Neverthelesse considering that this clause hath long continued in the Creede, and that by common consent of the Catholike Church of God, and it may carrie a fit sense and exposition; it is not, as some would have it, to be put forth.”

—An Exposition of the Symbole, 1:231, col. 2

—Cited in Daniel R. Hyde, In Defense of the Descent: A Response to Contemporary Critics (Grand Rapids: Reformation Heritage Books, 2010), 67.

1. Consider that the knowledge of Christ as fully God and fully man in one Person is the most useful object of our contemplations and affections (1, 312–314). Christ’s identity as the God-man places him in a unique position to make your redemption possible. He also reveals the glory of God to your understanding in a unique manner.

2. Diligently study the Scriptures with the express purpose of finding the glory of Christ in them (1, 314–316). The Scriptures assert that Christ is their central object (Lk. 24:26–27, 45–46; 2 Cor. 3:13–16). The three primary ways that Christ is revealed in the Old Testament is by direct descriptions of his Person and his incarnation, by prophecies concerning him, and by the Old Testament ceremonies of worship (Owen richly expands each of these). Too often Christians read the Old Testament in a manner that is no better than the Jews. Even if we do not see Christ in everything in the Old Testament, we must be careful to take our knowledge of Christ with us while reading the Old Testament.

3. Meditate frequently upon the knowledge of Christ that you have already obtained, both from Scripture and from sermons (1, 316–317). Failing to use and to build upon the knowledge of Christ that we have already received is the “fundamental mistake” standing behind the lack of spiritual growth among so many Christians. This is the error of treating the doctrines of Christ as fundamental and basic, thus taking them for granted. Owen adds that although we must not isolate ourselves from the world, we must love solitude as well. Without some measure of regular solitude, meditation upon the Lord Jesus Christ is impossible.

4. Do not simply rely upon fixed times set aside for meditation, but think upon Christ at every possible occasion throughout the day (1, 317–320). This is particularly important during those seasons in which Christ “withdraws” himself from our “spiritual experience.” If we know what it is like to “miss” Christ sometimes, then we should take comfort from the fact that this means that we have truly known what it is to have fellowship with him. When the comforts of communion with Christ diminish, we must seek him with the desperation with which a thirsty man seeks water. Christ acts in this way for our good, since his withdrawals increase our dependence upon him and the fervency with which we seek him. The truth is that Christ is always near to us, but “the principal actings of the life of faith consist in the frequency of our thoughts concerning him” (1, 319).

5. Accompany your thoughts of Christ with admiration, adoration, and thanksgiving (1, 320–322). The more we contemplate our divine/human Lord, then the more we shall realize that he is beyond the limits of our comprehension. This should lead us to love the Lord Jesus Christ with every faculty of our souls. In heaven, we shall exercise all of the faculties of our souls simultaneously in the worship and service of Christ, but in this world both our understanding and our strength is incomplete. Therefore, sometimes our thoughts of Christ should lead to admiration, others to adoration, and still others to thanksgiving according to our understanding and our capacity. You must never lose sight of the fact that the purpose for which you know Christ is worship.

Owen closes this section with the useful reminder that meditation upon the glory of the Person of Christ only occurs in the context of a heavenly-minded life. This is an important thought. Perhaps one reason why meditation is so hard for us is that we have not set our minds on things above where Christ is seated at the right hand of the Father in everything that we set our hands to (Col. 3:1–2). Meditation upon the glory of Christ is a jarring and painful interruption when our minds are trained to run along the well-worn grooves of our earthly routine. Let us never forget that we are pilgrims and strangers in the world! Let us never be surprised at the difficulty of heavenly-mindedness on this side of glory! Let us make use of means to help us contemplate the glory of our Savior more fully! And may we come to our heavenly Father who is able and ready to help us to meditate upon the glory of his Son through the power of the Holy Spirit!

Now available for pre-order and will be available as of April 15th from Reformation Heritage Books where you can also read chapter 1 as a .pdf here.

Endorsements:

“For creedal and confessional Christians, the clause in the Apostles’ Creed ‘he descended into hell’ is important, but sometimes puzzling. Even as intelligent lay folk often struggle to articulate a brief, cogent, accurate reply as to its precise meaning, they may not fully appreciate the history of discussion behind the phrase, or the origins and function of its inclusion in what is probably still, liturgically, the most widely used creed in the Reformation churches. Daniel Hyde has come to the rescue with a brief, helpful, historical, biblical, and pastoral treatment of this clause, and the crucial theological truth it is designed to propound and protect. I warmly commend it to the Christian reader.”

— Ligon Duncan, Senior Minister, First Presbyterian Church, Jackson, Mississippi and Adjunct Professor of Theology, Reformed Theological Seminary

“Every pastor knows that sinking feeling when the congregation recites the ‘descent into hell’ clause of the Creed. What do we say to them? Written for laypeople and pastors alike, this slim volume not only gives us a good answer; it offers a terrific summary of broader Christian reflection. Danny Hyde convincingly argues that, far from an idle question, our Lord’s descent into hell is a precious facet of the gospel.”

—Michael S. Horton, J. Gresham Machen Professor of Systematic Theology and Apologetics, Westminster Seminary California (Escondido, CA)

In his letter to Du Moulin, Owen recounted that Du Moulin accused Owen of contradiction, speaking of the “active obedience of Christ imputed to us” on the one hand, and saying that “Christ acquits us by his obedience in death and not by his fulfilling of the law” on the other (Thomson, 144–145). It is telling that the longest section of Owen’s letter deals with a refutation of this accusation.

Owen’s reply to Du Moulin was gentle: “I fear you make use of some corrupt copy of our Confession” (Thomson, 145). Contrary to Du Moulin’s charge, Owen retorted: “…but we say that Christ, by his obedience and death, did fully discharge the debt of all those who are justified – which comprehends both his active and passive righteousness” (Thomson, 145). To Du Moulin’s attempt “to disprove this doctrine of ours concerning the imputation of the active righteousness of Christ unto our justification,” Owen forcefully said, “Pray, sir, do not mistake that such mistaken reasonings can give us any occasion to change our judgments in an article of truth of this importance” (Thomson, 145).

Owen summed us his response to this point, with a wonderful paragraph on the twofold obedience of Jesus Christ for our justification, when he said,

“In the meantime I tell you, we are by the death of Christ freed from all sufferings as they are purely penal, and the effects of the curse, though they spring out of the root; only, sir, you and I know well that we are not freed from pains, afflictions and death itself – which had never been, had they not proceeded from the curse of the law. And so, sir, by the obedience of Christ we are freed from obedience to the law as to justification by the works thereof. We are no more obligated to obey the law in order to justification than we are obligated to undergo the penalties of the law to answer its curse” (Thomson, 145).

Interpreting Canticles along the lines of a believer’s communion with Christ is not, of course, peculiar to the Early Church or to the Puritans.  In fact, the Reformation theologian, Theodore Beza wrote a fine exposition of the Song of Solomon, which contains not only many important Christological insights, but glimpses into the nature of our communion with the Lord.

In the seventeenth century Canticles was often translated and sung to various Psalter tunes. One anonymous work is titled: The Song of Solomon, called The song of songs. Translated into English meeter, and fitted to be sung with any of the common tunes of the psalms. Besides that, we have Henry Ainsworth’s Solomon’s Song of songs In English metre, which could also be sung in church. Wouldn’t that be interesting? When was the last time you were in a church that sang the Song of Songs?

Beza’s work on Canticles is titled: Master Bezaes Sermons upon the first three chapters of the Canticle of Canticles (wherein are discussed the chiefest points of religion). This really is a fine work on Christology.  Beza argues that the Song is to be taken in a Spiritual sense and not to be taken as a marriage song between Solomon and Pharaoh’s daughter, as some have insisted (1 Kings 11 condemns this marriage). Rather, this is a most excellent psalm touching on the spiritual bond between Christ and his Church (Genesis 2 & Eph. 5).  For Beza, the Song speaks of betrothing (engagement) and marriage that refers to Christ in his infirmities (betrothal) and Christ in his glory (marriage).

Incidentally, one of the best sermon series I have ever heard was on the Song of Songs; the series was preached by a South African preacher who understood it in much the same way as Beza, James Durham, John Owen, Samuel Petto, Thomas Brightman, John Cotton, Edward Leigh, Richard Sibbes, Matthew Henry and Johannes Cocceius (to name a few).

For your information, the Westminster Assembly condemned those who understood the Song of Songs as “a hot carnal pamphlet formed by some loose Apollo or Cupid”.  Moreover, John Wesley found the literal reading repulsive.  And, after reading Longman’s commentary on the Song of Songs, I felt like it was a complete waste of time.  Indeed, some of his own interpretations seemed to me to be far more “allegorical” than the stuff I’ve read from Beza and the Puritans!

If Canticles does describe the communion that a believer ought to have with his Savior, then I suspect that not a few of us will be exposed for having such a dry and boring relationship with the one who is “chief among ten thousand!”