Philosophical Implications of the Concept
of the Trinity
by Jan Nilsson
My chapter takes its point of departure in the difference
between Western and Eastern theology of Trinitarianism. While the Western
branch traditionally has taken a more static approach, the Eastern tradition is
more dynamic and relational. This difference in emphasis can be observed both
in the teaching of the Trinity and in its anthropological consequences for the
teaching of man as created in the image of God.
In recent times the German
theologian Jürgen Moltmann has criticized the definitions of the Trinity found
in the confessions of faith. According to Moltmann the creeds do not imply the
dynamic and relational aspects, which were implicit in the Trinitarianism of
the early Church. Moltmann criticizes the use of the static concepts of
'substance' and 'subject' in the history of Trinitarian thinking and promotes
the concept of ‘perochoresis’ in his revision of the concept of the person. The
Greek word 'perochoresis' contains meanings such as 'to circle around one
another', 'to give room for' etc. In other words this is a more inclusive
concept in comparison to the traditional philosophic concepts of 'substance'
and 'subject'.
Finally, with point of departure in
the Greek theologian John Zizioulas, this paper demonstrates how the relational
concept of person found in the doctrine of the Trinity implies the
distinctiveness or 'otherness' of the person. In an apophatic (negative)
theological tradition such as the orthodox the distinct persons of the Deity
are first of all defined in terms of what they are not in relation to the others. In Zizioulas' thinking the
person is thus defined on the basis of his or her distinctiveness or otherness
in relation to the individuals of the surrounding community. Consequently, a
community of persons can only exist by virtue of the mutual difference or ‘otherness’.
In Zizioulas’ words "Communion does not threaten otherness; it generates
it."
No comments:
Post a Comment