Theology Today - Vol 17, No. 3 - October 1960 - ARTICLE

353 - The Phrase 'In Christ'

The Phrase "In Christ"
By J. K. S. Reid

To the term "Christian" (three times used in the New Testament) and the other descriptive phrases (e.g., "the faithful," men "of the way"), St. Paul has the distinction of adding another designation for the adherents of this new faith. For all its brevity, it is a descriptive term, all the more significant because it suggests a description at the most profound level. It is the simple phrase "in Christ," with its equivalent "in the Lord." "The formula which Paul most frequently used to describe the nature of the Christian man was that he was 'in Christ.'"¹ The purpose of this article is to examine this phrase as it appears in St. Paul's writings, with some reference to other books of the New Testament.

In 1892 Adolf Deissmann, then a Privatdozent in Marburg, published a small book entitled Die neutestamentliche Formel "in Christo Jesu." Since this date it has hardly been possible to write about St. Paul's theology without reference to the phrase or reckoning with this monograph. Not all its statements and conclusions have gone unchallenged, but, if the assembled statistical data and nothing else are allowed to be true, the work demonstrates beyond all doubt the unusual prominence of the formula in the mind and thought of St. Paul. The phrase assumes different forms. In the Pauline literature the form most frequently occurring is Å º½Á¯É, with Å ÇÁ¹ÃBÉ 'I·Ã¿Í a close second and Å ÇÁ¹ÃÄÎ some distance behind in the third place. With still less frequency occur the expressions Å ±ÍÄÉ and Å ýò. But the notable fact emerges that in the Pauline corpus the phrase in one or other of its forms occurs no fewer than 164 times. To complete the picture, Deissmann calculates that the phrase occurs 24 times in the Johannine corpus (including the Apocalypse), only 8 times in Acts and I Peter, and nowhere else in the New Testament. Further, the phrase is entirely

¹ W. D. Davies, Paul and Rabbinic Judaism (London, 1948), p. 86.

354 - The Phrase 'In Christ'

absent from the parts of the New Testament which are earliest or dependent on the earliest sources, i.e., the Synoptic Gospels. It makes a sudden appearance in the Pauline literature. The post-Pauline writings are all more or less influenced by it. While the frequency of its occurrence in St. Paul compared with the rest of the New Testament is striking, within his writings themselves it appears with diminishing frequency in the three groups respectively into which historical investigation has divided them, the earlier epistles, the imprisonment epistles, and the pastoral epistles. As Deissinann says,² the fact that the phrase occurs so often and makes its appearance With such suddenness cannot but arouse the keenest interest: the formula "is really the characteristic expression of [St. Paul's] Christianity."³

The suddenness of its appearance raises the question of origin. Johannes Weiss⁴ regards it as a pertinent question "whether Paul himself has created ... the formula 'in Christ,' or has taken it over from some other source." Contemporary religious modes of thought and feeling supply a possible source from which St. Paul might be borrowing. Weiss⁵ gives several examples of such expressions, of which one must here suffice: "Come into my spirit and soul throughout my whole life, and do everything for me that my soul desires. For you are I and I am you; what I say, may it always come to pass; for I have your name as an amulet in my heart; no swinging fist will ever overcome me; nor be able to withstand me, neither a spirit nor a demon, no occurrence, nor any other evil coming from Hades-for the sake of your name which I have in my soul."⁶ This is the authentic language of mysticism. That there is a Pauline mysticism need not at this point be disputed; but there is a wide difference between what is said here and the formula "in Christ." The expression "in Christ" preserves a clear distinction between the individual and Christ in whom he is, and St. Paul is never found saying: Christ is I and I am Christ. This distinction is obliterated in the words quoted from heathenism, and the affirmation that it is only a "name" that the individual has in his soul hardly amends the situation. Much the same thing has to be said about the other quotations which Weiss assembles. It follows that no clear

² Die neutestainentliche Formel "in Christo Jesu" (Marburg, 1892), pp. 1 f.
³ Paul (London, 1926), p. 140.
⁴ Johannes Weiss, The History of Primitive Christianity, vol. 11 (London, 1937), p. 465.
⁵ Op. cit., p. 465, n. 18.
⁶ Quoted loc. cit. from Reitzenstein, Poimandres, pp. 19 ff., from a prayer to Hermes.

355 - The Phrase 'In Christ'

case has been made out, at least so far, for a direct borrowing on the part of St. Paul from the contemporary mystical literature.Weiss prudently concludes that the question he poses is not easy to answer. Deissimann, on the other hand, is bolder. After detailed discussion, he comes to the conclusion⁷ that St, Paul "was the inventor of the formula, not in the sense of being the first to use Å with a personal singular, but in the sense that he employed an already existing idiom to form a new technical term." The evidence as known can lead to no other conclusion.

But a further question has here to be faced. Granted that the phrase is characteristic of St. Paul, and granted that for it he is not at least directly dependent upon non-Christian sources; may we suppose that it is a phrase current in the Christianity into which he was introduced, or is it at least representative of a concept elsewhere to be found in the New Testament? The two parts of the question have to be examined separately. As Deissmann has pointed out, the phrase occurs elsewhere in the New Testament only in Acts, I Peter, and the Johannine corpus. There can be no question of St. Paul being dependent on the last as the source from which he borrows the phrase. The probable dates for the composition of the other two books make it similarly impossible for St. Paul to draw upon them. Besides, the phrase is used in these books sporadically, and its occurrences are little more than approximations of the way in which it is used by St. Paul. The written documents of the New Testament give no ground for supposing that St. Paul is borrowing from contemporary Christianity. The second part of the question, however, opens up quite a different range of possibilities. The phrase does not occur in the Synoptic Gospels, and there can therefore be no question of St. Paul borrowing directly from their antecedents. It is, however, not so clear that some kind of equivalent is not there to be found. J. S. Stewart maintains⁸ that "it is at least possible that the idea conics from Jesus himself." There is, he suggests, a hint of it, for example, in Matt. 18: 20, "Where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them." Evidence corroborative of this is to be found indirectly in the Fourth Gospel. In the payable of the vine and the branches, the theme "Abide in me and I in you" (John 15: 4) occurs repeatedly. It cannot of course be assumed that these are the ipsissima verba of our Lord himself;

⁷ Die neutestamentliche Formel, p. 70.
⁸ A Man in Christ (London, 1935), p. 156.

356 - The Phrase 'In Christ'

but it is not unreasonable to suppose that the thought constitutes an element in his own teaching transmuted into Johannine idiom. Hence, though direct borrowing by St. Paul from the Gospel tradition is not capable of proof, the phrase "in Christ" may well be representative of an equivalent idea traceable to our Lord himself.⁹

Another consideration imparts weight to this supposition. C. A. A. Scott draws attention¹⁰ to a contrast with the Synoptic Gospels, arising from "the fact that another preposition (¼µÄ¬) is there used to describe the companionship of the disciples with Jesus, a preposition which is never employed by St. Paul for that purpose." The preposition is used in the simplest definition which the Gospels offer of the reason for there being an inner Twelve at all: "And he ordained twelve, that they should be with him" (Mark 3: 14), while the Johannine version (John 15: 27) is: "Ye hove been with me from the beginning." It is not difficult to see the reason for this discrepancy. When in the days of the incarnation men were the companions of Jesus, it is natural to speak of them as being with him. When St. Paul uses his characteristic phrase "in Christ" he is talking of another order of fellowship. Carnal limitations no longer intervene to make simple compresence the only relation possible. A new possibility is opened up by Christ's exalted withdrawal of himself from visible presence with them. This is the "expediency" which he himself ascribes to his going away from them. That this is the explanation of the use of the two prepositions is corroborated by three further facts. St. Paul never uses the expression "in Jesus Christ" but, when the two names are conjoined, always and only "in Christ Jesus," and we have to wait till post-apostolic times for this apparently deliberate distinction to be blurred.¹¹ The second piece of evidence is found in the use of the phrase "in me" in the Fourth Gospel. As the High Priestly Prayer is offered, it is as much the exalted Christ as the incarnate Jesus that is presented; the line of distinction between them

⁹ So Sanday and Headlam, Romans (International Critical Commentary; Edinburgh, 1900), p. 161: "... it is natural to ask whether all can be accounted for on the assumption that the phrase originates entirely with St. Paul. In spite of the silence of Evv. Synopt. it seems more probable that the suggestion came in tome way ultimately from our Lord himself. This would not be the only instance of an idea which caught the attention of but few of the first disciples but was destined afterwards to wider acceptance and expansion."
¹⁰ C. A. A. Scott, Christianity According to St. Paul (Cambridge, 1939), p. 152.
¹¹ Two remarks may be made about the use of the formula in the sub-apostolic age: first, that it plays a small part and that it occurs comparatively infrequently; and secondly, that while in Clement of Rome the phrase ½ ÇÁ¹ÃÄÎ appears oftener than any other variant, in Ignatius ½ 'I·ÃÌÅ ÇÁ¹ÃÄÎ virtually replaces the Pauline ½ ÇÁ¹ÃÄÎ 'I·ÃÌÅ See both Deissmann, op cit.; and W. Schmauch, '•½ ÇÁ¹ÃÄÎ (GÌtersloh, 1035), pp. 178 ff., who concludes that "the formula cannot be construed any longer as articulated to the variant meanings on which tile sense of the Pauline formula is based."

357 - The Phrase 'In Christ'

has almost disappeared. But more: there is a further stage and level of experience in which the Johannine and the Pauline conceptions, different as they characteristically are, meet. It is at the end of time. For of this stage both traditions unite to use the phrase "-with Christ": John 17: 24, "Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory"; and Col. 3: 3, the Christian's life is "hid With Christ in God." "Note," says C. H. Dodd,¹² "that Paul constantly uses with Christ of the future status of Christians as distinct from their present state in Christ." Thus, when the difference of orientation is taken into account, there is a striking similarity and congruity between the language of St. Paul and certain elements to be found in the Gospels.

Later reference will be made to these facts. In the meantime, comparison of the Pauline "in Christ" with possibly equivalent expressions elsewhere in the New Testament, and examination of the allied expression "with Christ" in St. Paul and the rest of the New Testament, lead to the same conclusion. However novel the use made by St. Paul of the phrase "in Christ," and however unprecedented the emphasis which it acquires in his theology, the phrase itself is not a pure invention. There is elsewhere in the New Testament an element of dominical origin upon which St. Paul has seized. He discovers this element to be a fit expression for his own deepest religious experience and understanding;¹³ he makes of it a cardinal concept in his theology; he expands and amplifies it with remarkable and rewarding fertility; and he endows it with a prominence and importance which merit attention.

The more important though not unrelated question of the meaning of the phrase has now to be faced. In the case of Christian readers of the New Testament who have seen and used the two words so often, familiarity tends to breed, not perhaps contempt, but certainly disregard. We tend to forget that there is no other proper name that could intelligibly stand after and be governed by the word "in." As J. S. Stewart says,¹⁴ "we do not speak of being in St. Francis, or in John Wesley." Nor is this simply a peculiarity of the English lan-

¹² Romans (Moffatt New Testament Commentary; London, 1932), p. 89.
¹³ See J. Weiss, The History of Primitive Christianity, vol. II, pp. 465 ff. Weiss allows the question of the historical origin of the phrase "in Christ" to merge into this "psychological problem," and here it is finally submerged.
¹⁴ A Man in Christ, p. 154.

358 - The Phrase 'In Christ'

guage or of the day in which we live. In Greek literature, ½ is found governing a personal singular, but, as Deissmann reminds us,¹⁵ it is a very rare usage. If, as has been suggested, the phrase has approximate equivalents in the words of Jesus himself, they must have struck his hearers as unusual and surprising. Indeed it may have been their perplexing character which prevented their easy or frequent assimilation into the Christian kerygma, until their latent significance was realized by the awakened sensibility arid apprehension of St. Paul.

Deissmann's monograph initiated serious consideration of the phrase and pioneered a new understanding of Pauline theology. Accordingly it is right to begin the discussion of the meaning of the phrase with what he says. After an exhaustive examination, he draws the following conclusion.¹⁶ "St. Paul constructs the formula ½ ÇÁ¹ÃÄÎ 'I·Ã¿Í out of a usage already present in secular speech. The phrase characterizes the relation of the Christian with Jesus Christ as an existence in the pneumatic Christ locally conceived. For this thought there is no analogy in any other relation of man with man. But we may clarify it by the analogy of the concept underlying the expressions ½ À ½µÍ¼±Ä¹ and ½ ÄÎ ¸µÎ, the concept of dwelling in a pneuma-element comparable with air. The question whether the idea of locality which is the basis of the formula is to be understood in its proper sense or merely as a rhetorical metaphor cannot be certainly decided; but the first possibility has the higher degree of probability. In any case, whether understood literally or metaphorically, the formula is the characteristic Pauline expression for the most profound fellowship conceivable between the Christian and the living Christ." This statement is amplified in a later work¹⁷ as follows: "This formula-so closely related in meaning with the phrase 'in the Spirit'-must be conceived as the peculiarly Pauline expression of the most intimate possible fellowship of the Christian with the living spiritual Christ.... just as the air of life, which we breathe, is 'in' us and fills us, and yet we at the same time live in this air and breathe it, so it is also with the Christ-intimacy of the Apostle Paul: Christ in him, he in Christ."

Deissmann's monograph occasioned immediate and widespread interest. It was generally recognized that an important issue had been raised, even if the conclusions reached did not command com-

¹⁵ Die neutestamentliche Formel, p. 70.
¹⁶ Die neutestamentliche Formel, pp. 17 F.
¹⁷ Paul, p. 140.

359 - The Phrase 'In Christ'

plete assent. Perhaps the most critical comment was that Deissmann pressed a unity of meaning too rigidly upon the phrase, So Weiss wrote¹⁸ that "it is, it seems to me, a mistake of Deissmann ... when he assumes that in all passages the phrase carries the same emphasis." The criticism really amounts to saying that error is incurred if "Chyist-mysticism is represented as the prevailing, characteristic mark of Pauline religion." But in fact, as Weiss himself is at pains to show in the long analytical note to which reference is made, Deissmann himself recognizes a variety of contexts in which the phrase occurs, and a consequent variety of at least shades of meaning accorded to it.

Weiss then immediately proceeds to observe that "the formula also occurs frequently simply as an expression denoting to be a Christian." Of this use significant examples are to be found in Rom. 16: 11, "The household of Narcissus, which are in the Lord"; Phil. 1: 1, "All the saints in Christ Jesus"; and similarly I Cor. 7: 39, the widow "is at liberty to be married to whom she will: only in the Lord and II Cor. 12: 2, "I knew a man in Christ." These passages, Weiss thinks, discredit Deissmann's hypothesis that the mystical meaning of the formula is primary in St. Paul's mind, and in this contention Weiss is no doubt correct. Whether lie rightly assesses the importance of the simple use of the formula as denoting the Christian will later be questioned. In the meantime, it may be taken as an assured finding that St. Paul's use of tile phrase comprise a considerable variety of meaning which Deissmann's exposition tended to conceal.

The accounts given by Deissmann and Weiss elicit two matters of some importance. They may be expressed in the form of questions: first, is there some kind of identification between Christ and the Spirit in the mind of St. Paul, and secondly, is St. Paul's conception of the "in Christ" mystical? These two matters I propose to deal with here in a very summary manner.

Is there an identification between Christ and the Spirit? Deissmann and Weiss both maintain that there is. I find it impossible Lo accept this conclusion. For one thing, we have to allow for the impression which his conversion experience had upon Paul. In his reported recital of the incident, St. Paul regularly gives the name of him who encountered him as "Jesus." This I find incompatible

¹⁸ The History of Primitive Christianity, vol. II, p. 168, n. 22.

360 - The Phrase 'In Christ'

with the suggestion that at any later time (to use the words of Weiss) "the fixed outlines of the personality [of Jesus] had been softened and dissolved, and replaced by the idea of a formless, impersonal, all-penetrating being." Further, St. Paul's assertion that "the Lord is the Spirit" has to be set against other quite different affirmations; and above all it has to be interpreted by the fact that it is Christ who is crucified and we may not say that the Spirit was crucified. It is not, then, a spiritualized Christ that St. Paul is thinking of when he uses the phrase "in Christ."

Is St. Paul's conception of the "in Christ" mystical? Here Deissmann and Weiss differ from one another, the first giving an affirmative and the second a negative answer. I cannot, myself, think that it is possible with any precision to ascribe mysticism to St. Paul in any ordinary sense. He never represents his own personality as being fused with Christ; and at just those points where mysticism seems apparent, as Gal. 2: 20, his mind seems to shy away from it: "I live no more," he says, if he had left the thing there, mysticism would have been unmistakable; but he does not, for he hurries on to supplement what he has said: "Yet I live."

We therefore conclude that, since the spiritualized Christ is not he with whom we have relation in the "in Christ," and since the relation itself is not of an ordinarily mystical kind, the way is open for another interpretation.

III

The attempt must now be made to give a simple classification of at least some of the ways in which the formula "in Christ" is used by St. Paul. The attempt will not compete with the detailed analytical investigation which Deissmann carried out. The aim will be rather different, for the question to which an answer is sought is whether, for all the learning and skill exemplified in the writings of earlier scholars, an important element present in the mind of St. Paul has not been left out. This element, for want of a better description, will have to be called the objective element.

We revert in the first place to what was said at the beginning. The phrase is used to denote Christians, as in Rom. 16: 7, "Salute Andronicus and Junia ... who also were in Christ before me." St. Paul is simply greeting the two persons named, and characterizes them as "Christians before ever I was." In Rom. 16: 11 an-

361 - The Phrase 'In Christ'

other greeting goes to "the household of Narcissus, which are in the Lord"-that is the Christian family and house of Narcissus. The use of the formula here is little more than indicative-as if St. Paul were saying: you know the Andronicus and Junia, you know the Narcissus I mean-the ones who are Christians. But it is not a merely formal indication, but also a denotation by quality or characteristic, and it thus amounts to a connotation. That is to say, it defines as well as denotes. A Christian is one who is in Christ.

It need hardly be said that the uses of the word ½ in the New Testament are manifold, and even those in which a personal subject is connected by the preposition to an object are various. Certainly the work of classification done by the lexicographers cannot be repeated here. But a simple exemplary classification may not be out of place. (i) There is first of all the simple notion of location, as in Acts 2: 11, where the disciples are recorded as being "all with one accord in one place," or as in Acts 5: 25, where a messenger announces to the magisterial authorities that "the men whom ye put in prison are standing in the temple and teaching." The relationship connoted here is adventitious and transient: it can be terminated or altered at the will of the persons concerned by the simple process of moving elsewhere. (ii) Again there is exemplified the notion of situation, as in Philemon 13, where St. Paul mentions that he is "in the bonds" or fetters which he has incurred as a result of his evangelical activity. The relationship connoted here is extrinsic, imposed upon the person concerned by factors outside his control and alterable, not indeed by his mere volition, but by a change in external circumstances. (iii) There is further the notion of condition, as in II Cor. 11: 27 where St. Paul declares among other things that he has frequently been "in hunger and thirst." The relationship connoted is intrinsic to the person concerned, and, while dependent upon external circumstances, is alterable only as a change in these external circumstances has a correlative change in the person himself. In the light of this brief analysis, it is worth-while asking whether the "in Christ" refers to a relationship like any one of these three, or whether it must be regarded as a relationship sui generis and quite dissimilar. As already has been said, the judgment of Deissmann would be that the relationship has its closest analogy to the first usage where locality is primarily intended. May it not with even more justification be

362 - The Phrase 'In Christ'

regarded as having closest analogy with the third usage and connote primarily not an adventitious or external circumstance of the persons concerned, but an intrinsic circumstance properly called a condition? Then the characteristic by which these Christian people are designated will have to be understood not so much as a locality in which they may be found, not so much as a situation in which they are placed, but rather as a condition or status to which they have been admitted. This interpretation seems to be strongly supported by the use of the formula in such a passage as Eph. 2: 11 f., the thing that (mirabile dictu) makes these uncovenanted and estranged Gentiles acceptable is the fact that, though formerly quite alien, they are now within the fellowship of reconciliation because they are "in Christ Jesus."

Again the phrase is apparently used to designate or define conduct. This looks as if it were a secondary and derivative use, dependent upon and determined by the use already mentioned: it is the conduct of those who have first been denoted as in Christ. Thus in Rom. 16: 12, the characteristic feature of Tryphena and Tryphosa is that they "labor in the Lord." Once more the unusual character of the phrase has to be noted. We can indeed speak of working in the factory or in the gas-works or even perhaps in the university; but we should never speak of working in the shop-steward or in the boss or in the Vice-Chancellor. It is of particular interest to contrast this use of the phrase with a more usual form of words that sometimes also occurs in St. Paul, the phrase "of Christ," as in Col. 4: 12 of Epaphras, who is called simply a "servant of Christ." In the last resort, the intention of the phrase 'Is not fundamentally different; and yet the fact that different phrases are used implies some kind of distinction. While the simple "of Christ" implies a more or less external relationship or bond between master and servant, the more unusual "in Christ" must imply a more intrinsic relationship between the two. Again, St. Paul exhorts the Philippians to "stand fast in the Lord" (Phil. 4: 1). The phrase which would more naturally spring to mind is "for the Lord," as in fact the hymn expresses it: "Stand up, stand up for Jesus."¹⁹ No doubt again, the difference between the Pauline use of "in the Lord" and the more

¹⁹ It is recorded that the evangelist C. T. Studd, calling upon his audience at a great evangelistic meeting to do something to symbolize their adherence to Christ, proposed that they
should obey the injunction of this hymn, but observed that they were already standing; and accordingly he bade them "Stand on your chairs for Jesus." But, even when more was, as it were, demanded by him, it was still in the formula "for Jesus" that the demand was made.

363 - The Phrase 'In Christ'

usual "for the Lord" is not very great. But the fact that St. Paul prefers to use his own characteristic phrase indicates that he has in mind, not the external relationship which "for Jesus" suggests, but a more intimate connection, indicative less of an attitude than of a status. Hence the conduct of those that are "in Christ" is itself qualifiable by the same phrase.

A third use of the phrase may properly be distinguished. The formula "in Christ" is applicable to the relations of those that are "in Christ" with others. As determining relations with others, Rom. 16: 8 is an example: St. Paul sends greetings to "Amplias my beloved in the Lord." Similarly in Rom. 16: 22 he salutes his correspondents as his dear friends, but adds: "in the Lord." And again in Philemon 23 Epaphras is denominated as his "fellow-prisoner"; but the community referred to has its ground not in a mere similarity of situation or circumstance, but "in the Lord." As we may put it, the relationship is based upon a concrete tertium quid in which the two parties participate, namely the common status which they enjoy and which is described as "in the Lord." With this the close parallel of Col. 4: 7 may be compared: the fellowship of service in which St. Paul and Tychicus participate has its basis "in the Lord"; and this evidently adds something to that fellowship.

The formula is applied also to the relationship existing between members of the Church. The Thessalonians are gathered together into a Church, but the Church into which they are thus gathered "is in God the Father and in the Lord Jesus Christ" (I Thess. 1: 1). More expressly, in Gal. 3: 28 the unity which characterizes the Church is a unity in Christ Jesus: "Ye are all one in Christ Jesus." It is evident that the association to which reference is thus variously made could have been rendered differently. It could have been represented as a function of a personal liking or attraction, or of a common participation in a common misfortune. And the unity could have been rendered as that of a social entity. The work upon which St. Paul and other Christians are engaged could have been expressed as a joint loyalty exercised in a common cause. But St. Paul avoids all these associative relations, and deliberately refers the bond of unity concerned to something theologically more profound. The key to its proper understanding, he declares, is not to be found in any trivial associative bond, but rather in the "in Christ."

364 - The Phrase 'In Christ'

This analysis of St. Paul's language makes it clear that his use of the formula embraces virtually the whole range of the life of the Christian. What is connoted by the formula proves to be the determination of a man's being a Christian at all, the determination of his individual conduct, and the determination of his relations with others. The simplicity of the analysis cannot conceal the extensive range to which it is applied. This variety has proved puzzling to those who have taken the trouble to review it: the question whether there is any distinctive basic meaning to be assigned to the phrase has proved difficult to answer, and the replies given to it have varied. For example, it is characteristically mystical (Deissmann); it is "like a coin which has been thinned by handling" (Weiss); "it commends itself to the Apostle largely on account of its elasticity ... the meaning is in most cases left more or less vague" (W. Morgan, The Religion and Theology of Paul [Edinburgh, 1917], p. 119). Such conclusions would be profoundly disappointing, and if they had to be accepted would amount almost to a counsel of despair. But do the facts force us to it? That there is "elasticity" in the Pauline usage, or better said a manifold variety, is incontestable. But that the idea is characterized by "vagueness" is not the only method of making sense of these facts. On the contrary, it may with equal right be suggested that it is not vagueness which enables the idea to appear in such a variety of uses and applications, but the basic importance which it possesses. On this reading of the facts, it would follow that it is wrong to regard the use of the formula when equivalent simply to "Christian" as being a debasement of its value. The right interpretation would rather be that, concealed in the formula "in Christ" is the ultimate basis of being a Christian and of the life that emanates from this.

If this interpretation is followed, it is immediately necessary to discard the idea that the mystic interpretation is normative. The reason for this is not that it is necessarily wrong in itself. The reason is rather that this interpretation focuses attention on the nature of the relation connoted by the phrase, without displaying sufficient interest in the basis upon which the relation, whatever nature it may have, alone rests. To correct this, attention must be brought to bear upon what it is that, by the grace of God in Jesus Christ, has been done to make the relation a possible and real thing. If the

365 - The Phrase 'In Christ'

essential reference of the phrase is to this, then it is no wonder that it should occur with such frequency and be employed in such a bewildering variety of applications. God has laid the foundation for a new humanity and a new life. It is to this mighty work that the phrase "in Christ" testifies.

When it is so conceived, we can give an intelligible account of what is always a puzzling matter for Christian theology. How can we understand both that a man must make a personal response of his very own in order to be a Christian at all, and also that even in this, since "all is of grace," it is God who takes the initiative. If the Christian life is understood with reference to the "in Christ," at least the outlines of an answer appear, and we are not confronted with a bare paradox. The answer consists in the following affirmations.

(i)Jesus Christ, the God-man, has himself made the fully appropriateresponse to God.

(ii)But Jesus Christ is the God-man, and makes this response not only on his own behalf but on ours.

(iii)By his life and work, he has already objectively brought us where he is.

(iv)The status men have before God is thereby radically characterized-God wills to see men in Christ.

(v)There is therefore no question of our initiating de novo the response of faith, since this has already been clone for us by Jesus Christ.

(vi) The response Christ makes does not, however, exempt me from making my own response; it makes it possible for me to respond.

(vii)My faith then is rather the consequence of my being in Christ than the ground of it-and this seems to be congruous, and in the last resort alone congruous, with the Gospel of the New Testament.