A Supervenient Trinity: An Alternative to Latin and Social Trinitarian Theories

The Latin Trinity (LT) and the Social Trinity (ST) represent the two dominant approaches for interpreting the doctrine of the Trinity in contemporary philosophical theology. Both approaches have consequences for Christian theology, however, and I believe that neither sufficiently overcomes the charges of modalism or tritheism, respectively. Moreover, the charge of the overall logical incoherency of the doctrine of the Trinity remains a viable criticism. In order to defend the doctrine of the Trinity against charges of incoherency, while avoiding the modalistic and tritheistic leanings of the LT and ST models, I argue that the unitary nature of God‐as‐three‐hypostases is best understood in terms of a relationship of supervenience between the revelation of (1) Deut. 6:4 and (2) the Gospel of John. The Hypostases of the Trinity supervene on the unitary identity of God insofar as to be ‘God’ is to entail the perichoretic relationship of unbegottenness, begottenness, and spiratation (procession). The Supervenient Trinity (SvT), as an analogical model, provides a way to understand God as (1) and (2) that better avoids the modalist and tritheistic difficulties raised by the LT and the ST approaches.     

Augustine and Karl Rahner on the Relationship between the Immanent Trinity and the Economic Trinity

Abstract:  Karl Rahner developed his influential axiom concerning the identity of the immanent Trinity and the economic Trinity largely as a polemical reaction to their separation in the Western tradition, a tradition heavily shaped by Augustine. An analysis of Augustine's De Trinitate , however, reveals that Augustine was not guilty of most of the charges of which Rahner accuses him. Furthermore, Rahner's outworking of his fundamental axiom leads him into numerous difficulties that he could have avoided had he adhered to Augustine's view of a close but differentiated relationship between the immanent Trinity and the economic Trinity.     

Sabellianism reconsidered

Sabellianism, the doctrine that the Persons of the Trinity are roles that a single divine being plays either simultaneously or successively, is commonly thought to entail that the Father is the Son. I argue that there is at least one version of Sabellianism that does not have this result and meets the requirements for a minimally decent doctrine of the Trinity insofar as it affirms that each Person of the Trinity is God and that the Trinity of Persons is God while maintaining monotheism without undermining the distinctness of Persons. I am grateful for comments by participants at the Society of Christian Philosophers 2000 meeting and University of San Diego Philosophy colloquium at which earlier versions of this paper were read, and by anonymous referees for this journal.     

In the Name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit: A Critical Reflection on the Trinitarian Theologies of Religion of S. Mark Heim and Gavin D'Costa

Abstract:  S. Mark Heim and Gavin D'Costa are two significant contemporary authors grounding a theology of religions in the doctrine of the Trinity. This article critically examines their respective interpretations of the doctrine of the Trinity, and their deployment of this doctrine in appreciation of religious difference. Heim, in his attempt to provide a theological validation for the world religions, departs from more traditional formulations of the Trinity. Ironically, this departure means that he fails to describe the world religions in their own particularity, that is, as they would describe themselves. D'Costa, by contrast, maintains a sound trinitarian position, and raises the question of Christian responsibility toward the world religions from precisely this theological grounding. He does not conceptualize the religions within a theological framework, but does demonstrate that engagement with the religions constitutes an obedient ecclesial response to the Trinity.     

'One Commixture of Light': Rethinking some Modern Uses and Critiques of Gregory of Nazianzus on the Unity and Equality of the Divine Persons

Gregory of Nazianzus' doctrine of the Trinity is both a constructive source and an object of critique for Leonardo Boff's account of the Trinity. I argue that Gregory's account of the unity of the Trinity in the monarchy of the Father does not entail the ontological subordination of Son and Spirit nor otherwise obviate the equality of the divine persons. On Gregory's account, the unity and equality of the divine persons is bound up with that of their distinct identities in the very particular modes in which they relate to one another: a unity transcending all human commonality. By contrast, Boff's theology of the Trinity seems to elide the real distinction between God and creatures and erode the differences between the divine persons, so subverting the social programme he derives from his doctrine.     

Trinity and Religious Pluralism: The Doctrine of the Trinity in Christian Theology of Religions

Books reviewed:
Veli-Matti Kärkkäinen, Trinity and Religious Pluralism: The Doctrine of the Trinity in Christian Theology of Religions. Reviewed by John Flett Princeton Theological Seminary     

The Trinity, Election and God's Ontological Freedom: A Response to Kevin W. Hector

Abstract:  A recent article by Kevin Hector considered the disagreement between Bruce McCormack and me over the relationship between the doctrines of election and the Trinity raising a number of crucial issues such as the proper relation of the immanent and economic Trinity, the nature of God's freedom and the identity of the logos asarkos . In this article I explore how and why Barth's dialectical understanding of the triune God's freedom from and for creatures disallowed equating God's ontological freedom with election in the manner suggested by McCormack and Hector, because that would reduce God's omnipotence to his omnicausality, the immanent to the economic Trinity.     

Classical,Critical and Constructive: Paul Hinlicky's Beloved Community

This engagement with Paul Hinlicky's systematic theology, Beloved Community, provides both analysis of his text and constructive enhancement of the wider discussion of the Trinity. The term ‘Beloved Community’ is what Hinlicky calls the Trinity, an open Trinity that invites believers into the divine life. This book, like a springboard, encourages diving into the new trinitarianism inaugurated by the two Karls, Karl Barth and Karl Rahner. I place Hinlicky into this stream of thought and then raise the critical question: is this new trinitarianism conflictual or compatible with the classical theism we find in both Christianity and Islam?     

Quantum perichoresis: Quantum field theory and the Trinity

The main thesis of this article is that the Trinitarian theological doctrine of perichoresis can be metaphorically interpreted as a form of Divine phase entanglement with the world. Such entanglement would entail non-local, relational holism and superposition through which the immanent unity of the Trinity is economically present in creation. Christ kenoticly empties himself of the immanent perichoresis of the Trinity in order to enter the economic perichoresis of the creation. The Spirit is then the continuing perichoretic love of God sanctifying the creation toward life and fulfillment from within. It is the Trinity in ongoing perichoretic entanglement with the creation, affirming Divine ubiquity and panentheism.     

Trinity, Temporality, and Open Theism

A number of thinkers today, including open theists, find reasons to attribute temporality to God. According to Robert W. Jenson, the Trinity is indispensable to a Christian concept of God, and divine temporality is essential to the meaning of the Trinity. Following the lead of early Christian thought, Jenson argues that the “persons” of the Trinity are relations, and these relations are temporal. Jenson’s insights are obscured, however, by problematic references to time as a sphere to which God is related. Schubert M. Ogden gives the notion of divine temporality coherent content by arguing that God’s actuality is best understood as an unending succession of experiences. This paper was delivered in the APA Pacific 2007 Mini-Conference on Models of God.     

Rahner's Rule: An Emperor without Clothes?

Abstract:  Karl Rahner's famous Rule, 'The "economic" Trinity is the "immanent" Trinity, and the "immanent" Trinity is the "economic" Trinity', has had an enormous impact on trinitarian theology. Yet it is extraordinarily difficult to identify a reading of the Rule that meets two essential criteria: (1) it is interesting (that is, not trivial), and (2) it is possibly true. In this paper I consider three possible readings: strict realist, loose realist, and finally antirealist. Unfortunately, each reading leaves the Rule either trivial or obviously false and so fails to meet both criteria, thus calling into question the theological value of the Rule.     

The Trinity: A New Wave?

Books reviewed in this article:
Bruce Marshall, Trinity and Truth
Boris Bobrinskoy, The Mystery of the Trinity: Trinitarian Experience and Vision in the Biblical and Patristic Tradition
David S. Cunningham, These Three are One: The Practice of Trinitarian Theology
Denis Edwards, The God of Evolution: A Trinitarian Theology     

Divine Simplicity in Historical Perspective: Resourcing a Contemporary Discussion

This article seeks to resource contemporary discussions about divine simplicity by exploring how this doctrine was understood throughout patristic and medieval church history, especially with respect to the relation of divine simplicity to the doctrine of the Trinity. It argues, first, that there have been different versions of divine simplicity throughout church history, though most current treatments focus on the Thomist version. Second, it suggests that divine simplicity had a greater role in the witness and worship of the church than is generally recognized today. Third, it argues that many of the differences between contemporary and ancient treatments of divine simplicity boil down to more basic ontological differences. Finally, it draws attention to the close connection between divine simplicity and the Trinity throughout church history, and suggests that the doctrine of divine simplicity provides a more reliable means of grounding the Trinity as monotheistic than the doctrine of perichoresis.     

Trinity,Simplicity and the Status of God's Personal Relations

It is commonly argued by Christian philosophers and theologians that the traditional doctrine of divine simplicity is incompatible with the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity. First, it would seem that the presence of relations in God suggests a composition of substance and accidents in him. Second, if all that is in God is God, as simplicity claims, then it would seem that one could not maintain the real distinctions between the divine persons, as the Trinity requires. In answer to these challenges this article seeks to recover Thomas Aquinas' and the Reformed scholastics' emphasis upon the subsistence and pure actuality of the personal relations in God. The article concludes that while God's personal relations are really distinct from each other, there is no real distinction between the personal relations and the divine substance and that the Trinity and the doctrine of divine simplicity are thus agreeable.     

LOVE OF GOD AND LOVE OF NEIGHBOR IN THE THEOLOGY OF KARL RAHNER AND KARL BARTH

The way Barth and Rahner envision the relationship between the commands to love God and neighbor is affected by their views of the relationship between the immanent and economic Trinity. Rahner identifies the immanent and economic Trinity; thinks the two commands are identical, and believes that self‐acceptance is the same as accepting Christ and revelation. Barth insists that, while identical in content, the immanent and economic Trinity must be sharply distinguished without separation; insists the two commands are inseparable but not identical and maintains that we must seek God only in Christ. This divergence, I contend, results from their very dissimilar understandings of nature and grace and is rooted in their different starting points for theology, namely, transcendental experience for Rahner and God's Word and Spirit for Barth.     

The Trinity Hymnal

ABSTRACT

The Trinity Hymnal, published in 1990, is a complete hymnal for churches of Presbyterian and Reformed convictions. The hymnal is a major revision of the original version prepared in the 1950s. Trinity is unique in that it has neither capitulated to current trends in contemporary Christian music, nor broadened its doctrines to encompass a lowest-common-denominator theology. This article is written by the editor who guided the production of the hymnal through its seven years of “gestation.” He provides personal reflections of the behind the scenes work of the committee describing how they made their decisions.     

Trinity, polyphony and pastoral relationships

The author explores the Christian doctrine of the Trinity to shed light on the nature of the pastoral ministry. Using the trinitarian term, "polyphony" (David Cunningham) for this purpose, he explicates unity and difference as key polyphonic categories in the doctrine of the Trinity. The author suggests that the polyphonic notes sounded by pastoral caregivers are toughness and tenderness, woundedness and health, wisdom and folly, and communion, nearness and distance.     

What is the Doctrine of the Trinity For? Practicality and Projection in Robert Jenson's Theology

This articles engages the theology of Robert Jenson with three questions in mind: What is the doctrine of the Trinity for? Is it a practical doctrine? If so, how, and with what implications? It seeks, on the one hand, to identify whether Jenson's trinitarian theology ought to count as a “social” doctrine of the Trinity, and to what extent he puts it to work for human socio‐practical purposes. On the other hand, in light of Jenson's career‐long worries about Feuerbach and projection onto a God behind or above the triune God revealed in the economy, the article interrogates his thought with a view to recent critiques of social trinitarianism. The irony is that, in constructing his account of the Trinity as both wholly determined in and by the economy and maximally relevant for practical human needs and interests, precisely in order to avoid the errors of Feuerbachian “religion,” Jenson ends up engaging in a full‐scale project of projection. Observation of the human is retrojected into the immanent life of the Trinity as the prior condition of the possibility for the human; upon this “discovery,” this or that feature of God's being is proposed as a resolution to a human problem, bearing ostensibly profound socio‐practical import. The article is intended, first, as a contribution to the work, only now beginning, of critically receiving Jenson's theology; and, second, as an extension of general critiques of practical uses of trinitarian doctrine, such as Karen Kilby's or Kathryn Tanner's, by way of close engagement with a specific theologian.     

Some sources for a history of English Socinianism a bibliography of 17th century English Socinian writings

Conclusion In 1697, the Presbyterian, William Bates, presented an address, on behalf of some dissenting ministers, to William of Orange. In this, he called for measures against the Socinians and Deists, and, in particular, for the banning of the publication of Socinian works. Bates' address was published in JOHN HOWE, Sermon Preech'd on the Day of Thanksgiving (1698). On 17th February, 1698, the House of Commons presented an address to the King, We do further, in all humility, beseech Your Majesty, that Your Majesty would give such effectual order, as to Your Royal Wisdom shall seem fit, for the suppressing all pernicious books and pamphlets, which contain in them impious doctrines against the Holy Trinity, and other fundamental articles of our Faith, tending to the subversion of the Christian Religion; and that the authors and publishers thereof may be discounted and punished.The statute 9 and 19 William III, c. 32, An Act for the more effectual suppressing of Blasphemy and Profaneness, accepted these requests. It prohibited the writing, publishing and teaching of doctrines that were contrary to the Trinity, Christian truth or the divine authority of the Old and the New Testaments.It should be noted that the Toleration Act of 1689 does not extend tolerance to, amongst others, those who deny the dogma of the Trinity. It was not until 1813 that the Unitarians were free to practise their cult. The Trinity Act (An Act to relieve persons who impugn the Doctrine of the Holy Trinity from certain Penalties. 53 Geo. III, c. 160) of that year exempted the Unitarians from the penalties laid down by the Toleration Act and by the Blasphemy Act quoted above     

How Revolutionary is the Holy Spirit?

Most theologians agree that the early church neglected the Holy Spirit in formulations of the Trinity, and in recent years, many books have been written to redress this deficiency. Pentecostal theologians are especially invested in recovering a fuller doctrine of the Holy Spirit. These two monographs, one by an established scholar (Steve Studebaker) and the other by a relative newcomer (Andrew Gabriel), are among the best on this topic. Both are unafraid to be critical of Pentecostal theology and both are valuable for their specificity. Gabriel revises the divine attributes of classical theism while Studebaker goes even further by arguing that the Holy Spirit constitutes the Trinity. Neither author is sympathetic to Social Trinitarianism, and Studebaker in particular is critical of Richard of Saint Victor, who is often credited as an early progenitor of the social model. This first complete translation of Richard's treatise on the Trinity, by Ruben Angelici, reveals a radical view of the Holy Spirit and thus needs to be taken seriously by all future discussions of this topic. Richard not only gives the Holy Spirit its own personal identity but also ties the Spirit to God's power of listening, just as the Son is God's Word.