pilgrim people

If you are interested in reading more about the connection between Owen's doctrine of the pactum salutis and his doctrine of the imputation of Christ's active obedience, pick up a copy of The Outlook this October. The editor has agreed to publish an article I wrote on Owen's doctrine of imputation, which, hopefully is more clear, cogent, and concise than a series of blogposts.

There is one point, however, that I would like to make briefly. For Owen, ALL of Christ's obedience was ultimately active obedience, even his suffering and death. In some regards, Owen found the debates in his day over the distinction between the active and passive obedience of Christ to be foolhardy, “for [Christ] exercised the highest active obedience in his suffering, when he offered himself to God through the eternal Spirit.” (V, 253) Because of the pactum salutis, the whole of Christ's work was in the context of active obedience. Sent as our surety in the covenant of grace, Christ had to accomplish the work the Father gave him to do and fulfilling the demands of the law by keeping its commands and suffering its penalty and curse. For England's most significant federalist theologian, all of this was Christ's active obedience.

Owen did not begin his case in The Doctrine of Justification by Faith with an explanation of the pactum salutis. He began, rather, with a lengthy introduction stating his reasons and pastoral concerns for taking up this work, namely, “the glory of God in Christ, with the peace and furtherance of the obedience of believers.”

He followed this with a full six chapters on the nature and object of justifying faith, as well as the meaning of justification itself.

Click to read more ...

In his 1655 work against the Socinians, Vindiciae Evangelicae, Owen described the covenant of redemption (pactum salutis) as “that compact, covenant, convention, or agreement, that was between the Father and the Son, for the accomplishment of the work of our redemption by the mediation of Christ, to the praise of the glorious grace of God.” (XII, 497.) He saw five major elements within this covenant:

(i) The Father, as “promiser,” and the Son, as “undertaker,” voluntarily agreed together in counsel to achieve a common purpose, namely, “the glory of God and the salvation of the elect.”

Click to read more ...

In 1677, when John Owen (1616-1683) published his book, The Doctrine of Justification By Faith through the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ; Explained, Confirmed and Vindicated," the Protestant doctrine of justification sola fide was still engulfed in controversy. "In my judgment," said the English Calvinist, "Luther spake the truth when he said, 'Amisso articulo justificationis, simul amissa est tota doctrina Christiana.' (trans., "When the article of justification is lost, at the same time the whole Christian doctrine is lost.") And I wish he had not been a true prophet, when he foretold that in the following ages the doctrine hereof would again be obscured." (Works, 5:67)

As a Reformed theologian, Oxford University Vice-Chancellor, and Congregationalist pastor, Owen defended the Protestant and confessional doctrine of justification against Arminianism, Socinianism, and Roman Catholicism. Indeed, The Doctrine of Justification by Faith was primarily a repudiation of these three positions, particularly Socinianism. (To read an extensive series of blogposts on this work by Owen, see Todd Pedlar's blog, "Semper Ubi, Sub Ubi").

These were not, however, Owen’s only opponents on this subject.

Click to read more ...

For John Owen, the imputation of Christ's active obedience was a necessary component of the gospel. So important was it to Owen, that he believed it should be refelected in the church's confession. In his classic work, The Doctrine of Justification by Faith through the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ; Explained, Confirmed, and Vindicated, Owen made clear that the passive obedience of Christ (i.e. Christ's suffering the curse to remove the penalty of sin from us) was not enough. Sinners do not merely need acquittal, they need to be declared righteous in God's sight. That requires perfect, active obedience to the law, which was fulfilled by Christ, the righteous One. He argued for the imputation of what is called the active and passive obedience of Christ to the believer: "the obedience of Christ unto the law, and the imputation thereof unto us, are no less necessary unto our justification before God, than his suffering of the penalty of the law, and the imputation thereof unto us, unto the same end...We have need of more than the mere sufferings of Christ, whereby we may be justified before God." (Works, V, 252, 254)

Why is it important to think about what someone like Owen said about Imputed Active Obedience (IAO)?

Click to read more ...