Westminster Larger Catechism # 52
Commentary by Dr. Chuck Baynard
Q52. How was Christ exalted in his resurrection?
Answer: Christ was exalted in his resurrection, in that, not having seen corruption in
death (of which it was not possible for him to be held,) and having the very same body in
which he suffered, with the essential properties thereof, (but without mortality, and
other common infirmities belonging to this life,) really united to his soul, he rose again
from the dead the third day by his own power, whereby he declared himself to be the Son of
God, to have satisfied divine justice, to have vanquished death and him that had the power
of it, and to be Lord of quick and dead: all which he did as a public person, the head of
his church, for their justification, quickening in grace, support against enemies, and to
assure them of their resurrection from the dead the last day.
References: Acts 2:24,27; Luke 24:39; Rom. 6:9; Rev. 1:18; John 10:18; Rom. 1:4; Rom.
8:34; Heb. 2:14; Rom. 14:9; 1 Cor. 15:21-22; Eph. 1:20-23; Col. 1:18; Rom. 4:25; Eph.
2:1,5-6; Col 2:12; 1 Cor. 15:25-27; 1 Cor. 15:20.
The Divines packed more into this answer backed with an abundance of references than
can be treated in a short two page commentary as has been the attempt. I think they
attempted to still the voice of both the Church of Rome and England in this one statement,
for they give us an almost complete christology in one paragraph as it has been understood
in the reformed tradition from Calvin forward, and perhaps before.
"Christ was exalted in his resurrection" is a true statement, and in that
resurrection having His work on earth vindicated, thus returning to the place and glory He
had known with the Father from all eternity, we could say this was the fullness of His
exaltation. However the Divines chose to include several other key truths as proof of His
exaltation. As a systematic work, these truths would need to be dealt with,. And under the
present heading is as good a place as any to do so.
"Not having seen corruption..." to me simply means that His body (flesh) did
not decay, the rest of this sentence concerning His not being able to be held by it not
having reference to decay, but death itself. This only stands as a logical truth, that the
Lord of life would indeed hold sway over death and could not be held by it. This brings
out one place I differ with the Divines, though they have better support from Scripture
than I in what they proclaim. To wit: "to have vanquished death and him that had the
power of it..." I find this out of sync with my own understanding of the sense of
Scripture as a whole. This would allow that Satan at some point held the power of death in
his hands. I don’t agree with this at all, but that life and death have always been
in the hands of God. Consider Job, where Satan could not even afflict the just without the
permission of God. Lest we are speaking of spiritual death here, death has not been
vanquished, but we read that the one enemy left to be defeated on the return of our Lord
is death (1 Cor. 15:25-27). Yet, saying this applies to the second death has the same
problem, for this too has been a "past" event through faith for all mankind from
the beginning. The events of Calvary are but the earthly manifestation of what has been
Divine truth from before the foundation of the earth. God in the fullness of time (His
time) having revealed Himself in this more perfect and complete way. I make no attempt to
refute the divines, just offer an alternative understanding which I do not think changes
any of the reformed Christology. Their proof text stands (Heb. 2:14) and I dare not
declare the Holy Writ in error, but simply admit my frailty of reason to bring this verse
captive to the logic of man. Yet I don’t think Satan rules in a kingdom of death
having had the power of death to be held as a sovereign, for there is one Sovereign, God.
I find nowhere that God has ever set aside this complete sovereignty at any time. The
Divines rightly point to the truth that Christ lay down His life, and Christ took up His
life (John 10:18). This is a point many miss saying He was raised by the power of the Holy
Spirit. Yet, this fits my position better than their own, in that prior to His death and
resurrection Christ had the power over death, and thus His resurrection was but the
manifestation of this power in the flesh, not the attainment of a new power as reward for
His completed work, nor in exalting Him.
The Divines point out that all of His work, including the death and resurrection was
done as a public person and thus as the representative of His people. This being a
necessity for the doctrine of imputation (the so called federal theory) to stand. As the
Son of God, part of the Godhead, Christ was the sovereign of the quick and the dead, and
his death and resurrection were but the manifestation in the flesh (time or history) and
again not a new power attained for His perfect obedience in His exaltation. I find most of
the statement by the divines here to be of this nature, that is, a visible deed, performed
in the flesh before man, firmly establishing the doctrine of Christ as the first fruit.
At this point one could ask when did Christ become the head of the church? It could be
said that in the eternal counsel of God, He has always been so. Yet, in being pragmatic,
we could rightly point out that the church as we know it didn’t exist until after His
ascension. I choose the sense of church here to mean that of the invisible church which
would have included the Old Testament saints, as well as those present then and those who
were to follow in the New Testament church born at Pentecost. I would have preferred the
word elect, with this wider sense of whom the exaltation brought justification for.
One cannot pass here without comment on the body being the same and yet different.
Definitely metaphysical and beyond our normal understanding of things pertaining to the
body. Yet it was the same body with the scars of Calvary still upon it. This is important
to the purpose of the resurrection and ascension being spread over some 40 days. Christ
had need to appear to many in the same body (some 500 according to Paul) that this
essential truth be well established with eye witnesses so that it could not be lightly
refuted by the enemies of God among men. The miracle of the resurrection itself not being
set aside, it had need to be different in that it had been dead, separated from the soul.
The Scripture support here is by implication and the use of logic in its exposition.
However, a position I have found myself contrary to many in is that the body in the tomb
was but dead flesh, the soul having been parted there from. The Divines touch on this with
these words "really united to his soul." How can it be reunited except it first
be separated? How can he be declared dead while the soul yet still inhabits the body?
We have talked before of Christ having the human nature united with the divine, both
being one, yet both maintaining that which is proper to each. Here we find that the
"physical" body too is united with Christ. Yet though the same scarred body that
suffered for us, it differs in that it is also a spiritual body. There is much here we
cannot grasp while still in this fleshly body. This ability to change is important to us
even though we may not understand the how of it. Lest this be true, where is the hope for
those where no mortal remains exist? I think we must point to the fact that the body of
Christ was divinely protected even in death, and there was no need for the restoral of the
body from corruption, for it saw none, and thus Christ appeared in the same body, scars
and all. Yet this exact process will not apply to the bodies of those before or after
Christ in that our bodies will see corruption, and they will be restored in spiritual
perfection with no concern of the mode of death or that of burial or any other earthly
concern. That we will rise in these bodies is scriptural fact. If bearing the same marks
of life and death what a fearful picture from the brush of Dante heaven would be, when
filled by the faithful martyrs who died in such grotesque ways. Thus while it was fit and
necessary for the marks of death to be on the body of Christ, no such need will exist for
the rest of us.
All that said, I find in the last words of the statement, the justification of all the
elements of christology the Divines included in the first part of this statement; ".
. .assure them of their resurrection from the dead at the last day." These things,
and particularly the resurrection and appearances in the same body (though changed
physically) were proof to those first disciples that He was who He said He was, and that
as God had raised Christ, so they too could be assured of their own resurrection. There
were those in the Jewish church who did not believe in a resurrection and spiritual things
(the Sadducees) as well as those who did believe in the resurrection (the Pharisees). Thus
the "doctrine" of the resurrection was not new with Christ, though He did become
the proof of it, and confirm to men they too could be raised from the dead on that great
day of the Lord. John wrote his Gospel for the purpose that men might believe on the name
of the Son of God. Christ’s exaltation in the events chosen by the Divines, served
the same purpose, that having seen, man could believe.
Limited atonement clearly stands out from the verses chosen as proof text, as well as
the words of the divines. Though they chose not to use the word election,
"justification for the church" serves the same purpose. We also see the second
petal rising from the pen of the Divines and Holy Scripture once more and grace stands
tall, thus Unconditional Election remains true. Divine justice then having been satisfied,
the fifth petal stands firm and we can rest in the truth of the Perseverance of the
Saints.
Tremendous words of promise and hope in this question. One we could all stand to spend
more time considering. Most of the errors to assail our faith have come from
misunderstanding of these christolical issues. Big words and deep thought, but by faith
these truths can be understood and embraced by all of God’s children.
Dr. Chuck Baynard - May 1998
LC Index
Observer Home Page
1st EPC Home Page
