Defining and Supplementing Conciliar Trinitarianism

This article constitutes a brief reply to Timothy Pawl's clear and insightful article on Conciliar Trinitarianism (defined as the Trinitarian theology of the Ecumenical Councils from Nicaea I to Nicaea II). The two basic arguments of that article (regarding the relationship between divine pers...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Alexis Torrance
Format: Article
Language:deu
Published: Catholic University of Louvain 2020-07-01
Series:TheoLogica
Online Access:https://ojs.uclouvain.be/index.php/theologica/article/view/55393
id doaj-234732293a7f41958839616904b53b97
record_format Article
spelling doaj-234732293a7f41958839616904b53b972020-11-25T01:28:41ZdeuCatholic University of LouvainTheoLogica2593-02652020-07-014210.14428/thl.v4i2.55393Defining and Supplementing Conciliar TrinitarianismAlexis Torrance0University of Notre Dame This article constitutes a brief reply to Timothy Pawl's clear and insightful article on Conciliar Trinitarianism (defined as the Trinitarian theology of the Ecumenical Councils from Nicaea I to Nicaea II). The two basic arguments of that article (regarding the relationship between divine persons and divine nature and the debate over possible subordinationism) are celebrated rather than challenged. I instead offer three short comments. The first concerns the limited nature of the conciliar texts for the articulation of highly developed Trinitarian theology, and thus the question of methodology as it applies to Conciliar Trinitarianism. The second comment argues that the question of strict identity in the Godhead can be extended beyond the relationship of divine person and divine nature to the question of divine nature and divine power, will, and energy. The third comment argues that Pawl gives undue weight to a line from Cyril of Alexandria for a discussion of the Holy Spirt's mode of origination, and not enough weight to the clause related to the Holy Spirit articulated at the First Council of Constantinople, which recurs in one way or another at each of the subsequent Ecumenical Councils, up to and including Nicaea II. These three comments serve more as a supplement than a challenge to Pawl's original article, providing three further avenues for scholarly deliberation on the matter of Conciliar Trinitarianism. https://ojs.uclouvain.be/index.php/theologica/article/view/55393
collection DOAJ
language deu
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Alexis Torrance
spellingShingle Alexis Torrance
Defining and Supplementing Conciliar Trinitarianism
TheoLogica
author_facet Alexis Torrance
author_sort Alexis Torrance
title Defining and Supplementing Conciliar Trinitarianism
title_short Defining and Supplementing Conciliar Trinitarianism
title_full Defining and Supplementing Conciliar Trinitarianism
title_fullStr Defining and Supplementing Conciliar Trinitarianism
title_full_unstemmed Defining and Supplementing Conciliar Trinitarianism
title_sort defining and supplementing conciliar trinitarianism
publisher Catholic University of Louvain
series TheoLogica
issn 2593-0265
publishDate 2020-07-01
description This article constitutes a brief reply to Timothy Pawl's clear and insightful article on Conciliar Trinitarianism (defined as the Trinitarian theology of the Ecumenical Councils from Nicaea I to Nicaea II). The two basic arguments of that article (regarding the relationship between divine persons and divine nature and the debate over possible subordinationism) are celebrated rather than challenged. I instead offer three short comments. The first concerns the limited nature of the conciliar texts for the articulation of highly developed Trinitarian theology, and thus the question of methodology as it applies to Conciliar Trinitarianism. The second comment argues that the question of strict identity in the Godhead can be extended beyond the relationship of divine person and divine nature to the question of divine nature and divine power, will, and energy. The third comment argues that Pawl gives undue weight to a line from Cyril of Alexandria for a discussion of the Holy Spirt's mode of origination, and not enough weight to the clause related to the Holy Spirit articulated at the First Council of Constantinople, which recurs in one way or another at each of the subsequent Ecumenical Councils, up to and including Nicaea II. These three comments serve more as a supplement than a challenge to Pawl's original article, providing three further avenues for scholarly deliberation on the matter of Conciliar Trinitarianism.
url https://ojs.uclouvain.be/index.php/theologica/article/view/55393
work_keys_str_mv AT alexistorrance definingandsupplementingconciliartrinitarianism
_version_ 1725100167829389312