Subordinationism (1): Augustine facepalms at it. [1]

This short series of blog posts has been inspired by the current controversy on eternal subordinationism. This summary has a list of the several parties involved in the debate, and therefore it may be helpful to those who want to study the debate some more. My blog posts do not claim to make contributions to the debate, nor to answer to its central questions. The modest goal of these three blog posts is to briefly see and comment what Augustine, Anselm and Aquinas have to say on the issue. We begin with Augustine.

On the Trinity (De Trinitate). That is the place we want to go. Augustine was not a systematic writer as today we would define it. However, On the Trinity is helpful inasmuch us it is arguably the most systematic Augustinian treatment on God. Here is one of Augustine's arguments to support the equality of the three subsistancies of the Godhead. Gird your loins because this is not exactly Sunday school material.

Augustine facepalming.
 [From Existential Comics.
Used with permission.]

"There is so great an equality in that Trinity, that not only the Father is not greater than the Son, as regards divinity, but neither are the Father and Son together greater than the Holy Spirit; nor is each individual person, whichever it be of the three, less than the Trinity itself ... In this Trinity two or three persons are not anything greater than one of them; which carnal perception does not receive, for no other reason except because it perceives as it can the true things which are created, but cannot discern the truth itself by which they are created; for if it could, then the very corporeal light would in no way be more clear than this which we have said. For in respect to the substance of truth, since it alone truly is, nothing is greater, unless because it more truly is. But in respect to whatsoever is intelligible and unchangeable, no one thing is more truly than another, since all alike are unchangeably eternal; and that which therein is called great, is not great from any other source than from that by which it truly is. Wherefore, where magnitude itself is truth, whatsoever has more of magnitude must needs have more of truth; whatsoever therefore has not more of truth, has not also more of magnitude. Further, whatsoever has more of truth is certainly more true, just as that is greater which has more of magnitude; therefore in respect to the substance of truth that is more great which is more true. But the Father and the Son together are not more truly than the Father singly, or the Son singly. Both together, therefore, are not anything greater than each of them singly. And since also the Holy Spirit equally is truly, the Father and Son together are not anything greater than He, since neither are they more truly. The Father also and the Holy Spirit together, since they do not surpass the Son in truth (for they are not more truly), do not surpass Him either in magnitude. And so the Son and the Holy Spirit together are just as great as the Father alone, since they are as truly. So also the Trinity itself is as great as each several person therein. For where truth itself is magnitude, that is not more great which is not more true: since in regard to the essence of truth, to be true is the same as to be, and to be is the same as to be great; therefore to be great is the same as to be true. And in regard to it, therefore, what is equally true must needs also be equally great." ~ On the Trinity, 8.1.1-2.

We may call this an "argument from truth." For Augustine, the "level of truth" of a created being establishes its magnitude, that is, the greater the truth the greater the magnitude and the smaller the truth the smaller the magnitude. Now, "in respect to whatsoever is intelligible and unchangeable, no one thing is more truly than another, since all alike are unchangeably eternal," and here he is clearly referring to God. In created things truth determines their magnitude, still their truth is not their magnitude. However, in God "truth itself is magnitude ... in regard to the essence of truth [i.e., God], to be true is the same as to be, and to be is the same as to be great; therefore to be great is the same as to be true." Therefore, considering that no person of the Trinity is more true than another or than two persons together, then they all have the same magnitude and they are all "equally great." 

Now, there is more to say. I originally planned to write only one blog post where I discuss Augustine's view on the equality of the persons of the Trinity. Nonetheless, I got a bit carried away reading (again) some sections of his On the Trinity. There are other passages I would like to quote and possibly comment, so wait for them.

Stay tuned. Stay Aurelius Augustinus Hipponensis. ✍

©

The A-Team!

At the end of the 20th century and the beginning of the 21st, a theological commando unit was condemned by an academic court for logical fallacies they didn't commit. These men promptly escaped from a maximum security academic conference to the underground. Today, still wanted by the personal theists, they survive as theologians of fortune. If you have a philosophical theology problem, if no one else can help you with theology proper, and if you can find them, maybe you can hire... the A-Team.

The A-Team: Augustine of Hippo (354-430), Anselm of Canterbury (1033-1109), Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274).

Seriously speaking (but not too much, and yes, I can do that, too, if I want), these three men are pretty much still very alive through their works. I have always loved Augustine and Anselm, two thinkers who have helped me in diverse ways. Recently, I came to appreciate more also the third man, Aquinas.

Many Protestants have a strict and negative judgement of Aquinas (especially with that threatening golden chain...... Did you get it? Golden chain! Aquinas wrote a commentary called Golden Chain, and in the picture I put a golden chain on Aquinas...  Funny, right?...... Right? ... 😐 ) ... Anyway! Certainly, I totally disagree with him at points (transubstantiation, justification, probably epistemology, just to name a few) and one needs to read him with discernment (thing that is also true not only for Augustine and Anselm, but for all non-inspired writers in general). Nevertheless, I think that reading Aquinas' theology proper judiciously (that is, his treatments of God's unity and trinity) may help Protestants with theology proper and philosophical theology. Richard A. Muller quotes Aquinas several times in connection with the Reformed Scholastics in his Post-Reformation Reformed Dogmatics, Vol. 1 and elsewhere, while James E. Dolezal recovers Aquinas' defence and exposition of divine simplicity and God's triunity.  Of course, looking for someone more comprehensively and systematically orthodox, I would go for other theologians, such as Stephen Charnock (1628-1680) or Francis Turretin (1623-1687), Herman Bavinck (1854-1921) or Herman Hoeksema (1886-1965). But the main point I would like to make here is that the A-Team members are honorary ambassadors of that approach to theology that is usually called "classical theism" and that I embrace.

Therefore, the A-Team will be at the centre on my first short series of blog posts. In the light of the current controversy on trinitarian subordinationism caused by theologians such as Wayne Grudem and Bruce A. Ware, I will quote the A-Team on the equality of the three persons of the Godhead (and I will comment them when  the passage becomes tricky). I have to say that I have not read Grudem's and Ware's arguments but from secondary sources. However and with all due respects to the two scholars, it seems clear to me that their views are seriously defective, not only because of exegetical fallacies but also for mistakes pertaining to theology proper and philosophical theology. In this regard, instead of proposing novelties (that, at the end, are not new at all), I think that listening to the voices of the past is much more profitable and safe.

The series will have three blog posts, one for each theologians. I do not plan to make it particularly articulate and to develop it in depth. But do not worry, this blog is just at the beginning and I am just warming up.

Stay tuned. Stay classic.

©

Inaugural Post

Hello, everybody. 

Well, I suppose I can call myself a philosopher, now. BA in philosophy, MA in philosophy, PhD candidate in philosophy. I am not trying to boast (1 Cor. 4:7). My point is that I think this is my calling. Therefore, I have met one of the main requirements for being a philosopher: opening a blog... logically. Furthermore, I noticed there are not many blogs dedicated to my academic fields, so I decided to open my own in order to fill this desperate need... 😛

Jokes apart, through this blog I plan to offer quotes and reflections on christian philosophy, philosophical theology, theology and related subjects. Theologically, this will be done from a Reformed confessional point of view (Three Forms of Unity); philosophically, from a classical theistic perspective (Augustine, Anselm, Aquinas [the A-TEAM!], the Reformed scholastics, etc.). Apologetically, well, for now I can only say that I like Gordon H. Clark. Of course, as a christian philosopher, my ultimate authority will be the Scripture, the Word of God. However, I will frequently interact with creeds and confessions, the Church Fathers, Augustine, Anselm, Aquinas, M. Luther, J. Calvin, J. Edwards, and many others. 

I would like to start by quoting Augustine: "It is a matter of no moment in the city of God whether he who adopts the faith that brings men to God adopts it in one dress and manner of life or another, so long only as he lives in conformity with the commandments of God. And hence, when philosophers themselves become Christians, they are compelled, indeed, to abandon their erroneous doctrines, but not their dress and mode of living, which are no obstacle to religion" (City of God, 19.19. I am indebted to Prof. Paul Helm for bringing to my attention this Augustinian passage in his blog). I think this description fits me quite well. 

Augustine of Hippo (354-430)

The greatest Church Father continues: "It is, of course, important also that he loves the truth and performs the duties of charity. For no one has to live a life of leisure in such a way that he takes no thought in the leisure for the welfare of his neighbour; nor ought he to be so active as to feel no need for the contemplation of God. The delight offered by a life of leisure must not consist in idle inactivity, but in the opportunity to seek and find the truth, so that everyone may make progress in this regard, and not jealously withhold his discoveries from others" (Ivi., Trans., R. W. Dyson). I hope that this blog may follow Augustine's directions in this regard.

So, to conclude. Thank you for reading my blog, and I hope it may profit you. 

Soli Deo gloria.

©