Considering Union with Christ by Billings

About a year ago I realized I had no books on the subject of our union with Christ. I decided to go on a buying binge. It didn’t last long because there are not many books on that subject. Since then I read Robert Letham’s excellent book on the subject. Since I was on study leave, I decided to take J. Todd Billings’ book Union with Christ: Reframing Theology and Ministry for the Church.

The phrase reframing theology can often be a bad sign, sort of like ‘repainting the faith”. But here it is not. Billings is a Reformation scholar, with particular emphasis on Calvin. This book oozes Calvin, along with others. He utilizes “retrieval theology”, which was a new term for me. You look to the theology of the past to address problems of the present, and to renew our vision. We tend to be culturally captive, and see theology in light of the problems of our day. This looks to the past to gain a theological foothold to examine the problems of our day, sometimes to even see them. I hope that makes sense, and that I did it justice (I suspect some Ph.D. candidate out there could take me to task). Billings wants to reframe our thinking, so we look at things like salvation, justice, communion and ministry in light of our union with Christ.

When I taught a Sunday School class, one congregant took issue with Packer’s assertion that one only understands Christianity to the degree that they understand adoption. His assertion was that union with Christ as the most important unifying principle or doctrine that we must understand. So, I found it ironic that the first chapter is entitled Salvation as Adopted in Christ. The point is, that they are connected to one another. You can’t have one without the other. But one way we can better understand union is thru understanding adoption. Much of the book keeps our current context in mind, and explores how Christianity really differs from MTD, or moralistic, therapeutic, deism. Odd in that some of the other books I’ve been reading have dealt with that as well. Salvation as adoption is so different than MTD. God, who is transcendent (great & glorious) draws near to us in salvation. He draws near to us to save us.

“The prospect of adoption in this sense is an offense. It is too much closeness– it is the sort of closeness that requires giving up one’s own identity.”

Billings brings in Calvin’s notion of “double grace”: in union with Christ we enjoy both justification and sanctification. We don’t just get one of them. Christ is not divided, or torn apart (Michael Horton uses this in addressing the problem of antinomianism in the theology of the current leader of Exodus International). In union with Christ, we not only died with Him on the cross but were also raised with Him so we partake of newness of life. This is significantly different from moralism. We are not trying to get into God’s good graces. Our new living comes out of our new identity in Christ which is a function of our union with Christ.

Billings, using this framework, provides a robust antidote to MTD regarding our understanding of salvation. It is robust particularly because it encompasses both justification and sanctification. Adoption brings the supposedly distant God too close for comfort. We discover a God that is not concerned with our feeling good so much as our being God, sharing in the likeness of His Son. It is more like physical therapy- painful, but restorative.

“For Calvin, both of these (prayer and the Lord’s Supper) help us enter into our new identity as God’s children by the Spirit’s power. And they both have the shape of the double grace received in union with Christ.”

As adopted children, we being to act like His children. We move in, so to speak, with the rest of the family (in other words, we join a church). We eat the family meal (communion), and learn the family rules. As ones who receive His incredible generosity and kindness, we want to please our heavenly Father.

But this is where the gospel as union with Christ is so radical. It says, do not look to yourself, but look to Jesus Christ for your new identity.”

Billings then moves to total depravity and examines it in light of communion with Christ. This was a fascinating chapter. Adam was fully alive, in touch with his true self, when he was united with God prior to the Fall. After the Fall, Adam lived apart from that union. Apart from this union, we are unable to do any good with reference to our salvation precisely because we are separated from God. We live in the power of the flesh with its bent toward selfishness. It does not move toward God, but toward self, being curved inward.

“But if sin is acting ‘in ourselves’ and obedience is acting in communion with God, then it is simply impossible to move toward God by acting ‘in ourselves.'”

In union with Christ, we are able to discover our true self- in Christ. We become who we are in Christ. Our gaze is turned away from self to love God and our neighbor.

He is critical of TULIP, as are other Calvin scholars like Muller. I want to spend more time studying the Canons of Dort to explore this. The initials are new, but I don’t think the theology is. And the theology must be separated from the misunderstandings of the theology. So, while total depravity is easily misunderstood that doesn’t mean it isn’t true. But union with Christ helps us to better understand our depravity.

“All revelation is accommodation because all revelation is an act of condescending love that seeks fellowship and, to some extent, mutual knowledge of the other.”

Dutch Theologian Herman Bavinck

He moves on to encountering mystery. Billings brings union with Christ to bear on the reality of God’s incomprehensibility. While God is wholly other, He condescends to reveal Himself in a way to understand Him. He explores the idea of accommodation as found in Calvin and Bavinck. Calvin retrieved theology in that matter from Augustine and Chrysostom. This helps in the discussion between Van Til and Clark. The covenant is part of that accommodation that we might know God and His will. The goal of the covenant of grace as expressed in the covenants with Abraham and Moses culminating in the New Covenant is union with God.

Billings then turns his attention to the Gospel and justice with a connection to the Lord’s Supper. He traces the history of the Reformed Church in South Africa. A sinful accommodation to some regarding communion was the seed that became apartheid. It was recapturing the truth of our union in Christ, as expressed in communion that helped dismantle apartheid. Because we are united to one another, we are to love one another. This is a basis for justice as an implication of the gospel. And a necessary one. Think again of the double grace- Jesus does not just justify us. He also sanctifies us. Part of that sanctification is the love of neighbor and pursuing their good.

“The union and reconciliation that takes place in the one Christ is not a general social policy. It is a Spirit-formed concrete reality that calls peoples who were separated by enmity to live in their true, reconciled identity in Christ.”

He brings up some studies that indicate that while progressives seem to talk about justice more, the theologically conservative actually do more for the poor. They are more just! Tim Keller talks about the differing emphases of justice. Progressives stress corporate justice, and conservatives stress individual justice. A just society vs. just individuals. There is such a thing as unjust structures, but they are created by unjust people.

In reading Billings, I’m just struck at how this plays out. Why do progressives to less to directly help the poor? Because they think the government needs to address it. They address it indirectly, thru taxes, instead of directly thru giving to organizations that help the poor. Instead of dismantling unjust structures, this just shifts the injustice in a different direction. Wilberforce, a just man, sought to end an evil practice. This is legitimate. Christians should work for justice out of love for their neighbor. Christians should also act justly, not just expect the government to do it all for them. It takes wisdom to discern what the government should do (just laws and punishing evil doers), and what the church and/or Christians should do (show compassion and mercy to those in need whether the victims of injustice or not). I’d better get back to Billings.

Billings ends the book with a focus on ministry. He is sympathetic to aspects, or emphases of the missional movement. But he’s critical of incarnational ministry. He spends time working through Philippians 2 to show that we imitate Christ’s humble service, not incarnation. He builds a case for participation ministry. Since we participate in union with Christ, we are empowered to serve others. We seek to understand them, and sacrifice for them. But Christ is the one who saves, and the one we point them to. He brings us to the Heidelberg Catechism, and Ursinus’ commentary on it to show that Christ is our prophet, priest and king. By virtue of our union with Him, we share in his anointing. He uses us in His prophetic, priestly and kingly ministry. I need to remember this if I ever get back to my books on the Three-fold Office of Christ. We participate with Him in these ministries, but we ourselves are not prophets, priests and kings. We may lean toward prophetic, priestly and kingly gifts, but we do not hold those offices- He does.

Union with Christ is published under Baker’s academic label. It is not written on a popular level. He has lots of footnotes (often to his own articles that explore a matter more in depth). As a result, it is a bit more challenging than your typical book on the shelf of a good Christian bookstore. I liked the change of pace. He dealt with important issues in a very meaningful way. I found the book quite helpful in reframing these issues, helping me to think through them more clearly. It is a book I would recommend to prompt deeper, clearer thought.