 Making sense of the Trinity  The Presbyterian Layman Volume 33, Number 3, Posted May 22, 2000
In Making Sense of the Trinity: Three Crucial Questions (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2000), Millard J. Erickson asks: “Is the doctrine of the Trinity biblical?”, “Does the doctrine of the Trinity make sense?” and “Does the doctrine of the Trinity make any difference?” His short answer to each question is “Yes.” His longer answers are unfolded with a gracious spirit in non-technical language. Those who have been troubled by some facet – scriptural, historical, logical or practical – of this historic doctrine will find Erickson’s book a useful primer. Ruth C. Duck and Patricia Wilson-Kastner also believe the Trinity matters. They express regret that the Trinity has become more an object of detached academic study than the subject of devoted Christian worship. In Praising God: The Trinity in Christian Worship (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1999) their concern is to suggest “a constellation of metaphors that includes yet goes beyond the language of ‘Father’ and ‘Son.’” The starting point of theology But they presuppose that predominately male language for God is “ethically problematic” and “lends credence to values that condone the violation of females by males – from battering to sexual abuse to economic discrimination.” Thus they soon suggest that “‘Mother’ is one good way of speaking about the first person of the Trinity … a good alternative or complement to addressing God as Father.” This starting point leads inevitably to the conclusion that “to promote justice between the sexes” God’s self-revelation as Father, Son and Holy Spirit must be set aside in favor of terms meant to soothe itching ears. That is not surprising. Theology that starts with human experience rather than God always remakes God in its own image. By beginning with a problem, “patriarchy,” and adjusting God’s revelation to fit their desired resolution, Duck and Wilson-Kastner undermine their goal of restoring the Trinity to a central place in Christian worship. Finally, The Triune Creator: A Historical and Systematic Study by Colin E. Gunton (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999) principally considers the Christian doctrine of creation, especially as it relates to the emergence of modern science. However, he does so by approaching creation as the work of God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, exactly the opposite approach to that taken by Duck and Wilson-Kastner. The result is a demanding but rewarding study, one that enhances our knowledge and love of God and the world. Which is precisely why theology matters, why the doctrine of the Trinity makes a difference, and why any study of the Trinity, whether done by a denomination, congregation or individual, must start and end not with what human beings have experienced but with what God has revealed. Robert P. Mills |
||
| Home
· News
· PLC
Publications ·
The
Presbyterian Layman Online Reviews · Archives· History of the Lay Committee · Feedback · Links |
||
