Christology argue that Logos Christology alone does not do justice to the breadth of the biblical testimony and account of the person and nature of Jesus Christ. If we read the four Gospels together, then our picture of Jesus is formed not only by the Gospel of John but also by the Synoptic Gospels, in which we read of the incarnation, the life and the ministry of Jesus as formed and lived out in the power of the Spirit. So proponents of Spirit Christology argue that a pneumatic Christology not only fulfils a more faithful witness to the biblical account of Jesus as the Saviour but also completes more fully our understanding of the Trinitarian revelation of God. Ralph Del Colle writes, ‘Spirit-christology addresses directly the charge that something is lacking in the church’s understanding and faith if in theory and praxis the basic Christological confession is not informed by pneumatology.’ ¹ Spirit Christology is a corrective to the tendency either to ignore the work of the Spirit or to subordinate the person of the Spirit to the person of Christ. It is a Christology that works out the implications of Yves Congar’s axiom that there should be ‘no Christology without pneumatology and no pneumatology without Christology’. ²

Spirit Christology, with its plea to recognize Jesus Christ as the Spirit-anointed man, has caused some apprehension and resistance among those who are concerned that we might simply be returning to an adoptionist heresy – that Christ was ‘adopted’ as the Son, rather than being the eternally begotten Word, ‘of one substance with the Father’. It is true that with the broad range of Spirit Christologies and the elusiveness of the term, there are some who appear to be replacing the Logos with the Spirit, or implying that Christ only ‘became’ the Messiah as he was anointed with the Spirit. David Coffey, a contemporary proponent of Spirit Christology, outlines two guiding principles for an orthodox Spirit Christology. In order to guard against accusations of adoptionism, Coffey states that John 1.14 as the basis for Christ as the incarnation of the Logos is ‘non-negotiable for subsequent theological reflection’. ³ We cannot abandon the truth that the pre-existent Word assumed humanity for our sake. In the light of Luke 1.35 however, and the truth that Christ was conceived by the Spirit, Spirit Christology also claims that the Holy Spirit is ‘constitutive’ of the person and work of Christ. The result will be a Christology that is able to account for the role of the Spirit in the relation of the Father and the Son, in the assumption of the human nature and in the life, ministry, death, resurrection and return of Christ. The point here is that one Christological model should not be developed without the other.

Jesus and the Spirit

The Synoptic Gospels, Acts and Hebrews give us an account of the incarnation in which the Spirit plays a dynamic role in the conception, growth, ministry, death and resurrection of Christ, as well as being the one whom Christ sends (or leaves) on earth to carry on his work in creation. In Luke 1.35 and Matthew 1.18 we read of Jesus Christ conceived by the Spirit in the womb. His dedication as a baby was presided over by the Spirit (Luke 1.80; 2.52). He was baptized with water and with the Spirit (Luke 4.1). He was led, or ‘driven’, as some translations say, by the Spirit into the wilderness (Luke 4.14). He overcame the temptations of the devil with the word of God and in the power of the Spirit. He returned to Galilee filled with the power of the Spirit. The Spirit anoints Jesus to bring good news to the poor, to proclaim release to the captives, recovery of sight to the blind, to let the oppressed go free and to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favour (Luke 4.18–19). Jesus offered himself up on the cross ‘through the eternal Spirit’ (Heb. 9.14). If we understand Romans 8.14–17 to be an indication that it is through the Spirit that we cry to the Father, then Jesus’ cries to his ‘Abba Father’ while on this earth are by the Spirit. Romans 1.3–4 links the role of the Spirit in the resurrection and vindication of the Christ as the Son of God, ‘the gospel concerning his Son, who was descended from David according to the flesh and was declared to be the Son of God with power according to the spirit of holiness by resurrection from the dead’. In 1 Peter 3.18 we read, ‘He was put to death in the body and made alive by the Spirit.’ In 1 Timothy 3.16 we read, ‘He was justified – or vindicated – by the Spirit.’ Luke describes Jesus of Nazareth as having been anointed by God ‘with the Holy Spirit and with power, how he went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, for God was with him’ (Acts 10.38).

Amos Yong writes, ‘Spirit christology sees Jesus not only as one anointed by the Spirit to do the mighty works of God but as a fully anointed one whose life from beginning to end was of the Spirit.’ ⁴ This is easily demonstrated. The more complex question that we face with Spirit Christology is how this picture of Jesus as the one who is anointed with power by the Spirit to do the works of God conforms to the Christ of Logos Christology. How do we hold the Spirit-anointed man with Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the eternal Son who assumes sinful humanity into his sinless self? Was this Son of God not capable of performing the mighty works of God because he was God on earth? What of the divine nature? Was Jesus truly dependent upon the Spirit? If so, how did this work and what happens to our claim that we can only work out a Spirit Christology if we hold on firmly to Logos Christology? The letter to the Hebrews illustrates this two-fold picture of the incarnate Christ. Jesus bears the very stamp of God’s nature. He is the image of the invisible God, upholding the universe by his word and power (Heb. 1.3). At the same time, the writer to the Hebrews emphasizes his humanity. He was like his brothers and sisters in every respect (Heb. 2.17). He grew like we do, felt like we do, lived like we do, prayed like we do, suffered like we do, and died like we do. He ‘offered up prayers and supplications, with loud cries and tears, to the one who was able to save him from death, and … he learned obedience through what he suffered’ (Heb. 5.7–8).

The spirit and the humanity of Christ

The question of how to explain how Jesus is both weak and frail humanity and almighty God at one and the same time is never going to be resolved once and for all. The mystery of the incarnation will in many respects always remain a mystery. As those to whom the revelation of God has come in Christ, Christians will continue, however, to attempt to articulate this mystery as best we can. One attempt to account for the frailty, weakness and limitations of Christ is ‘kenotic’ Christology. This comes in various forms and is based on the text of Philippians 2.5–8 that the Son of God ‘emptied himself’ to dwell among us and to become as we are. There is no doubt that there is some form of self-limiting that occurs as God becomes man, but many kenotic Christologies posit that the Son gives up so much of his divinity in order to come to earth that the Christological model then fails to conform to Chalcedonian orthodoxy. If Christ gives up his divinity to become man then how is it that he continues to be fully human and fully divine, truly man and truly God? Better to work with the classic statement regarding the incarnation, that the Son assumed the human nature. It was the voluntary assumption or taking on of the limiting human nature that subjected the Son to human weaknesses, not the ‘giving up’ of his divinity.

The ‘Spirit Christology’ of John Owen

Spirit Christology is a Christology in which the Holy Spirit is understood to be constitutive of the person and work of Christ. Jesus Christ is formed by the Spirit, and performed the works that he did in an entirely mutual, reciprocal and co-inherent relationship with the Spirit. One of the marks and the great strengths of Spirit Christology is that it allows us to emphasize the humanity of Christ. It is able to offer a Christological model that explains both the dependence of the Son on the Father and the Spirit while on this earth, and of his development and growth as a human being. Spirit Christology focuses less on the emptying of Christ and more on the human life of Jesus lived out in the power of the Spirit. However, Spirit Christology faces the same question that we face with kenotic Christologies. Where is the divine nature of Christ, and how is it that Jesus Christ is God and does the works of God if he is a man dependent on the Spirit? We will come to this in due course.

John Owen, a seventeenth-century Puritan formulated what would now be called a Spirit Christology. Owen’s Christology is formed on the basis that the eternal Son of God assumed human nature into personal union with himself in line with Logos Christology. Owen insisted that the one person of Christ was the person formed by the hypostatic union of the divine and human nature. However, as Alan Spence points out, the distinctive insight of Owen’s Christology is ‘that all direct divine activity on the assumed human nature of Christ was that of the Holy Spirit’. ⁵ It is the Spirit then, rather than the divine Word, who is identified as the ‘immediate, peculiar, efficient cause of all external divine operations’. ⁶ The life of Jesus is understood as a life lived as a human being in complete and utter dependence on the Spirit. Jesus grew in the power of the Spirit, bore his temptations in the power of the Spirit, was maintained in holiness by the Spirit, healed the sick, cast out demons, and so on, all under the anointing of the Spirit. Colin Gunton writes that such a conception creates space for a conception of the humanity of Jesus ‘which gives due emphasis to his freedom, particularity and contingency’. ‘They are enabled by the (transcendent) Spirit rather than determined by the (immanent) Word.’ ⁷ Jesus Christ was not able to do what he did or maintained in holiness because he was God but because of his dependence on the Spirit.

The implications of this Christology for our understanding of what it is to be a human being are highly significant. Spence’s work explores some of the implications of emphasizing the full humanity of Christ in this way. Christ is the ‘normative man’, the ‘paradigm’ of that which is truly human. Christ’s life not only becomes ‘a plumbline by which to form an estimate of our present human condition’ but also ‘the prototype of our destiny in God’s redemptive purposes’. ⁸ In short, Christ’s life represents the goal of human existence. This in itself has direct implications for both discipleship and mission. What are those who are called to follow Christ being called into? It does not take a Spirit Christology to affirm that we are being called into becoming like Christ. What Spirit Christology offers is a model of participation in the life of Christ that is moulded and shaped by the Holy Spirit. This will naturally appeal to those with Charismatic and Pentecostal leanings.

First, then, our Christological model is the basis for our understanding of what it looks like to be truly human, and this cannot be understood without the work of the Spirit. ‘A sanctifying work is presupposed in Christ who thereby becomes a pioneer in the faith for other believers.’ ⁹ Steve Holmes notes that the effect of John Owen’s Christology is profound; the sanctification of Christ is now understood as ‘a work of the Spirit in the life of a human being’. ¹⁰ Second, the Spirit is the one who unites our lives with God’s, in an analogous manner to the relationship of the Son to the Father while in his incarnate state. Jesus lived a life in the same way that we live ours. He receives his affirmation as the Son at his baptism by water and the Spirit. It is by the Spirit that we cry out ‘Abba Father’ as we receive the revelation that we are truly the sons and daughters of God (Rom. 8.14–17). It is by the Spirit that we are being conformed to the likeness of the Son. It is by the Spirit that we participate in the freedom and glory of God (2 Cor. 3.17–18). It is in the power of the Spirit that we are sent out to witness to Christ. It becomes impossible to form a theology and practice of either discipleship or mission without reference to the intertwined and reciprocal work of Christ and the Spirit.

Christ’s life and ours

As we have noted the strengths of Spirit Christology are the emphases on the humanity of Christ and the reality of the incarnation as complete identification with humankind. We are able to identify Christ’s life with ours and our lives with his. Moreover, we have a Christological model that can account for the Son of God who performed miracles in the power of the Spirit, cries out to his Father in Gethsemane, and who goes to the cross sustained, comforted and empowered by the Holy Spirit. He is then raised to life by the power of that same Spirit, who unites with him all those who put their faith and trust in this crucified Saviour. It is a pneumatological and Christological account of the incarnation, the life, the death and the resurrection of Christ that then forms the basis of both a theological anthropology and a theology of mission.

The potential weaknesses can be an inability to account for the divine nature in the incarnated Christ with the corollary to that being an inability to account for the difference between our lives and Christ’s. In answer to the first, Spence speaks of the work of the Spirit in the human life of Christ as operating within the ‘divine hospitality’ of the Son. I particularly like this picture. The divine nature is not ‘switched off’ so that the human nature of Christ has to function on its own, dependent on the Spirit. Jesus Christ is only and can only be the one person who is truly God and truly man. He never ceases to be truly God. When becoming truly man, however, his life is lived as we live ours, and God himself (Father, Son and Spirit) creates the space for that and enables this growth. The divine assumes the human, and allows the human to flourish and to grow within the embrace of God. The implications of this for humanity are vast. The key soteriological point is that it is only within the embrace of the divine that humanity will ever become what it is truly meant to be. A humanity formed outside God’s embrace will be broken, stunted, crushed and dying. A humanity that is invited into the embrace of God in Christ will be empowered, healed, liberated and sanctified beyond our imagination (1 Cor. 2.9). This is enabled by the Spirit.

In answer to the second, human beings on this earth cannot be Christ as we are not ‘truly divine’ and the process of being made holy will never be completed in our lifetime, but we are participating in this process in relationship with him. Spirit Christology gives us a strong theological and dogmatic basis for the claim that our lives can become truly Christlike in all aspects. The Holy Spirit forms our characters into Christlikeness, just as the Spirit empowers us to do the works of Jesus on this earth. Becoming truly human is not a process of becoming more and more ‘spiritual’ but of becoming more and more like the incarnated and fleshly Jesus Christ. It is a journey into compassion towards the poor and the sick, a journey into truthfulness, salvation and freedom, and healing for ourselves and others. The Son learned obedience to the Father through the anointing of the Spirit. We too, with submissive spirits, and over time, can learn to do the will of the Father in the power of that same Spirit. Jesus was given the Spirit without measure (John 3.34). Jesus gives the graces of the Spirit by measure (Eph. 4.17). For this reason, we learn the life of the Spirit in relationship with one another and in need of each other’s gifts and characters. The Spirit not only enables our participation in Christ and our dependence on the Father that is the grounds of our flourishing but also creates in us a dependency on one another. We are not complete in ourselves as ‘little Christs’ but only in relationship with one another as we are together the Spirit-filled representatives of his body here on earth.