Conciliar Trinitarianism, Divine Identity Claims, and Subordination

Abstract

In this article, I present the trinitarian teaching of the first seven ecumenical councils, what we might call Conciliar Trinitarianism. I then consider two questions. First, what is the relationship between the divine persons and the divine nature? I argue that neither strict identity nor instantiation interpretations of that relationship fit well with the conciliar texts. Second, does the relation of procession among the divine persons, asserted in the conciliar texts, imply an objectionable ontological subordination in the Trinity? I argue that there is at least one way for a proponent of Conciliar Trinitarianism to deny that objectionable ontological subordination follows from the divine processions.

The Logical Problem of the Trinity: A New Solution

“…12 Pawl (2020) did not fully explicate the critique of the development of the model featured in this article. Thus, the 'multiple-natures' problem should be seen as a further development of his critique.…”

The Logical Problem of the Trinity: A New Solution

“…12 Pawl (2020) did not fully explicate the critique of the development of the model featured in this article. Thus, the 'multiple-natures' problem should be seen as a further development of his critique.…”

‘There can be only one’: A response to Joseph C. Schmid

“…By way of what's called their relations of origin – the Father is the unoriginated origin, the Son is generated from the Father, and the Spirit proceeds ('spirates’, in technical terminology) from the Father and the Son 19 . And hence, ‘[e]ach [divine] person has a unique proper characteristic’ (Pawl (2020), 106) that grounds their distinction – paternity for the Father, filiation for the Son, and spiration for the Spirit. The Father is not the Son nor the Spirit, for he proceeds from no-one and is the origin of the Son and the Spirit; the Son is not the Father nor the Spirit for he is generated from the Father and contributes to the procession of the Spirit, and so on (Leftow (2004), 315; Pawl (2020), 105).…”

“…And hence, ‘[e]ach [divine] person has a unique proper characteristic’ (Pawl (2020), 106) that grounds their distinction – paternity for the Father, filiation for the Son, and spiration for the Spirit. The Father is not the Son nor the Spirit, for he proceeds from no-one and is the origin of the Son and the Spirit; the Son is not the Father nor the Spirit for he is generated from the Father and contributes to the procession of the Spirit, and so on (Leftow (2004), 315; Pawl (2020), 105). Thus, the divine persons are subsistent relations in God that are distinguished because of their mutual or relative opposition – that is, because they do not relate to each other in the same way.…”

“…17.I am not necessarily endorsing this solution to the Logical Problem of the Trinity, but merely using it as an entry point into the doctrine. See Pawl (2020) for an illuminating discussion of the problem and some proposed solutions. Be that as it may, all that matters for our purposes now is just the following: that traditional Trinitarianism affirms that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are one in being (the same one being or substance) and three in person (three distinct persons).…”

The persons of the Trinity are themselves triune: a reply to Mooney

“…The second council of Constantinople anathematizes anyone who ‘will not confess that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit have one nature or substance, that they have one power and authority, that there is a consubstantial Trinity, one Deity to be adored in three subsistences or persons’ ( ibid ., 114). In his work on conciliar Trinitarianism, Timothy Pawl (2020) sums up the claim that God is triune this way: ‘What is there one of? Nature, substance, divinity, essence, Godhead.…”

The Logical Problem of the Trinity: A New Solution

“…12 Pawl (2020) did not fully explicate the critique of the development of the model featured in this article. Thus, the 'multiple-natures' problem should be seen as a further development of his critique.…”

‘There can be only one’: A response to Joseph C. Schmid

“…By way of what's called their relations of origin – the Father is the unoriginated origin, the Son is generated from the Father, and the Spirit proceeds ('spirates’, in technical terminology) from the Father and the Son 19 . And hence, ‘[e]ach [divine] person has a unique proper characteristic’ (Pawl (2020), 106) that grounds their distinction – paternity for the Father, filiation for the Son, and spiration for the Spirit. The Father is not the Son nor the Spirit, for he proceeds from no-one and is the origin of the Son and the Spirit; the Son is not the Father nor the Spirit for he is generated from the Father and contributes to the procession of the Spirit, and so on (Leftow (2004), 315; Pawl (2020), 105).…”

“…And hence, ‘[e]ach [divine] person has a unique proper characteristic’ (Pawl (2020), 106) that grounds their distinction – paternity for the Father, filiation for the Son, and spiration for the Spirit. The Father is not the Son nor the Spirit, for he proceeds from no-one and is the origin of the Son and the Spirit; the Son is not the Father nor the Spirit for he is generated from the Father and contributes to the procession of the Spirit, and so on (Leftow (2004), 315; Pawl (2020), 105). Thus, the divine persons are subsistent relations in God that are distinguished because of their mutual or relative opposition – that is, because they do not relate to each other in the same way.…”

“…17.I am not necessarily endorsing this solution to the Logical Problem of the Trinity, but merely using it as an entry point into the doctrine. See Pawl (2020) for an illuminating discussion of the problem and some proposed solutions. Be that as it may, all that matters for our purposes now is just the following: that traditional Trinitarianism affirms that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are one in being (the same one being or substance) and three in person (three distinct persons).…”

The persons of the Trinity are themselves triune: a reply to Mooney

“…The second council of Constantinople anathematizes anyone who ‘will not confess that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit have one nature or substance, that they have one power and authority, that there is a consubstantial Trinity, one Deity to be adored in three subsistences or persons’ ( ibid ., 114). In his work on conciliar Trinitarianism, Timothy Pawl (2020) sums up the claim that God is triune this way: ‘What is there one of? Nature, substance, divinity, essence, Godhead.…”

The Logical Problem of the Trinity: A New Solution

“…12 Pawl (2020) did not fully explicate the critique of the development of the model featured in this article. Thus, the 'multiple-natures' problem should be seen as a further development of his critique.…”

‘There can be only one’: A response to Joseph C. Schmid

“…By way of what's called their relations of origin – the Father is the unoriginated origin, the Son is generated from the Father, and the Spirit proceeds ('spirates’, in technical terminology) from the Father and the Son 19 . And hence, ‘[e]ach [divine] person has a unique proper characteristic’ (Pawl (2020), 106) that grounds their distinction – paternity for the Father, filiation for the Son, and spiration for the Spirit. The Father is not the Son nor the Spirit, for he proceeds from no-one and is the origin of the Son and the Spirit; the Son is not the Father nor the Spirit for he is generated from the Father and contributes to the procession of the Spirit, and so on (Leftow (2004), 315; Pawl (2020), 105).…”

“…And hence, ‘[e]ach [divine] person has a unique proper characteristic’ (Pawl (2020), 106) that grounds their distinction – paternity for the Father, filiation for the Son, and spiration for the Spirit. The Father is not the Son nor the Spirit, for he proceeds from no-one and is the origin of the Son and the Spirit; the Son is not the Father nor the Spirit for he is generated from the Father and contributes to the procession of the Spirit, and so on (Leftow (2004), 315; Pawl (2020), 105). Thus, the divine persons are subsistent relations in God that are distinguished because of their mutual or relative opposition – that is, because they do not relate to each other in the same way.…”

“…17.I am not necessarily endorsing this solution to the Logical Problem of the Trinity, but merely using it as an entry point into the doctrine. See Pawl (2020) for an illuminating discussion of the problem and some proposed solutions. Be that as it may, all that matters for our purposes now is just the following: that traditional Trinitarianism affirms that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are one in being (the same one being or substance) and three in person (three distinct persons).…”

The persons of the Trinity are themselves triune: a reply to Mooney

“…The second council of Constantinople anathematizes anyone who ‘will not confess that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit have one nature or substance, that they have one power and authority, that there is a consubstantial Trinity, one Deity to be adored in three subsistences or persons’ ( ibid ., 114). In his work on conciliar Trinitarianism, Timothy Pawl (2020) sums up the claim that God is triune this way: ‘What is there one of? Nature, substance, divinity, essence, Godhead.…”