Re‐imagining Divine Simplicity in Trinitarian Theology

This article reconsiders the relationship between divine simplicity and trinitarian theology based on historical and systematic grounds. I first show that in its early emergence, simplicity was not understood as posing intuitive incompatibilities with the development of trinitarian language. This provides good reason to question the assumption that incompatibility of this kind exists between simplicity and Trinity. I then argue that simplicity deeply enriches the doxological dimension of trinitarian theology. Divine simplicity forces us into the habit of questioning our understanding of the Trinity based on concepts that we are familiar with. As a result, it magnifies our sense of the Trinity's ‘super‐abundant richness’. I conclude that trinitarian theology will lose a great deal of its doxological potential if we give up the doctrine of divine simplicity.     

Contemplating the One who Remains the Same: Augustine,Swinburne, and Psalm 102 on the Relation between Divine Immutability and Theological Reason

This article defends a classical doctrine of divine immutability by contending that the most influential objections lodged against it by theologians and philosophers such as Richard Swinburne–i.e. that divine immutability is speculative rather than practical, is philosophical rather than biblical, and fails to cohere with a ‘personal’ God who relates to creatures–are rooted in a particular construal of theological reason. I diagnose Swinburne’s account of theological reason with the help of Karl Barth’s interpretation of Anselm, and put forth a contrasting account of divine immutability, rooted in a distinct approach to theological reason, through a theological interpretation of Psalm 102, an analysis of the Creator/creature distinction, and an examination of Augustine’s De trinitate.     

The ‘Divine Names’ and the ‘Attributes of Deity’: On the (Infinite) Analogical Interval in Forty-Six Aphorisms

For the modern tradition of analytic philosophy of religion (that this article rejects), goodness, beauty, wisdom, and so on are divine attributes, whereas, for the classical tradition of Christian theology, they are divine names. This crucial distinction between attributes and names helps to explain why feminist philosopher Grace Jantzen’s charge of an identification of the male self with the divine self in Anglo-American philosophy of religion leads on, directly, to a critique of the ‘doctrine’ of analogy. Jantzen’s critique of ‘classical theism’ is directed against the (largely modern) reduction of God to a (male) superbeing. Here, God’s ‘attributes’ are merely human ones, even if extended to a superlative degree. I distinguish the analogical reflections of Aquinas (following Dionysius) and his heirs from the anthropomorphic dissolutions of the divine in contemporary analytic philosophy of religion. Theology’s analogical speech, I argue, has the potential to answer – at least partially – the feminist critique of God as a ‘pure projection’ of ‘man’. For Aquinas, God’s perfections must be qualitatively different and not merely quantitative maximisations of our own. I contend that feminist philosophy of religion cannot afford to dismiss the potential of the way of analogy, especially in its negative or apophatic dimensions.     

The Consubstantial Otherness of God: Divine Simplicity and the Trinity in Hans Urs von Balthasar

Martin explores divine simplicity according to the twentieth‐century Catholic theologian Hans Urs von Balthasar. She grants that Balthasar does not provide a traditional presentation of the attribute of divine simplicity. In his doctrine of the Trinity, Balthasar emphasizes such themes as distance, “hiatus,” and infinite difference, none of which seems to promise a robust doctrine of divine simplicity. Indeed, some have suggested that Balthasar's Trinitarian theology does not allow for traditional claims about divine simplicity. Martin argues, however, that one finds in Balthasar's Trinitarian theology the doctrine of divine simplicity, assumed as an internalized starting point and rooted in his understanding of the analogia entis. This can be seen, for example, in his various engagements with Aquinas as well as with contemporary thinkers such as Gustav Siewerth and Erich Przywara. Likewise, when addressing the issue of whether the Trinitarian Persons can be “counted” according to our normal understanding of number, he insists with Evagrius that God is simple. In the same context, he similarly draws upon Plotinus, Basil of Caesarea, Gregory of Nyssa, Gregory Nazianzen, Tertullian, Ambrose, and Aquinas. Martin therefore gives particular attention to the Theo‐Logic and to Balthasar's affirmation in his Trinitarian theology of the points that the divine Persons are fully God, the divine attributes are identical with each other in God, and the distinction of Persons has to do not with three parts of God but with opposed subsistent relations.     

The Holy Trinity: Between Mystery and Analysis

Two significant strands of trinitarian theology, the analytic and the apophatic, emphasize considerations of logical consistency and divine incomprehensibility respectively. This article seeks to mediate between these two seemingly opposed lines of thought by arguing for a fuller awareness of the particular mystery associated with the trinitarian notion of ‘person’. By specifying more closely this mystery of divine personhood, I qualify an overzealous apophaticism and also open up some scope for analytic approaches. I then highlight an implication of the mystery of divine personhood that any proposition linking together person‐language and nature‐language (e.g. ‘the Son is God’) necessarily contains its own mystery and cannot be understood in analytic terms.     

Thomas Aquinas’ Divine Simplicity as Biblical Hermeneutic

Long draws from the Old Testament scholar Walter Brueggemann's commentary on Jeremiah some strong reasons for rejecting the traditional teaching on divine simplicity. Above all, for Brueggemann the book of Jeremiah simply will not work if God is simple: God explicitly tells Jeremiah that God suffers and also that God changes in response to Israel. According to Long, however, Thomas Aquinas's doctrine of divine simplicity actually upholds the points that Brueggemann draws from Jeremiah. Long argues that theological accounts of divine simplicity should especially have two purposes: to serve as a way of manifesting in speech the mystery of the Triune God, and to affirm God's transcendent sovereignty over creation. In light of Brueggemann's approach, Long examines four early Reformed theologians: Peter Vermigli (1499‐1562), Girolamo Zanchi (1516‐1590), John Biddle (1615‐1662) and John Owen (1616‐1683). While Biddle rejects divine simplicity, the others uphold it. Long shows that their teaching on divine simplicity focuses on God's transcendent sovereignty over creation. By contrast, Long finds Aquinas's doctrine of divine simplicity to be more helpful in upholding Brueggemann's insights, insofar as Aquinas uses the doctrine to defend the simplicity of the Triune God. Rather than focusing on God's sovereign power, Aquinas's doctrine of divine simplicity focuses on getting the Trinitarian processions right.     

Eucharistic priority in Hilary of Poitiers' trinitarian theology: a critique of contemporary approaches to divine–human communio

The notion of koinonia or communio is at the heart of contemporary ecclesiology, and trinitarian theology has become its necessary presupposition. This article argues that the way many contemporary theologians have envisaged this link between divine and human communion is deeply problematic. Hilary of Poitiers was the first theologian of communio, and he offers a bold critique of contemporary discussions. Hilary gives eucharistic priority to trinitarian theology, that is, there is a movement from Eucharist to Trinity in his thinking on the relation between divine and human communion. A retrieval of Hilary's eucharistic priority in trinitarian discourse can provide constructive avenues in trinitarian theology which avoid the anthropocentric tendencies of contemporary social doctrines of the Trinity and reject the misdiagnosed problem of trinitarian ‘relevance’ in current discussions. Such a retrieval recovers trinitarian doctrine as a practised, performed reality, lived out in human communio itself through the eucharistic life of the Church.     

‘The Body of Christ is Made From Bread’: Transubstantiation and the Grammar of Creation

Aquinas's theology of Christ's eucharistic presence, often identified by the term ‘transubstantiation’, can best be understood by locating it in relation to the ‘grammar’ of the creator–creature relationship. After a brief overview of Aquinas on creation, the article examines closely Aquinas's analysis of the statement that ‘the body of Christ is made from bread’. This allows us to begin to imagine how Aquinas might respond to one of the most influential contemporary critiques of his sacramental theology: that of Louis‐Marie Chauvet. In addition, such an examination casts new light on Aquinas's doctrine of creation itself.     

Visual Theologies and Material Form

This article offers a reading of a feature of John Calvin's theology that has received little attention – the role of visuality in his writings on the sacraments as developed between the years of 1536 and 1561. As an intervention into longstanding debates over the legacy of his sacramental theology, I argue that Calvin's use of visual categories to describe the sacramental event is best understood in terms of what I will call the ‘apoiconic’: a vision of divinity had through visual negation. I suggest that for Calvin the sacramental elements signal a divine absence that, in turn, redirects the gaze upward to Christ, whose spiritual presence constitutes the sacraments' substance. To make this argument, I trace the trinitarian dynamics of this ‘apoiconic vision’, where the Spirit unveils the living Christ by illumining the eyes of faith to comprehend the power of God that dwells therein. I close by reflecting on ‘apoiconicity’ as a strategy for moving beyond anxieties over materiality's idolatrous entanglements and for developing a sacramental theology that is cosmic in scope.     

Transcendentality and the Gift: On Gunton,Milbank, and Trinitarian Metaphysics

This article considers the compatibility between the doctrine of the Trinity and the theory of the transcendental properties by offering an account of the notion of the ‘gift’ as a transcendental term. In particular, this article presents a re-reading of John Milbank’s influential theology of the gift through Colin Gunton’s project of developing ‘trinitarian transcendentals’. Showing how Milbank’s notion of the gift could be systematically understood in terms of what Gunton calls a ‘trinitarianly developed transcendental’ which nonetheless avoids many of the problems found in Gunton’s original project, this article argues that understanding ‘gift’ as a transcendental term not only provides new ways of conceiving the relationship between the philosophy of transcendental properties and various traditional doctrines, it can moreover demonstrate how the traditional and biblical names of the Holy Spirit as ‘the Gift’ and the Son as ‘the Word’ can offer new ways of developing distinctively trinitarian accounts of metaphysics.     

What's Not to Love? Rethinking Appeals to Tradition in Contemporary Debates in Trinitarian Theology

Contemporary discussions of the doctrine of the Trinity are sometimes centered on debates between ‘Social Trinitarians’ and ‘Classical Trinitarians.’ Those who align with ‘Social Trinitarianism’ usually insist that an adequate doctrine of the Trinity demands an affirmation of intra-Trinitarian mutual love – and thus reject the doctrine of divine simplicity and numerical sameness out of a commitment to being fully Trinitarian. Meanwhile, those who want to recover ‘Classical Trinitarianism’ insist that the doctrine of divine simplicity is true and salutary – and thus reject any notion of love shared between the Father and Son within the divine life. I argue that both alternatives are profoundly out of step with the theological tradition they claim to retrieve and represent, for simultaneous affirmations of divine simplicity and mutual love are found all across the tradition of Latin scholastic theology. Constructive Trinitarian theology that makes appeal to the ‘classical’ tradition should take this diversity and complexity into account.     

The Responsiveness of Pure Actuality: Unmediated Agency,Linguistic Potentiality and the Divine Accommodation of Speech Acts

This article builds upon the trinitarian theology of Thomas Weinandy, applying his elaboration of Aquinas' notion of God's pure actuality to the matter of linguistic agency. In particular, the seemingly contradictory claim will be made that God is more responsive to us (properly understood) precisely because he cannot perform the act of response. Rather, God reveals the pure act that is himself through what the article terms notional responses. These are the epistemological accommodations of his pure actuality to finite human persons in the form of speech acts as humans change in their relation to God. In understanding God's communicative agency as such, divine transcendence will be shown to establish divine immanence rather than to stand at odds with it.     

The Difference Of Theology and Some Philosophies of Nothing

This article argues that theology thinks differently than philosophy because it is able to think an ontological difference and differences. Theology is able to do this, I argue, because of a trinitarian understanding of creation. A trinitarian understanding of creation does not rest upon any dualism which could domesticate difference. For example, according to Aquinas, creation is not a change. Consequently, there is no dualism of before and after. This means that God does not look to some external register from which to understand what difference is (as is the case with the Neoplatonist One, who can 'create' only one effect, and must do so necessarily). God creates difference qua difference, from divine unity. Furthermore, I argue that all knowledge is related to difference. For this reason, knowledge is itself an eschatological anticipation of the beatific vision.     

Trinity and Creation

A theology of creation requires clarity about trinitarian doctrine, especially the relation of the one divine essence to the three persons, the distinction between immanent and transitive acts, and the indivisibility of God's outer works. The triune God is one undivided essence in an irreducible threefold personal modification. The persons of the godhead are distinguished from each other by mutual relations and by each person's proper characteristics; these relations constitute God's immanent perfection anterior to creation. The work of creation is a non-necessary, novel and voluntary work of the Trinity. As an outer work it demonstrates God's unity: the work of creation is not divisible into three distinct actions. But distinct and eminent appropriation of specific acts to specific persons is permissible if each person is understood as a mode of the one divine essence. Creation is thus a common work of the undivided three-in-one; there are not three creators, but three who create.     

Trinitarian Missiology: Towards a Theology of God as Missionary1

Abstract: This article explores the possibilities of using ‘missionary’ as an attribute of God, as has been done recently in some ecclesial discourse. To this end, it offers an exegesis of John 20:21–23 via expositions of Augustine's discussion of the divine missions in De Trinitate, Barth's account of election, and the Lateran condemnation of Joachim of Fiore, and a discussion of the relationship between trinitarian theology and the divine attributes.     

THE MAKER'S MEANING: DIVINE IDEAS AND SALVATION

The divine ideas tradition played a valuable but often unrecognized role in the history of Christian theology. This article investigates the possible loss to theology by examining how the divine ideas permitted a unified theology of creation and salvation, centred upon the contemplation of all things in Christ. Interpreting examples from Origen to Aquinas, the article demonstrates that leading theologians understood the full truth of all creatures to be known eternally by God in the procession of the Word, by whose incarnation, death, and resurrection the creatures are redeemed.     

Herman Bavinck’s ‘Yes’ and Karl Barth’s ‘No’: Constructing a Dialectic‐in‐Organic Approach to the Theology of General Revelation

By grounding theology in God’s revelation, Herman Bavinck (1854‐1921) and Karl Barth (1886‐1968) take differing attitudes to general revelation, which is widely accepted in the circle of Reformed theology. Bavinck firmly says ‘Yes’ to the existence of the knowledge of God in creation. In contrast with him, Barth holds fast to the Christocentric view of God’s revelation, and thus says ‘No’ to general revelation in the universe. This divergence is primarily due to their different theological thinking and concerns. Bavinck deploys organic thinking in revelation and focuses on God’s creation, which seems to blur the distinction between general and special revelation. By contrast, Barth makes use of dialectical thinking and preoccupies himself with divine‐human reconciliation, which subordinates creation to God’s redemption. To this extent, both bring about disparities within God’s revelation. This essay proposes a dialectic‐in‐organic approach to general revelation, which affirms the disclosure of the knowledge of the Triune God in creation, recognises the independent value of creation, and maintains the diversity‐with‐parity within the revelation of the Triune God.     

The Beauty of the Ugly: Balthasar, the Crucifixion, Analogy and God

Abstract:  In the first volume of The Glory of the Lord , Hans Urs von Balthasar asks how the crucified Christ can be considered an icon of a beautiful God. Because the crucifixion initially confronts us as morally and aesthetically ugly, no authentic analogy between worldly beauty and the beauty of divine revelation seems to obtain. In arguing to the contrary, Balthasar presents us with an original interpretation of Thomas Aquinas that yields fresh insights into the Christian doctrine of God. By placing the cross at the center of intramundane aesthetics, Balthasar forces us to rethink, not only the meaning of the divine simplicity, but the relation in God among being, beauty and love.     

Divine Persons and Their ‘Reduction’ to Relations: A Plea for Conceptual Clarity

Contemporary trinitarian ‘revisionist’ theologians frequently accuse ‘classical’ or ‘Western’ (e.g. Augustinian, Thomistic) trinitarian theologies of ‘reducing’ the divine Persons to their relations with and to one another. In response, many defenders of the Western tradition of trinitarian theology suggest that the alternative accounts of contemporary revisionists, likewise, ‘reduce’ the Persons to relations. Thus, the same charge (the reduction of Persons to relations) is employed in two opposing viewpoints as a way of critiquing the other. This article aims to note this (apparently hitherto unremarked) phenomenon and to explore the theological rationale for its development. In conclusion, the article suggests how a new conceptual clarity may be achieved in light of this semantic confusion and points toward the possibility of a renewed dialogue between classical forms of trinitarian theology and their contemporary critics.