Thanks for the quotes above, they are fantastic. Yes, the Muller article in his dictionary of terms is excellent. In fact, that book itself is incredible.

You might also be interesting in having a read at this little article I wrote for an online journal of Moore College students called The Catechist: “Here is Something Marvellous – The Extra Calvinisticum

Thanks for pointing me to your blog. I’ll be sure to pop my head in from time to time and have a read!

Blessings,
Mark

“To fill often signifies to finish, and it might have that meaning here; for, by his ascension into heaven, Christ entered into the possession of the authority given to him by the Father, that he might rule and govern all things. But a more beautiful view, in my opinion, will be obtained by connecting two meanings which, though apparently contradictory, are perfectly consistent. When we hear of the ascension of Christ, it instantly strikes our minds that he is removed to a great distance from us; and so he actually is, with respect to his body and human presence. But Paul reminds us, that, while he is removed from us in bodily presence, he fills all things by the power of his Spirit. Wherever the right hand of God, which embraces heaven and earth, is displayed, Christ is spiritually present by his boundless power; although, as respects his body, the saying of Peter holds true, that ‘the heaven must receive him until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.’” From Calvin’s Commentary on Eph. 4:10

“8. What then? If He came hither, where was He? “He was in the world.” He was both here and came hither; He was here according to His divinity, and He came hither according to the flesh; because when He was here according to His divinity, He could not be seen by the foolish, by the blind, and the wicked. These wicked men are the darkness, concerning which it was said, “The light shineth in the darkness, and the darkness comprehended it not.” Behold, both here He is now, and here He was, and here He is always; and He never departs, departs no-whither. There is need that thou have some means whereby thou mayest see that which never departs from thee; there is need that thou depart not from Him who departs no-whither; there is need that thou desert not, and thou shalt not be deserted.”

Augustine, “Homilies on the Gospel of John: Tractate II.8″ in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Series 1, ed. Philip Schaff (Peabody: Hendrickson, 2004), 7:16.

“But what means that passage of the great Evangelist, He was in the World, and the World was made by him? (John i. 10.) The sense sure is, that he was sent hither with regard to his Humanity, but was really here before, and all-along in respect of his Divinity.”

Augustine, from Pious Breathings. Being the Meditations of St. Augustine, His Treatise of the Love of God, Soliloquies and Manuel. To which are added, Select Contemplations from St. Anselm and St. Bernard, trans. George Stanhope, 5th edition (London, 1720), 25-26.

Notice how Augustine is protecting the integrity of both Christ’s divinity and humanity by predicating the properties of both natures to his one Person, while not predicating the properties of each nature [such as omnipresence] to each nature, thus avoiding the ubiquitarian error [i.e. Jesus' human nature is omnipresent].

Just got back earlier this week and have now a little bit of time for internet things! Let me have a crack at answering your questions:

1) From what I’ve read they are pretty much synonymous. Ie., they’re trying to do the same thing; namely, to preserve the full humanity and divinity of Christ. So, my short answer would be yes.

2) I’m not entirely sure what your question is exactly here, but I’ll throw around a few thoughts.

Perhaps we should start with the an/enhypostasis. Before the Incarnation there was one ‘ousia’ in the ‘Person’ of the Son, and after the Incarnation two ‘ousia’ (divine and human) were in the ‘Person’ of the Son. By preserving this distinction, the two ‘Leontioi’ were protecting against a) that the divine nature became a human nature, and b) that the divine person (hypostasis) of the Son became a human ‘person’. What they were asserting was that the Person of the Son assumed a human nature to himself. Thus, the one who is eternally the subject of divine nature also ‘becomes’, in time, also the subject of a human nature.

Well, back to your question! I would answer that just as Christ is truly divine and ubiquitous prior to the Incarnation, so he is also divine and ubiquitous after the Incarnation.

If you question wasn’t so much about the ‘Person’ issue, but more along the lines of the communication of the attributes, I would simply say that omnipresence is an incommunicable attribute. It makes sense for God to say ‘Be holy, as I am holy’ but doesn’t really make sense to say ‘Be omnipresent, as I am omnipresent!’

3) Good question. Haven’t really read too much about the work of the Holy Spirit with respect to the communication of the attributes, though I understand that John Owen is being retrieved in contemporary theology for his theology of the Holy Spirit in Christology. That said, I’ve only got rough thoughts about it and nothing that would really give a helpful response I’m sorry!

Ditto to chewing the fat, and ditto to thinking about the role of the Holy Spirit wrt. the extra!

Cheers brother,
Mark

1) do you think finitum non capax infinitum really requires the extra?
2) in what sense is Christ truly ubiquitous in his person as the incarnate son?
3)what implications does the NT role of the spirit have with respect to the incarnation and the attributes of the perpetually incarnate son?

given that calvin said so much about the spirit, i would like to get to know calvin’s pneumatology better to understand the extra. it would be great to see you again and chew the fat. moving house tomorrow to king st.

bruce

Yep, I’m back over at Chappo – heading up to Katoomba for NextGen on Sunday night, but when I’m back I’d love a cuppa mate. Will sms you then!

You back in Newtown atm? come round to #13 LQueen for a coffee sometime if you are…