Crowned with Glory and Honor: A Chalcedonian Anthropology

by Michael A. Wilkinson, Stephen J. Wellum (Foreword)

Jesus defines what it means to be human.

The field of theological anthropology is at a standstill, mired in debate between dualist and physicalist perspectives on body and soul. In Crowned with Glory and A Chalcedonian Anthropology , Michael A. Wilkinson argues that the man Jesus is the way forward. Anthropology should be centered around Jesus.

God the Son incarnate is true man, like us in all things except sin. Wilkinson approaches human ontology through Christology by looking to the Chalcedonian Definition and its Christology. Chalcedon confesses the man Jesus to be the divine person of the Son subsisting in a human nature. A Chalcedonian anthropology extends Jesus's person-nature constitution to define what it means to be human. A human being is a human person subsisting in a human nature. We are more than body and soul because Jesus is so much more.

Genres: Theology

400 pages, Paperback

Published March 6, 2024

Reviews

[Joel Newberg · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a fascinating read. It is something that I will spend time thinking through regarding the who, what, and how is a person comprised. As most published dissertations are, there is a lot of repetition. However, this is a critical book to engage with, as the landscape of theology is rapidly evolving on the anthropological front. Wilkinson begins to pave the way toward a new approach to a discipline that needs to be taken seriously and reckoned with as more challenges arise to traditional anthropology.

[Scott Bielinski · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a hard book to review. I’m not entirely sure what to make of it. It’s an interesting and original work of theological retrieval. And it is sorely needed - more work needs to be done in theological anthropology! Wilkinson’s work is an argument of “comprehensive Christological anthropology”, a form of theological anthropology commonly associated with Marc Cortez, which argues that Christ’s identity warrants “ultimate claims about being human that include all anthropological data” (23). He mainly does this by retrieving Chalcedonian categories and logic to make Christ’s being determinative for human beings.

Wilkinson’s project, in sum, argues that human being must be defined by and grounded in the human being of Jesus Christ. While theological anthropology has always been downstream from Christology, Wilkinson proposes that we should retrieve Chalecedonian categories and apply them to human ontology. He argues that Chalcedonian anthropology extends the person-nature distinction and constitution from Christology into its own formulations. His argument, in brief, is that because Jesus is the human being, he is ontologically definitive of human being simpliciter. Scripture “presents a biblical analogy” (334) between man and Jesus, grounding this ontological relationship. Chalcedon offers a dogmatic analogy between the divine and human nature of Christ - the person-nature distinction - so we must carry this into anthropology proper. Chalcedon also identifies the personal hypostasis of God the Son as the “ontological location for the union of his natures” (334), and since Christ is the divine person subsisting in and acting through a human constitution - a body and a soul - we can conclude that man subsists in and acts through a human nature like Christ does.

While it is true and obvious that anthropology must be downstream from Christology, I’m not sure I am persuaded that Wilkinson’s account of Christ’s identity requires that we adopt his conclusions. In other words, I wonder if Wilkinson makes too much of Scripture’s “theological and ontological identities in Scripture.” He argues that “Scripture presents four major theological identities [Christ, image of God, Redeemer, Son of Man] for Jesus that entail a sufficient ontological correspondence between his human being and ours” (335). But I’m not so sure. Why would Christ’s being the Son of Man require us to accept that we must transport Chalcedonian logic into our understanding of human nature? I certainly agree that Christ as the Son of God requires “a minimum ontological constitution that implies an ontological correspondence” (77) between Him and us, but this doesn’t actually prove his argument. That Christ must be human to be the Savior of mankind doesn’t mean humans must have the exact same constitution as Christ - no humans have a divine nature. For me, this is the part of Wilkinson’s argument that, I think, fails to get off the ground. There seems to be a kind of Christological infralapsarianism that gets backward the image of God: we are made in the image of God, not Christ, and Christ is made like us (Phil 2:7; Heb. 2:12, 17).

While he proposes this argument as a way of getting through the perceived impasse between dualists, physicalists, or hylomorphists (24), the book does little in the way of showing the upshot of his argument. While he is right to say that his project pretty seriously shifts the terminological framework of this discussion, that “Chalcedonian anthropology does not arise from, reduce to, or otherwise depend on the body-soul nature” (349) doesn’t seem like it’s going to resolve some of the major issues between these camps.

At the end of the day, this book is an admirable argument for foregrounding Christ’s ontological and narratival identity in theological anthropology. I’m not sure Wilkinson gets us there, but I’m also not sure this is his fault - it might just be mine.

Lexham Press provided a free copy of this book in exchange for an honest review.

[Bob · Rating 4 out of 5]

Summary: Argues for a Christian anthropology based on Chalcedon’s understanding of Christ’s person-nature constitution.

There is what seems to be a stalemate in contemporary Christian circles when it comes to anthropology. Basically it is a debate between dualism in various forms versus physicalism. In Crowned with Glory and Honor, Michael A. Wilkinson argues for beginning in a different place from discussions that are largely around philosophic categories. He believes the place to begin is Jesus Christ, who as the Incarnate Son is the human, man extraordinaire. Jesus is the ultimate expression of what it means to be human. Wilkinson believes the clearest and definitive expression of the church’s understanding of who God the Incarnate Son is may be found in the definition that resulted from the Council at Chalcedon.

To begin with, Wilkinson establishes both the biblical and epistemological warrant for defining what it means to be human in light of Christ. He then traces the antecedents to the Chalcedonian ontology of Christ. Briefly, this arose from the debates over the Trinity, how God may be both one substance (ousia) subsisting in three persons (hypostases). In a sense, Chalcedon both used and flipped this language in saying the person (hypostasis) of the Son subsisted in two natures, one divine and one human. In the incarnation, the divine person of the Son acted through a human nature with a human will.

Wilkinson offers one of the clearest summaries and explanations of the councils that led to the church’s understanding of the Trinity and of Christology I have read. However, the challenge for me was in moving from Christology to anthropology. Based on his understanding of Christology, he would argue for a similar person-nature understanding of human beings. He argues that the human person is created and exists by God’s power subsisting in and acting through a body-soul human nature. At first glance, this is an interesting alternative to the stalemate between dualism and physicalism. But I found myself considering several difficulties as I weighed the proposal:

1. Wilkinson rightly states Christ is one divine person (hypostasis) subsisting in two natures, divine and human. Yet to argue that he is man extraordinaire, but not a human person, but a divine person subsisting in a human nature, seems problematic given the analogy Wilkinson pursues. Man ordinaire seems more human than Jesus as both human in person and nature. Wilkinson acknowledges the analogy needs to be modified but his explanations did not resolve this difficulty for me.
2. It was unclear to me how the created human person acts through the body-soul nature.
3. Wilkinson comes down on the side of body-soul dualism but does not explain his reasons for doing so.
4. How is the human person different from the soul? Why is a soul necessary in this anthropology?

These difficulties noted, I am nevertheless intrigued by this proposal. It has always seemed intuitively obvious that we look to Christ for what it means to be fully human. Wilkinson adds to that intuition a biblical and theological warrant and the rich formulation of Chalcedon. Wilkinson’s mentor, Stephen J. Wellum, describes this proposal as “not the final word on the subject, but it is the place to begin.” I would agree and hope Wilkinson will continue to refine this proposal as God gives more light.

_____________

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary copy of this book from the publisher for review.

[Josiah · Rating 5 out of 5]

Read for Systematic Theology I with Ryle Seminary. Readers will leave with fresh insights into Christology in particular, and also Trinitarian theology more generally. I find myself convinced by Wilkinson's theory. The Chalcedonian definition's Christology is the outworking of Nicene Trinitarian orthodoxy, and unless we define human beings in accordance with Chalcedon's insights into Christ's human nature, we risk undermining theological coherence as applied to areas including salvation, sanctification, the imago Dei and more.

I'm hoping for a future, condensed and simplified Crossway edition to recommend to lay leaders! Also hoping for further studies on the implications of Chalcedonian anthropology in related areas of theology.

This was one of the hardest books I've ever read, but well worth it. 5/5.

[K. · Rating 4 out of 5]

There's a lot of really, really good material in here. Like most dissertations, the author takes about 75% of the book until he gets to his thesis. Unlike many dissertations, I was surprised to enjoy the first 75%—where the author explicates Chalcedonian Christology—more than the last 25%, where he gives his own proposal for theological anthropology. While an interesting proposal, he interacts with contemporary philosophy only sparingly, making his book not as useful as it might have been. For example, Thomas Morris's Logic of God Incarnate is mentioned nowhere in the main text, despite being a seminal 20th-century work of philosophical Christology. All that said, I enjoyed reading this and hope others interact with it.

[Conner Hinton · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a really interesting work of theological retrieval. I want to think more about his argument for the person-nature distinction for understanding anthropology in light of Christology. Like most published dissertations, there is a lot of repeated material throughout, but I think all of the author’s primary theses follow.

[Jesse · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is one of the most helpful theological books I've read in a while. This helpfully touches Trinity, Incarnation, Atonement, Imago Dei, Human Anthropology, and therefore the Mind-Body Problem and Substance Dualism as well.