M.TH. LONG DISSERTATION (LD6.1) - John Owen

John Owen’s Theological Context
However, if union with Christ takes place even logically prior to faith, Owen
faces a problem, for as we saw in chapter 3, faith is instrumental in uniting someone to
Christ. How can union precede faith, if faith is instrumental to union? Owen is not
unaware of this difficulty, but suggests it is ‘easily resolved.’ He explains that, ‘Christ is
ours before and after believing in a different sense. He who is made ours in an act of
God’s love, that for him we may have faith, may be found and made ours in a promise of
reconciliation by believing.’ 195 Owen seems to conceive of some kind of forensic union
with Christ prior to faith, perhaps better described as an imputation of Christ. This
imputation occurs when, at the time of his choosing, God proceeds to justify a sinner on
the basis of the antecedent decretal union. It consists in the Father reckoning him to us,
and giving him to us, and with him faith. However, full, reconciling union does not
happen until, on the basis of the imputation of Christ, the sinner believes. Only at this
point can he or she be regarded as truly united to Christ in the one mystical person of the
totus Christus.
Thus, Owen’s position answers Crisp’s rhetorical questions 196 without following
Crisp’s departure from the Reformed tradition in placing union prior to faith. Crisp
argues that faith must flow from union with Christ, and so faith cannot be the human
instrument by which union is accomplished. In contrast, Owen distinguishes full union
with Christ which follows faith, and forensic union, or the imputation of Christ prior to
faith on which ground faith is given. Faith is therefore a gift of God, purchased by
Christ and applied through Christ; at the point of application it is not received without
reference to Christ; yet it does not have to follow full, mystical union, and so can
maintain its role as instrumental in laying hold of Christ.
195 Owen 1850-55: X.470.
196 See p. 18, above.
53