Doctrine: God as Trinitycinw.s3.amazonaws.com/.../uploads/sites/2/2013/03/God-as-Trinity-2… ·...

EXPLORING FAITHTheology for Life

Doctrine:God as Trinity

Level 5Year A Term 2

Module Code: REL502

Material developed for Exploring Faith by the St Seiriol's Centre 2013.Cover image "Reaching for the light" (c) Rev Dr R Hainsworth 2012

1

INTRODUCTION

Aims and Content of the Module

Module Aims:

To enable students to examine ways in which the Christian scriptures and creedal statements reveal thenature and purposes of GodTo enable students to explore how understandings about the nature and purposes of God areencountered today in worship, prayer and hymnodyTo enable students to reflect critically on their own understanding of the nature and purposes of God.

Outline of the Module

This module aims to help candidates engage with the study of the emergence and development of ChristianDoctrine, in order to equip them to explore and communicate the Christian Faith today. The course isconcerned both with the substance of Christian belief (what is believed) and with the process of belief (howit came to be believed).

The Seminar Day will look at how the Creeds came into being and at what we can learn from that aboutstatements of faith in the twenty-first century. Sessions 1 to 4 will explore the theology of the Creeds (andother articulations of belief), focusing on belief in God the Father, in Jesus and in the Holy Spirit. Session 5will consider how the emergence of the doctrine of the Trinity took place alongside that of the Creeds. Thenin Sessions 6, the question of salvation will be pursued, as different perspectives on the atoning death ofJesus Christ are pondered. In Session 7 we will examine the work and witness of the Church as One, Holy,Catholic and Apostolic and Session 8 will provide the opportunity to reflect on what has been learnt aboutthe ways in which faith is debated, agreed and communicated, and the implications of this for disciples andministers today. This reflection will be focused by looking at the question of how God takes responsibilityfor suffering. At each stage the development of Christian doctrine will be set in its historical and culturalcontext, in order to help candidates understand how to engage with their culture and time. Further, eachsession will provide the opportunity to reflect on the interaction between questions of faith in the earlychurch and questions raised today.

Intended Learning Outcomes

On successful completion of the module, students will be able to:1. demonstrate a detailed knowledge of the ways in which the Christian scriptures reveal the nature ofGod2. describe and critically reflect on the growth of creedal formularies in the early centuries of theChristian church3. identify and critically evaluate the central Christian creedal beliefs4. discuss in an informed manner how worship, prayer and hymnody reveal and support patterns ofbelief5. critically reflect on how their own developing beliefs may creatively engage with the church’screedal statements and formulations.

Content

Each session contains preparatory work. Candidates will be asked to read a chapter from Young’s classicbook, ‘The Making of the Creeds’, and /or chapters from the Reading Block.

The sessions themselves include space to reflect on the introductory material and additional project work.The aim is to enable candidates to reflect as individuals and with the members of their group. This mirrorsthe way in which belief has been explored in every generation of the church, drawing on the imagination ofindividuals, but also working together as a community. No doubt there will also be disagreements and

2

differences of opinion, as has always been the case! However, the hope is that this will be creative,contributing to their growth in understanding, in faith and as disciples and ministers.Assignment questions are provided at the back of this handbook and a bibliography of additionalrecommended sources is below.

Worship and Prayer

Please surround each session with worship and prayer. Provision is made for worship at the beginning ofeach session and for prayer at the end. Please be imaginative and creative.

BOOK LIST

Companion Text.

Young F The Making of the Creeds London: SCM (1991)

Additional Reading.

Ashwin- Early Christian Doctrines and the CreedsSiejkowski P London: SCM (2010)

C of E Doctrine The Mystery of SalvationCommission London: Church House Publishing (1996)

Higton M Christian Doctrine London: SCM (2008)

Holloway R Dancing on the Edge London: Fount (1997)

Lorenzen LF Introduction to the Trinity Minnesota: The Liturgical Press (1999)

Marriage A The People of God, a royal priesthood London: DLT (1995)

MacCulloch D Groundwork of Christian History London: Epworth (1987)

*McGrath A Christian Theology: An Introduction (5th Edition) Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell (2011)

McGrath A (ed) The Christian Theology Reader (4th Edition) Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell (2011)

Sykes S The Story of Atonement London: DLT (1997)

*If you would like to invest in a book that will further support the work of the course and be a helpfulcompanion into the future, this is highly recommended

3

Seminar Day

DOCTRINE: GOD AS TRINITY

For the Seminar Day

Study the Introduction to the Seminar Day.

4

SEMINAR DAY

Doctrine: God as Trinity

INTRODUCTION

The Creeds occupy a particular place within Anglicanism. When clergy are licensed to new posts theytraditionally affirm and declare their belief “in the faith which is revealed in the Holy Scriptures and setforth in the catholic creeds’. This reflects our history and our approach to theology.

It reflects our history, in that the eventual outcome of the Reformation was a church which was both catholicand reformed. The Anglican Church was and is concerned to respond to new challenges and discover newways of enabling people to grow in faith and participate in the life of the church. At the same time it valued,and values, the tradition to which it belongs. This is reflected in the decision to retain the creeds as keystatements of belief, and as part of the liturgy. It is also reflected in the retaining of a threefold order ofordained ministry (bishop, priest and deacon).

Such an approach is also a way of doing theology which might best be described as apostolic, given thedouble meaning of that word. We are an apostolic church because we trace our history back through thecenturies to the time of the apostles, and we believe that the foundation of our faith is the revelation that theyreceived in Jesus Christ, and proclaimed. We are also an apostolic church in that we believe that we arecalled to proclaim the faith today, to be apostles in our generation. And we know that this requires us toexplore and articulate our faith in new ways. We do this in continuity with past generations of the body ofChrist, who wrote and drew together the New Testament, who produced the creeds, who drew up the historicformularies of our church. Like them we face questions arising out of our situation about what it means tobelieve in God and in his Son, Jesus Christ. We are able to learn from them so that we can takeresponsibility for finding answers for our day.

The study of the creeds and the subsequent history of the development of Christian doctrine is, therefore, avital part of our life as a disciple and hugely significant if we are preparing for ministry. We must grapplewith what the creeds say – the particular beliefs that are to be found there. But we must also explore howthe creeds came about, so that we can understand the process of articulating a new and deeper understandingof the Christian faith.

The Emergence of the CreedsSo how did we come to have such things as creeds? There are a number of questions here: Why declareyour belief in this way? Why add such statements to the various scriptures that were becoming the NewTestament? Why have more than one creed? What was the setting of the creeds – what part did they play inthe life of the church?

There are of course some statements in the New Testament that look a bit like prototypes of the sort ofphrases used in the creeds: declarations of faith by Peter (Mk. 8.29), Martha (Jn. 11.27) and Thomas(Jn.20.28); the phrase, “Jesus is Lord” (1 Cor.12.3); statements about God raising Jesus (Acts 2.32). A keypassage, which indicates the significance of such passages, is 1 Cor. 15.3-8:

“For I handed on to you as of first importance what I in turn had received: that Christ died for our sins inaccordance with the scriptures, and that he was buried, and that he was raised on the third day in accordancewith the scriptures, and that he appeared to…”

5

What this makes clear is that there were statements in the New Testament that expressed a new found beliefin Jesus, which centred on his death and resurrection, his being the Messiah (or Christ) and the salvation tobe found in him. Further, such statements were to be handed on, in order to evoke and confirm the faith ofothers.

These new beliefs were the mark of Christianity, as it emerged in the first century, first as a movementwithin Judaism and then as a separate faith. But these responses to the encounter with Jesus, or with thosewho preached about him, because of their newness raised profound questions for those who becameChristians: What does belief in Jesus say about God - are we dealing with a new God? Would Christianitycontinue within the Jewish monotheistic framework? Such questions gave rise to the development of thecreeds in the post-New Testament period.

This development took place in the context of cultural diversity. Christianity was growing in many areasround the Mediterranean. Especially from the second century onwards, the Jewish heritage of the firstChristians interacted with the Graeco-Roman culture of new Christians. These new Christians were bothJews dispersed through, and embedded in the Roman Empire, and increasingly Gentiles who had little or nounderstanding of Judaism. The meeting of Hebrew and Greek thought resulted in creative theology, but alsoin not a few tensions and disagreements. Disagreements came too for other reasons, as we shall see invarious sessions of this course. The emergence of the creeds (and other statements of faith) often had itspolitical dimension. There were tensions between the Latin-speaking West and Greek-speaking East, andbetween different parts of the Roman Empire. And all this was in addition to the sometimes fiercecommitment to a particular way of believing!

The First ‘Creeds’It is against the background of this cultural inter-action that we see first the development of statements ofbelief that went beyond the New Testament prototypes. These focused on who Jesus was and summarisedwhat was believed about him. So, in the early second century Ignatius of Antioch writes: "There is onephysician, fleshly and spiritual, begotten and unbegotten, God in man, true life in death, both of Mary and ofGod, first passible then impassible, Jesus Christ our Lord." (Bettenson H (ed) Documents of the ChristianChurch OUP (1963) p29).

In the late second and early third century we observe the development of what is known as “The Rule ofFaith”. Francis Young gives examples from Irenaeus, Tertullian and Origen in The Making of the Creeds(SCM 1991) pp.10-11. These represent summaries of faith that people could turn to in a variety ofsituations. They are authoritative; and they are 'apostolic' – representing faith that can be traced back to thetime of the apostles. They could be used against those who seemed to mainstream Christians to be departingfrom this apostolic faith. They are clearly an expansion of the church’s understanding of its belief in JesusChrist, which is at the same time related to belief in the one God, who created heaven and earth. The HolySpirit was also mentioned in at least some.

On the other hand, there is an important development in relation to baptism. Here is a particular setting inwhich a recognised statement of belief became necessary, as something which expressed the belief of thechurch that the person was joining, and to which they were required to accede. From the early third centurywe have evidence of threefold questions at baptism, which presented the Christian faith to catechumens inthe form: “Do you believe in…”. The questions related to belief in God the Father, in Jesus Christ and in theHoly Spirit, the Church and resurrection. This third century practice is found embedded in fourth centuryLent lectures, which form commentaries on such threefold creeds, which were addressed to those preparingfor baptism. Such creeds were local statements of belief, an example being the “Old Roman” creed. Butdespite local variations in wording, they had a common three-part structure, very like that of the Apostles’Creed, familiar to us, which is a descendant of the “Old Roman” Creed.

As we shall see, it is then in the fourth century that the creeds we know and recognise emerge, particularlythe Nicene Creed of 325 and the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed of 381 (which is the one we think of asthe “Nicene Creed”!)

6

The Significance of these First ‘Creeds’It is important to recognise a number of key features about these early creedal statements and about theprocess by which they came about:

1. In each case, the rule of faith, or local creed was a summary of the faith which had been handed on to thechurch community, in other words they were a reflection of the community’s tradition. They were seen asrooted in the ‘apostolic’ faith of the church.

2. They emerge out of a variety of settings, but especially out of the process of preparing people for baptism.It was in this particular situation that a succinct statement of the belief which characterised Christianitybecame most necessary, for those baptising as well as for those baptised.

3. Increasingly creeds became authoritative statements which could be used against false teachers, and couldact as a test of orthodoxy. They were used to distinguish between thosewho were within the Church and those who, by their beliefs, placed themselves outside its boundary.

4. In whatever setting, they were part of the identity of Christianity, as it emerged in the first four centuriesof the life of the church. Although very different in character, they functioned in a similar way to the Shemain Judaism (which you can find in Deuteronomy 6: 4-7). They were a reassurance that people belonged, arallying cry, a criterion for recognising authentic Christian belief.

TimescaleIt is worth comparing the timescale of the development of the creeds with the development of the NewTestament Canon. This process also took place over the course of the first four centuries. Different Canonswere suggested (such as the Muratorian Canon of circa 200 in Rome). Individuals made proposals aboutwhich texts should be included in the New Testament and which should not, such as Origen (in about 250)and Eusebius (in about 300). It was not until the Councils of Carthage in 397 and 418 that the NewTestament emerges entirely as we know it today. At each of the different stages of this process, differenttexts were included in the New Testament. Some were included at earlier stages which are no longerregarded as part of the New Testament, others (notably Hebrews) made a late entry to the Canon. Thereasons for comparing this process with that of the emergence of the creeds are as follows:

1. The timescale is similar

2. The process is also about discovering the ‘apostolic’ faith – which texts reflected this?

3. The emergence of the Canon is also about the identity of Christianity – which texts were at the heart ofthe faith and could build up the community and its members?

4. The process is a reaction to those who appeared to undermine the identity of Christianity, such as Marcionin the second century, who had definite, but rather different ideas about what the Christian Scriptures shouldlook like.

The Theology of the CreedsSo far we have dealt with the process of the emergence of the creeds, but have only hinted at their content.We have recognised that the creeds were marks of Christian identity, but have not yet explored what thatidentity was. We have hinted that the theology of the creeds had to do with questions about the nature ofGod arising from belief in Jesus Christ, but have not yet explored further. This, in many ways, is thechallenge for this term – to grapple with the theological identity of Christianity as it emerged in the first fouror five centuries, in order that we may better understand our theological identity as Christians in the twenty-first century.

7

SESSION 1

GOD THE FATHER

‘CREATOR OF HEAVEN ANDEARTH’

For this session

Read Young Chapter 2.

Read Source 1 in the Reading Block from McGrath, Christian Theology anIntroduction.

In 250 words address the question: What was gnosticism and how did it challenge the church's beliefs?

8

SESSION 1

GOD THE FATHER‘CREATOR OF HEAVEN

AND EARTH’

INTRODUCTION

In the introduction to the Seminar Day we referred to the questions raised about God by the new belief in JesusChrist. In the next sessions we will explore how Christians came to understand the relationship between Jesusand God. But in this session we turn to belief in God the Father.

The early creeds and their fore-runners articulate belief in God the Father Almighty, in God’s being the creatorof heaven and earth (which is taken to include all things visible and invisible). In one sense there is littlechange here from traditional Jewish beliefs. In the beginning Israel had experienced God as a tribal leader anda warrior who would fight battles on their behalf, a powerful God among other Gods. However, following theexperience of the exile, they began to see YHWH, their God, as the God of history who created and sustainsthe whole world. The Jews had come to understand God as the Father of their nation and Israel as his son.Indeed, this sonship was extended to others in Jewish history, in particular the Israelite Kings (see 2 Sam. 7.14,Pss.2.7; 89.26f).

Considering the patriarchal cultural context in which the scriptures were written it is not surprising thatanalogies for God were primarily male. However, YHWH was never seen as sexually male and a number ofthe images associated with Israel’s God recognize the importance of female imagery. Hence the image of God‘giving birth (Deuteronomy 32:18) as a midwife helping with the birthing process (Isaiah 66: 6-11) or ascaring for Israel as a mother cares for her child (Isaiah 66: 13)

Clearly, because of the relationship between God and Jesus, and of our relationship with God in Jesus, the ideaof God being Father appears in the New Testament in a new light. As we see from the Jewish tradition, aFather-Son relationship does not of itself imply equality. The notion that Jesus was in some way equal to Godwould about in other ways, as will be seen in future sessions. To say that Jesus is God’s Son only moves us ona shade from standard Jewish beliefs of the time, at least to start with.

It might also be said that belief in God as Creator looks familiar. The Jewish God had become known as theLord of the heavens and the earth and this was a belief inherited by the new Christian Church. However, thisidea was to be severely challenged in the second century by a set of thoughts, ideas and practices that havebecome known as ‘gnosticism’

GnosticismGnosticism might be said to be a way of thinking that was to be found in a variety of forms, or movements.Although there has been considerable debate about whether Gnosticism is to be found influencing the NewTestament, it seems clear that its most significant effect on Christianity was in the second century. But whatwas this phenomenon?

Although manifesting itself in different ways, Gnosticism had a nember of key characteristics. Firstly, andmost importantly, Gnosticism was dualist. Spirit and matter were distinguished. Spirit was seen as good,matter as evil. Secondly, there was no single God. God, the ultimate being, the source of divinity and

9

salvation, was separate from the creator god (or demiurge). He was the God who created matter and was seenas a rather lesser deity. Thirdly, creation was believed to have come about as a result of an accident or sin.And therefore, fourthly, salvation was understood to be a process whereby the divine spark in them could beliberated. By receiving secret knowledge (“gnosis”) they would be set free from evil matter and reunited withthe divine. This way of understanding the world was attractive to many and was widespread in the Graeco-Roman world.

The Response to GnosticismNot surprisingly, where Gnosticism touched Christianity it had a particular effect on Christian beliefs. From agnostic perspective, the God and Father of Jesus could not possibly be the same as the God of the OldTestament – the redeemer who set one free from matter could not be identified with the creator. Further, Jesuscould not really have been human, only have appeared to be such. And Jesus, being spirit, could not havereally been born, nor could he actually have been crucified, nor could his body have been raised. His birth,death and resurrection must be illusory and certainly could not contribute to our salvation.

It is clear that parts of the Christian church embraced aspects of gnostic thinking and this can be evidenced bytexts such as the Gospel of Thomas. However, a number of key figures set their face against this tendency,wrote against it and fought hard to ensure that the gnostic texts were not recognised as authoritative texts forChristians, and that the Hebrew Scriptures (the Old Testament) were.

Key amongst them in the second century was Irenaeus. He saw that it was essential to affirm that the world isGod’s creation and the place where God is at work. Redemption is not from matter, but of matter – the wholeof us is to be gathered up into God, not just our spirit. As we shall see in subsequent sessions, it is thereforenecessary that Jesus entered fully into our humanity, was crucified, buried and raised, that he might redeem thewhole work of his Father, the entire creation.

And, in the light of the challenge of Gnosticism, the church affirmed that creation was ‘ex nihilo’, out ofnothing. It was not formed out of eternal matter or indeed, out of God himself. Creation out of nothingemphasised the power of God in creation and the dependence of creation on God and emphasized that creationwas part of God’s work of salvation.

Irenaeus therefore saw that there was a continuum of salvation, beginning with the creation, continuing in thework of Christ and realised through the work of the Holy Spirit. The one God is responsible for ordering the'economy' of salvation. Within the Godhead each person is responsible for an aspect of salvation. The Fatheris the creator of the Universe; the Word/Son destroyed death and brought life and fellowship; the Holy Spiritmakes us new.

This is the theological groundwork for the creeds, and also for belief in the Trinity, which has its roots at aboutthe same time in the work of Tertullian. He was the first writer to use the term Trinitas of God, declaring thatGod is one in substance, yet three persons who are distinct but not divided, different but not separate.

Significance for TodayIn the writings of Irenaeus, Tertullian and others, Christianity opted not to be subsumed by gnostic teaching. Itdecided instead to affirm the unity of God, and to assert that all creation might be saved by God. Further, theyrejected the idea that salvation involved secret knowledge available only to the elect. Rather, salvation inChrist was available to all. This is part of what is expressed in the comparatively brief first clause of thecreeds about belief in God the Father.

Much of this thinking is of significance for us today. We too are faced with questions about salvation andmatter. In both society and the church, we encounter dualist thinking, which rejects the goodness of God’sworld, and which sees salvation in purely spiritual terms and we also encounter those who reject the idea ofanything spiritual or transcendent. For them ‘salvation’, in so far as it has a meaning, is to be found inmaterialism, in the accumulation of material things. In response to both viewpoints we are called to affirmtoday that Christianity is about the whole of life, the material and the spiritual.

11

Arrive and worship

Reflect on the seminar day

Worship together.

Project 1.

Using the work you have prepared for this session:List the distinctive features of Gnosticism.Identify the understandings of God that the early church wished to safeguard in response.

Project 2a.

Study the following passages.Consider, what in these texts might be attractive to a Gnostic Christian?How do these texts challenge Gnostic beliefs?

Genesis 1:1-10Isaiah 45:5-8Romans 8:9-11, 18-22

Project 2b.

Over the first few centuries, Christian theologians took two positions on God's relationship tocreation and role as creator. One, earlier phase, associated with Origen and Justin Martyr, heldthat God ordered matter that had always existed. The other, which later became the dominant view,as developed by Irenaeus, Tertullian and Augustine, held that God created everything from nothingand that apart from God nothing is eternal.

Compare the summaries of these two positions below.Which do you agree with and why?

Pre-existing matter.[Creation] was seen as an act of construction, on the basis of material that was already to hand, asone might construct an igloo out of snow, or a house from stone. The existence of evil in the worldwas thus to be explained on the basis of the intractability of matter. God's options were limited bythe poor quality of material that was available. The presence of evil or defects within the world arethus not to be ascribed to God, but to deficiencies in the material from which the world wasconstructed. McGrath, Christian Theology an Introduction p 219

Creation 'ex nihilio'Everything that exists owes that existence to God. There is no alternative source or origin ofexistence. Everything that exists was created good by a good God.The evil that exists within the world is not to be thought of as something positive and real.Possessing its own distinct substance. Rather it is to be thought of as a “lack of goodness”.Evil does not derive its origin from God, but from humanity's use of it's God given freedom. McGrath Christian Theology an Introduction p 218

GROUP SESSION 1

12

Project 3.

Discuss the question: Is your body your Temple?

Reflection.

Each share briefly what you have learned from this session.

Say how this session has made you feel.

Worship together.

Planning.

Plan your preparation for session 2.

13

SESSION 2

JESUS CHRIST

‘ETERNALLY BEGOTTEN OFTHE FATHER’

For this session


Read Source 2 in the Reading Block from Ashwin-Siejowski Early ChristianDoctrine and the Creeds

In 250 words address the question:Why was it important for the early church to decide whether Jesus was God?

14

When we read the New Testament, it is clear that Jesus is recognised to be more than human. Three timesthis is made explicit. At the beginning of John’s Gospel we are told that (John 1:1) ‘the word (Jesus) wasGod’. At the end of the same Gospel Thomas calls Jesus, ‘My Lord and my God’ (John 20:28). And at thebeginning of the Letter to the Hebrews a psalm is interpreted as being addressed to Jesus as God (Hebrews1:8).

The gospels also make it clear that Jesus acts as God. In Mark, chapter two, Jesus forgives the sins of aparalysed man which raises the question, (Mark 2: 7), ‘Who but God alone can forgive sins? Further inMark, chapter four, Jesus stills a storm on the Sea of Galilee and this evokes the question (Mark 4: 41),‘Who then is this, that even the wind and the sea obey him?’ This approach to the person of Jesus has beencalled ‘narrative Christology’. Who Jesus is emerges from what he does.

This understanding, that Jesus might somehow be God, had, and still has, profound implications for ourunderstanding of God. It sparked off a debate in the early Church about the person of Jesus and in what waythat person was divine. As well as recognising the divinity of Christ, however, the New Testament has alsomuch to say about Jesus’ humanity, his being born, his living and his dying. The early church wrestled withthis area too, and with the balance between Jesus’ humanity and divinity.

In the early Church period people grappled with this balance in a variety of ways. Some, such as theEbionites (a first century Jewish group), suggested that Jesus was only human – the son of Joseph and Mary.For them anything more would challenge their Jewish monotheistic faith. Others, known as adoptionists,suggested that Jesus was born as a human, but subsequently adopted by God, at his baptism, or after Jesus’death. Others again suggested that Jesus was God, but subordinate to the Father. And there were those whoagreed that Jesus was God, but denied that he had ever become fully human - he had just appeared to thosearound him to be a human being. This latter point of view is known as Docetism, and might well have beenheld by a gnostic Christian.

Various writers explored in more detail how it could be that Jesus the man could also be God. So forexample, Justin Martyr, writing in Rome in the second century, suggested that the Logos (the Word) wasmanifested in Christ. This seems to have been an apologetic approach, designed to convince Jews andGreeks. For the Jews, the idea that Jesus was the Word of God would allow them to draw on large parts ofthe Hebrew Scriptures which spoke of God’s Word almost as an extension of God’s being. For Greeks, andespecially for followers of the philosophical schools of Stoicism or Middle Platonism, the Logos is adesignation for the divine principle. Origen, writing in the third century, takes up this line of thinking,suggesting that the Logos was united with the human soul of Christ. For Origen, the Logos and the Fatherare co-eternal, but the Logos is subordinate. He writes against opponents, such as Celsus, who argue that ifJesus is worshipped as God then you no longer have one God, but two.

In such writings the key questions arising from the belief that Jesus is divine are mapped out:If Jesus is divine is God still one?Is Jesus, in his divinity, equal to God?How are the divine and human joined in Christ?Is the divine part of Jesus created, or eternal?Can we worship Jesus as we worship God?Does Jesus save us by being divine, by being human, or by being both?

SESSION 2JESUS CHRIST

‘ETERNALLY BEGOTTEN OFTHE FATHER’

INTRODUCTION

15

The Council of NicaeaSuch questions come to a head in the period leading up to the Council of Nicaea in 325. In order tounderstand what was going on in this period, we have to do some imagining. We have to imagine a timewhen the answers to these questions were not cut and dried (as, on the whole, they are for us). We have toremember that the debate was not just an esoteric one amongst academic theologians. People at all levels ofthe church had strong feelings about the outcome of the debate. Indeed, it is thought that songs about Arius(whom we shall encounter in a moment) were sung in Mediterranean dockyards! The debate was highlypolitical and cultural. There were strong differences of opinion between the Latin speaking West and theGreek speaking East. These cultural differences were sharply focused in difficulties of translating betweenLatin and Greek, where terms such as ousia (Greek) and substantia (Latin), both translated in English assubstance, are not equivalent in meaning. Even within churches of the same cultural background there werestrong factions. Further, by the time of the Council of Nicaea the Emperor Constantine had become well-disposed towards Christianity – indeed he called the Council and was involved in its affairs.

Two characters are usually taken as representing the opposing viewpoints at the Council. One of these wasArius, who believed that God the Father existed before the Son, who was created. He proposed that Christshould be described as being of like substance with the Father (homoiousios). His opponent wasAthanasius, who believed that as God alone can save, Jesus must be God incarnate, whom we can worship.The term associated with Athanasius was homoousios – meaning that Jesus was of the same substance as theFather. In the Greek the debate was over a single letter (an i, or iota). The Council, with the backing of theEmperor, opted not for homoiousios (of like being), but for homoousios (of one being). This cornerstone ofChristian Theology establishes that Jesus is God, in the same way that the Father, the Creator is God. Theyconcluded that Jesus was not created by God, but begotten – he existed before creation. This was enshrinedin the Nicene Creed.

‘We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,the only son of God,eternally begotten from the Father,God from God, light from light,true God from true God,begotten not made,of one being with the Father’

The Council was also quite clear that Jesus was human, that ‘he became incarnate’, that, ‘he was made man’.The creed maintained the belief that Jesus ‘suffered death and was buried’. The thinking was that beinghuman was an essential part of Jesus’ work, which was, and is, to save us - if he hadn’t suffered and died, hecouldn’t have achieved our salvation. To save humanity Jesus had to be fully human.

The ImplicationsHowever political the process by which the Creed was arrived at it established some key points of thetheology of Christ. In particular it established the belief that Jesus was both fully human, and fully God.The implication of this is that what you see, in Jesus, is what you get, in God. In other words, in Jesus Godbecame fully engaged with, and involved in, humanity, and indeed creation. Further, it is in this way thatGod saves humanity and brings the whole of creation to its fulfilment.

Not that this closes down debate! The belief that God fully engages with, is incarnate in, humanity in Christgives rise to a further area of exploration important in our generation. The fact that in the one person,human and divine, Jesus offered himself on the Cross leads us to a striking question. When Jesus sufferedon the Cross, did the Father suffer too? In the early church the consistent orthodox answer was that theFather could not. He was impassible (unchangeable) and therefore could not suffer. However, the questionhas refused to go away. Especially in the twentieth century, in the wake of two World Wars and theHolocaust, the idea that the Father is removed from human suffering has made less and less sense. As weshall see in the session, there is a growing conviction that just as the Father suffers, so does the Son.

Among those who have grappled with this is Jurgen Moltmann. He writes

16

‘A God who cannot suffer is poorer than any human. For a God who is incapable of suffering is a beingwho cannot be involved. Suffering and injustice do not affect him. But because he is so completelyinsensitive he cannot be affected or shaken by anything; he cannot weep, for he has no tears. But the onewho cannot suffer cannot love either. He is also a loveless being.’ (Moltmann J (1974) The Crucified God).

17

Arrive and worship

Reflect on any issues that have arisen from the last session.

Worship together.

Project 1.

Complete the table above by adding the Council of Nicaea's view of the divinity of Christ.

For each of the theologies that Nicaea rejected as heresy, explore why the Church came to rejectthese positions.

GROUP SESSION 2

Theology The nature of Jesus ('Christology')

EbionitesA human being only

Adoptionists A human who became the Son of God at his baptism orresurrection

OrigenThe divine Word of God, but a lesser Divinity than the Fatherwho is subordinate to the Father.

Arianism

Divine but created by God.There was a time when he was not.Of a like substance to the Father but not of the same substancewith the Father.

DocetismJesus was God who only appeared to be human, he neverreally was human and so only appeared to suffer

Council of Nicaea

18

Project 2.

In the New Testament, the writers explore and develop their understanding of who Christ was andhow he relates to God and humanity.

Study the following passages.

Luke 2:52

Romans 1:3

Hebrews 1:1-5

John 1:1-5

Philippians 2:4-11

How do they support or contrast with the various views of the nature of Christ that you haveexamined in project 1?

Project 3.

Discuss the question:Jesus was God. Jesus suffered and died. Did God suffer and die?

Reflection.



Worship together.

Planning.


19

SESSION 3

JESUS CHRIST

‘INCARNATE OF THE VIRGINMARY’

For this session

Read Young Chapter 5

Read Source 3 from the Reading Block, Joint Statement on Christology.

In 250 words address the question:What does it mean to say that Jesus was both fully human and fully divine?

20

SESSION 3JESUS CHRIST ‘INCARNATE

OF THE VIRGIN MARY’

The period after the Council of Nicaea provides an interesting demonstration of the progress of theologicaldebate in the early church. In particular we ought to note that:

The Council did not resolve the debate between the Arians and those who thought like AthanasiusThere were many factors which impinged on the debateSuch resolution as there was gave rise to new unanswered questions

So theological debate continued after the Council of Nicaea in relation to the divinity of Christ. Athanasiuscontinued to write treatises in order to convince people that only if Jesus was God in the fullest sense couldhe save humanity, and that any sense that Christ was subordinate to the Father left him as a mere agent ofGod. However, a series of Arian Emperors encouraged others to persist with the notion that it was necessaryto understand God in hierarchical terms. It was not until 381 and the Council of Constantinople that thepolitical climate allowed the Nicene formula (homoousios) to be once more accepted. The result was theNiceno-Constantinopolitan Creed (which is the one we refer to as the Nicene Creed!) Interestingly, thiscreed was probably created from a local creed into which was inserted what had been agreed first at Nicaea.

As indicated above however, this agreement gave rise to yet further questions. In the period leading up tothe Council of Chalcedon in 451, there was much debate about how the divine and the human could both bepresent in Jesus. At stake here was our understanding not so much of the nature of God, but of therelationship between humanity and God. In the fifth century one key viewpoint (still held by some EasternChristians known as Monophysites) was that in Jesus there was only one nature; the humanity was put onby, or taken into, the divine nature. The other main viewpoint was that in the one person of Jesus there weretwo natures, the divine and the human. These pictures of how divinity and humanity combine in Christ are,at the same time, pictures of how we are united with God in Christ. If humanity is subsumed into God inChrist, then we are to be subsumed into God. If divinity and humanity remain in some way separate inChrist, then we are united with God in Christ in a rather different way.

The Council of Chalcedon opted on the whole for the latter position, while stressing the essential unity inChrist. This is expressed in a complex way, of which the following is a sample:

‘We… confess our Lord Jesus Christ one and the same Son, the same perfect in Godhead, the same perfectin manhood... of one substance with the Father as touching the Godhead, the same of one substance with usas touching the manhood, like us in all things apart from sin… to be acknowledged in two natures, withoutconfusion, without change, without division, without separation; the distinction of natures being in no wayabolished because of the union, but rather the characteristic property of each nature being preserved, andconcurring into one Person and one subsistence ....’

Again, we must note some key things. First, the agreement was only one stage in the debate. Differentviewpoints persisted, and indeed persist today. One of the key differences between the Western Churches(including ourselves) and the Orthodox Churches of the East is the way in which we are seen to grow upinto Christ. In the West we are much more likely to think of our humanity being joined to God; in the Eastthey might well think more in terms of our becoming more God-like – a process of divinisation.

Secondly, we ought to note that the way in which faith is articulated in the fifth century has changed. Theresult of the debate is not a Creed, but rather a definition. Perhaps this represents a move away from a more

INTRODUCTION

21

popular debate, to one which only involved the specialists. Whether or not that is the case, the form oftheological discourse continued to change. For example, the Reformation period was to give rise to somekey confessions of faith, in different forms including our own 39 Articles. And in many generations newforms of worship, new liturgies and hymns have expressed faith in ways appropriate for the times.

Significance for TodayWhat above all we ought to recall from the debate leading up to Chalcedon, is that in Jesus,the fullness of God and the fullness of humanity are present and are united. This gives rise to the hope thatin Jesus all humanity, including ours, can be united with God.

Knowing that in Christ humanity and divinity are joined opens up for us the possibility, therefore, ofsalvation. In Christ, God reaches out to us and draws us into God. Through Christ, God is at work in us andour humanity is being transformed. This is something that will ultimately be completed in us, when we arefully united with God in Christ after our death.

The single word which articulates this hope is incarnation. It expresses what God is doing in and throughChrist. But it also expresses something of what is happening to us, as God becomes incarnate in us and increation. It encourages us, from West and East, with Christians of every generation, to pray the ancientChristian prayer, which is rooted in Athanasius’ theology: “May we come to share in the divinity of Christ,who humbled himself to share in our humanity.”

In truth, different christological questions arise in different ages. A particular concern in the nineteenth andtwentieth centuries has been with the Jesus of History (Jesus the first century Jewish religious figure); theChrist of Faith (the Jesus we believe in today); and the relationship between them. Different writers andthinkers have put different emphasis on the two aspects of Jesus. For some it is vital that their faith in Jesustoday is rooted in a historical understanding of the first century Jesus. Others doubt whether we canestablish much contact with that historical figure – for them faith in Christ today is key and Christ becomesincarnate in the present through that faith.

The twentieth century has also seen changes in the way the human beings understand themselves. Insightsfrom sociology and psychology, together with the influence of postmodern thinking has led to anunderstanding of humanity that:

stresses the autonomy of the individual over the communalunderstands the self as an individual project open to construction and re-inventionrecognises the complexity of human motivationvalues the multiplicity and plurality of human experiencerecognises the uniqueness of each human’s experience

The idea of the Incarnation; the thought that God should be united with humanity in the intimate way that issuggested by Chalcedon is commonplace for Christians today. But perhaps we ought to try and recapturethe shocking nature of this belief. It is surely incredible that God stepped into our midst in this way! Andperhaps just as shocking are the implications of the Incarnation for us, for our discipleship and ministry. Forwe are called not just to speak of God, but to live in such a way that God is incarnate in us and in ouractions.

23

Arrive and worship


Worship together.

Project 1.

Describe the two positions on the nature of Christ that were debated at the Council of Chalcedon.

Reflect on the quote: Between God and man there is such an enormous gulf that only a person representing both realities, that is divine and human at the same time, can bring together and reconcile the two.”

Ashwin-Siejkowski 2010 p37

Address the question: Why was one of the two positions chosen and not the other at Chalcedon?

Project 2.

Study the following passages.

Hebrews 4:14-15

John 11:32-37

Luke 22:39-46

Mark 15:25-39

Identify how Jesus' humanity and divinity are expressed.

Do you think that Jesus' humanity and divinity were ever in conflict?

Project 3.

Discuss the question: Can Jesus, a first century Jewish man, be like you?

GROUP SESSION 3

24

Reflection.



Worship together.

Planning.


25

SESSION 4

THE HOLY SPIRIT

‘THE LORD THE GIVER OFLIFE’

For this session


Read source 4 from the Reading block from Higton Christian Doctrine

In 250 words address the question:Why was the nature and work of the Holy Spirit debated in the early centuries ofthe church?

26

SESSION 4THE HOLY SPIRIT

‘THE LORD THE GIVEROF LIFE’

INTRODUCTION

We have looked so far in this term at theology relating to the Father and to Christ. But what of the HolySpirit? A natural question, given the use of the threefold formula at baptism (“In the name of the Father andof the Son and of the Holy Spirit”) and the inclusion of a question about belief in the Holy Spirit in thebaptismal creeds, is whether the Holy Spirit is also God as Jesus is and as the Father is. However, beforeanswering that, it is worth exploring a little what the early church experience of the Holy Spirit was after thefirst century. Was it for example, like that related in the Acts of the Apostles?

The answer is that such experience was rarer in the third and fourth centuries than in the first and second.Partly, this was in reaction to a rather extreme movement within the Church called Montanism, which seemsto have emerged in the late second century. This movement was characterised by ecstatic behaviour and anemphasis on prophecy. It, and therefore similar phenomena, came to be regarded with considerablesuspicion, not least because of the extent to which Montanus and other key figures claimed to speak God’sword directly. Such a claim acted as a huge challenge to the authority of the church (as indeed such claimsdo today). The reaction against Montanism seems to have resulted in less charismatic behaviour in thechurch. Further the church was in the process of deciding to limit the texts which would form the NewTestament, thus closing off the period in which the Holy Spirit was understood to be at work inspiring thewriters of these texts.

Nonetheless the church was convinced that the Holy Spirit had to be at work in the life of the church. It wasonly through the Spirit that scripture could be read, understood and interpreted. The Spirit sanctified thebeliever at baptism, and indeed the whole of the church. Further, theologians consistently wrote about Godusing the threefold formula: Father Son and Holy Spirit. As we shall see in the next session, Trinitariantheology has its roots firmly in the second and third centuries.

It was against this background that the church pursued the question of the divinity of the Holy Spirit andarrived at an articulation of a belief that the Spirit was also God, and, like the Son, fully God. This cameabout gradually in the period following the Council at Nicaea. Athanasius is to be found defending thisviewpoint in the second half of the fourth century. The Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed of AD381contains a much fuller clause about the Holy Spirit than the Creed of AD325. And soon afterwards(although not in the AD381 Creed itself) the Spirit is reckoned to be of one substance (homoousios) with theFather.

Once again there were some key questions that only arose at this point. Only when you arrive at theconclusion that the Holy Spirit is God in the same way as Jesus do the following questions emerge:

Is the Spirit another Son?Is the Spirit also begotten?

27

The answer to these questions (asked by critics of those who advocated the divinity of the Spirit at the time)was that no, the Spirit was not another Son, and therefore was not begotten. This safeguarded the belief thatJesus was the “only-begotten Son of the Father”. Rather the Spirit proceeded from the Father in anotherway – the Holy Spirit was not begotten of the Father, but breathed from the Father.

Not that the debate was completely straightforward, or free from cultural factors and differences. In theEast, the Greek patristic writers held that the Father was the sole source of divine being; it was the Fatherwho breathed the Spirit (just as it was the Father who begat the Son). In the West, Augustine and others,drawing on New Testament references to the Spirit of Christ, suggested that the Spirit was breathed by theFather and by the Son. By the ninth century, the Western Church tended to add to the phrase from theNicene Creed which spoke of the Spirit ‘proceeding from the Father’, the extra phrase ‘and the Son’ (inLatin filioque). This difference in theology contributed to, or focused, the divide between the Western andEastern Churches in 1054 CE, alongside other issues such as the primacy of the Pope.

Significance for TodayThis is an issue that has been revisited in the twentieth century. This is partly in the light of ecumenicaldialogue between Western and Orthodox churches, and partly to do with the need to revisit ourunderstanding of the way in which the Spirit works. To some the Western position tends to limit the role ofthe Spirit. It can lead to the view that the Spirit is only at work in the Church. The Eastern view mightencourage us to see the work of the Spirit as rather broader, to be seen in the whole of God’s creation.Those who would advocate such a view might ask: Do we seek to impose limits on the Holy Spirit, or do werecognise that the Spirit is at work wherever there is ‘love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, generosity,faithfulness, gentleness and self-control’ (Gal 5:22)? This seems to be an important question in an agewhere we have a large understanding of the world in which we live, and can see the diversity of cultures andbeliefs in that world. This situation must raise the question: in what ways is the Holy Spirit at work outsidethe church and how may we recognise this?

At the same time the church has experienced once again some of the ecstatic effects of the Spirit, and asense of the Holy Spirit being very active in guiding members of the church today, in the Pentecostal andCharismatic movements. Those who have had this kind of experience, and advocate the value of this kindof renewal of the church’s life might find creative opportunities for dialogue together with those who areaware of the wider work of the Holy Spirit.

29

Arrive and worship


Worship together.

Project 1.

Using the work you have prepared for this session:Identify the challenges that made the early church wrestle with the divinity of the Holy Spirit.

Identify the different ways in which the nature of the Spirit was expressed in the East and the West.

Why is it important for us that the Holy Spirit is God?

Project 2.

Using Study Sheet 1 and any other passages that you identify:Build up a collection of pictures and images of the Person and work of God the Holy Spirit inScripture.

Explore the activity of the Holy Spirit in:CreationRevelation and the search for truththe Church's ministryprayer and worshipthe work of salvation

In what ways does this multifaceted picture of the Spirit touch on your own experience?

Project 3.

Discuss the view that:The Spirit is at work in those who are not Christians.

Reflection.



Worship together.

Planning.


GROUP SESSION 4

30

STUDY SHEET 1

T

31

SESSION 5

THE HOLY TRINITY

GOD IN THREE PERSONS

For this session

There is no chapter of Young to be read this week.

Read Source 5 in the Reading Block from Faber Lorenzen, L Introduction to theTrinity.

In 250 words:Describe the different understandings of the Trinity proposed by Arius and thosewho opposed him.

32

SESSION 5

THE HOLY TRINITYGOD IN THREE PERSONS

INTRODUCTION

During the previous four sessions we have seen how the foundational elements of the doctrine of the Trinityemerged in the early Church period. We observed how questions raised in the New Testament about thenature of God, in the light of the experience of Jesus and of the Holy Spirit, are resolved (at least in part) inthe doctrine. Amongst those who wrestled with the questions, we looked, in particular at the work ofIrenaeus in the second century. He it was who argued that salvation began with creation, continued in thework of Christ and was realised through the work of the Holy Spirit. This gave rise to the view that the oneGod is responsible for ordering the 'economy' of salvation. Within the Godhead each person is responsiblefor an aspect of salvation: The Father for creation; the Word/Son for destroying death and bringing life andfellowship; the Holy Spirit for making all things new.

As we recognised, Irenaeus’ writing is the groundwork for belief in the Trinity. The belief itself had itsroots at about the same time in the work of Tertullian. He was the first writer to use the term Trinitas ofGod, declaring that God is one in substance, yet three persons who are distinct but not divided, different butnot separate. Interestingly, the image that Tertullian uses is drawn in part from the theatre. The Latin wordfor person, persona, means the mask worn by an actor as he becomes a particular character. This metaphorseeks to articulate the oneness of God, which we experience as three distinct personae.

We observe how the belief that God is three persons, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, in one God, arose out ofpeople’s experience of God. In particular it grew out of their experience of salvation. If we know Godthrough his creation, if we encounter him in Christ, if we experience the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, and ifwe recognise that this is the one God at work, then the belief that God is Trinity follows. Later theologians,however, came to see that the doctrine of the Trinity is not just the way we experience God, but reflects thevery nature, or essence, of God.

In understanding the nature of God in this way, and in particular the relationship of the three persons of theone God to each other, two words are important. One of these is perichoresis, which was in widespread useby the sixth century. The word is used to indicate the mutual inter-weaving of the persons of the Trinity,safeguarding their individuality, but also emphasising their unity within a ‘community of being’.

The second word is appropriation. Its use (reflected in the writing of Augustine) indicates that the work ofcreation, or of redemption, or of bringing to new life involves every person of the Trinity. However it isappropriate to think of creation as the work of the Father, of redemption as the work of the Son, and ofbringing new life as the work of the Spirit.

‘Taken together, the doctrines of perichoresis and appropriation allow us to think of the Godhead as a‘community of being’, in which all is shared, united and mutually exchanged’. (Alister McGrath: ChristianTheology: An Introduction Blackwell (2001) p326)

Such an approach allows us to steer our way between the two extremes of Trinitarian theology, against bothof which the church set its face. The idea of a community of being allows us to avoid the pitfall of tri-theism, of forgetting the importance of the unity of God, by focusing on the different work of the three

33

persons to the extent of regarding them as almost separate Gods. Equally we are steered away from thinkingthat the oneness of God is all important, and that the three persons are no more than the one God working indifferent modes (modalism). Instead we have a dynamic picture of one God who is three persons, whoseoneness and three-ness are both essential to a full understanding of God’s nature.

St Augustine was interested in the possibility of developing analogies which extend our understanding of theTrinity. One example of these is the idea that the Trinity is reflected in the image of mind, knowledge andlove. This is related to Augustine’s understanding of Jesus as Wisdom and the Spirit as Love and is knownas a ‘psychological analogy’. Other analogies have been developed by theologians. For example, JohnMacquarrie in his Principles of Christian Theology (SCM 1966) provides the analogy of primordial being(the Father), expressive being (the Son), and unitive being (the Spirit). He derives these from existentialism.From a feminist perspective, Sally McFague in her book, Models of God (SCM 1987) provides the analogyof mother (the Father), lover (the Son) and friend (the Spirit).

Significance for Today

This picture of the communion of the Trinity, of God existing in relationship counteracts the rather morehierarchical understanding of the relationship of Father, Son and Holy Spirit which can emerge fromreflection on the Trinity. It may challenge us to consider whether the life of the Church reflects theperichoresis of Father, Son and Holy Spirit, or is rather more to do with hierarchy, than with relationship.

This change in emphasis, from a hierarchical understanding to a more relational one, may be seen in recentthinking about ministry. This has encouraged us to consider the way in which patterns of ministry mightreflect, albeit in pale shadow, something of the community of being which is God. So the ordained are seennot as exercising their ministry on behalf of the community set apart from it, but as members of thecommunity ministering alongside other members of the laity and in relationship with them.

This represents a move away from a more hierarchical theology of ordained ministry, which was in turnderived from a more hierarchical understanding of God. In that older view the driving force for the theologywas an understanding of Christology, a picture of Christ as mediator between God and humanity, giving riseto a theology of ordained minister as intermediary. Recent understandings of ministry demonstrate veryclearly how an understanding of Christ and his significance (such as we have been working with in Sessions1 and 2) must be located within the wider doctrine of God, and especially of the Trinity.

Leonardo Boff, the Latin American liberation theologian, goes one step further. He challenges us to reflecton how the Trinity provides a model for social living, and requires us to address the inequalities in oursociety, arising out of hierarchical politics.

35

Arrive and worship


Worship together.

Project 1.

Read the following extract from the Athanasian Creed:

Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith. Which faithexcept every one do keep whole and undefiled; without doubt he shall perish everlastingly. And thecatholic faith is this: That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; Neither confoundingthe Persons; nor dividing the Essence. For there is one Person of the Father; another of the Son; andanother of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, is allone; the Glory equal, the Majesty coeternal. Such as the Father is; such is the Son; and such is theHoly Ghost. The Father uncreated; the Son uncreated; and the Holy Ghost uncreated. The Fatherunlimited; the Son unlimited; and the Holy Ghost unlimited. The Father eternal; the Son eternal; andthe Holy Ghost eternal. And yet they are not three eternals; but one eternal. As also there are notthree uncreated; nor three infinites, but one uncreated; and one infinite. So likewise the Father isAlmighty; the Son Almighty; and the Holy Ghost Almighty. And yet they are not three Almighties;but one Almighty. So the Father is God; the Son is God; and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet theyare not three Gods; but one God. So likewise the Father is Lord; the Son Lord; and the Holy GhostLord. And yet not three Lords; but one Lord. For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity; toacknowledge every Person by himself to be God and Lord; So are we forbidden by the catholicreligion; to say, There are three Gods, or three Lords. The Father is made of none; neither created,nor begotten. The Son is of the Father alone; not made, nor created; but begotten. The Holy Ghost isof the Father and of the Son; neither made, nor created, nor begotten; but proceeding. So there is oneFather, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons; one Holy Ghost, not three Holy Ghosts. And inthis Trinity none is before, or after another; none is greater, or less than another. But the whole threePersons are coeternal, and coequal. So that in all things, as aforesaid; the Unity in Trinity, and theTrinity in Unity, is to be worshipped. He therefore that will be saved, let him thus think of theTrinity.

In what ways are the three persons of the Trinity the same?In what ways are they different?How do they relate to each other?

How is this different from the understanding proposed by Arius?

Why did they hold these different views and why did they believe that the differences mattered?

GROUP SESSION 5

36

Project 2.

Examine the texts below:

Mark 1:9-13

John 15:26-27

1 Peter 1:1-12

Matthew 28:19

Colossians 1:15-20

How does each express the roles of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit?

How does each express the relationship between Father, Son and Holy Spirit?

What implications do their roles and relationship have for the life and mission of the Church?

Project 3.

Discuss the question: If God is Trinity, what does it mean for humanity to be made in the Image of God?

Reflection.



Worship together.

Planning.


37

SESSION 6

THE ATONEMENT:

GOD’S SAVING PURPOSE

For this session

Read Young Chapter 6

Read Source 6 in the Reading Block from McGrath Christian Theology an

Introduction 2nd Ed

In 250 words address the question:In what ways have Christians understood the saving work of Christ?

38

SESSION 6THE ATONEMENT:

GOD’S SAVINGPURPOSE

INTRODUCTION

As will be apparent from previous sessions, one of the driving concerns of those who argued over Jesus’divinity and humanity was the question of how we are saved in and through Jesus. Central to this question,and to Christianity, is the idea of atonement. At the heart of this concept is an understanding that we areseparated from God and that, in his death on the Cross, Jesus reconciled us to God, so that we could be atone with God. Different images and narratives, and theories abound, which seek to elucidate the atonement.There are multiple ways of articulating the nature of our separation from God, what it was that Christ’sdeath brought about and the way in which we are reconciled. Further, Christianity has avoided opting forone theory, picture, or story as being the definitive answer – although each approach has had, and often stillhas, its supporters! It seems that atonement is multi-faceted each description revealing but one face of theenormous truth that in Christ we are united with God.

During this session we will explore a number of different approaches, seeking to deepen our understanding,our faith and our sense of calling. We will work at this under a number of different headings, which serve togroup together various aspects of the theology of atonement.

‘Sacrifice’The notion of sacrifice is present in both Old and New Testaments. The root idea is that because of sin com-mitted an offering must be made to God. In the New Testament connections are made between Jesus’ deathand the offering of the Passover lamb. The Epistle to the Hebrews, in particular, explores the parallels anddifferences between Jesus’ priestly offering of himself and the offerings of the priests in the Temple.

The hymn that expresses this understanding is that translated by E. Caswall, “Glory be to Jesus”: “Abel’sblood for vengeance pleaded to the skies; but the blood of Jesus for our pardon cries.”

Some will worry that what is suggested is that through the sacrifice of Christ on the Cross God is appeased(or propitiated). More strictly, what is seen as taking place is that the demands of justice are met and theconsequences of sin are recognised and dealt with. This may still not satisfy all! There may be a feelingthat if God is bounded by the requirements of justice, this constrains God’s freedom to love and forgive, andthe reconciliation brought about is rather mechanical. Others will be shocked that God requires sacrifice(especially of his own Son) – even in the interests of justice being done.

Further, the language of sacrifice in the twentieth century has been both over-used and abused. There is atendency to regard more and more deaths as sacrificial in some respect. And the idea that people should beprepared to sacrifice themselves in time of war has been used not only to encourage, but also to coerce themto serve their country. Nonetheless the idea of Christ’s atonement being a sacrifice remains central to ourChristian tradition. It has the advantage, along with other pictures, of emphasising that in Christ’s deathsomething objective took place that made a difference, once and for all, to the relationship between God andhumanity. And we are reminded that this involved Christ suffering on our behalf. It also reminds us,therefore, that Christ made a costly offering, nothing less than the offering of himself – the atonement istherefore to be seen as costly to God.

‘Victory’A different perspective is provided by the concept of victory, also to be found in the New Testament. In hisdeath, Christ has overcome sin, death and the devil; his victory is demonstrated in his being raised from thedead by God. In the light of Easter, we ask: “Where, O death, is now thy sting?”

39

The nature of the victory is understood in different ways. It may be seen in terms of “ransom”. A ransompayment is made to someone so that humanity is liberated from slavery. As Origen pointed out, the onlycandidate for the person receiving the payment was the devil, who had acquired power over humanitybecause of their disobedience to God. Gregory the Great (writing in the late sixth century) pushed theanalogy a considerable way. He proposed the “fishhook” theory of the atonement (otherwise known as the“mouse trap” theory!) Christ’s death is likened to a fishook designed to catch the devil – the bait is Christ’shumanity; the hook his divinity. The devil takes the bait and is caught on the hook. For us today, this is farfrom being a comfortable theory, suggesting as it does that God engages in deception.

However, in the Middle Ages, the idea of victory was a popular one, linked to the belief that after his deathChrist broke open the gates of hell and liberated those trapped there. Although less popular in the wake ofthe Enlightenment, the image was given prominence by the work of Gustaf Aulén, Christus Victor, firstpublished in 1930. The attractive feature of this work was the belief in Christ’s victory over the forces ofevil, which were all too apparent to the twentieth century mind. Difficulties remain, however, inunderstanding how the victory is effected. Also, there is a question about the way in which humanity isbypassed in this arrangement – the transaction is between God and the devil. This seems somewhat at oddswith the thinking, which we have encountered in other sessions, that it is in his humanity (as well as hisdivinity) that Christ saves us. This suggests that the crucial transaction effected by Christ’s death (howeverit is pictured) is between God and humanity.

‘Satisfaction’This understanding of atonement is to be found in the work of the eleventh century writer Anselm,especially in Cur Deus Homo? (Why a God Man?). He was, at least to some extent, reacting against themedieval Christus Victor approach. He disagreed with the notion that atonement was about overcoming thedevil, on the basis that the devil has no rights over humanity (only the power which humanity hassurrendered to him through their sinfulness). Still less did Anselm think that atonement could involve Goddeceiving the devil. Rather, the atonement is focused in the righteousness and forgiveness of God.However, Anselm takes seriously the consequences of sin and the need for these to be overcome if humanityis to be forgiven and reconciled to God. Anselm’s argument is that “satisfaction” must be made for sin ifhumanity is to return to the state of original righteousness, which existed prior to our disobedience to God.Something must be done to remove the effect of the sin. This satisfaction ought to be made by the guiltyparty – humanity. However, we are incapable of offering satisfaction (disabled by the very sin for which weseek forgiveness). God, the innocent party, is the only one able to make satisfaction. God therefore pro-vides a way through to atonement in the incarnation. By sending God’s son to be born and to die upon thecross God provides a way out of the dilemma. As a human being, Jesus shares humanity’s responsibility forthe sin which separates us from God; as God, and in his righteousness, Jesus is also able to make satisfactionfor sin, which he does through his death on the cross. Thus both justice and forgiveness are possible.

Popular in the Reformation period, this argument gave rise to a number of variants, which express Christ’srole in slightly different ways. The differences lie in the understanding of how it is that Jesus’ death allowsthe rest of humanity to enter into God’s forgiveness. One line is that Christ is our representative. He re-establishes the covenant agreement between God and humanity. Through faith in him, we may come toshare in the covenant and in all its blessings, which include the forgiveness of sins. Another line is thatthrough faith we participate in the life of the risen Christ. This is derived from the Pauline understandingthat those who have faith in him come to be “in Christ”. By participating in Jesus’ death and resurrection,most notably in baptism, we are set free from the power of sin and death. A third approach proposes thatChrist died as a substitute for us, taking our guilt on his shoulders so that we might come to share in hisrighteousness.

In the modern period, and particularly in the middle of the twentieth century, lots of questions were raisedabout this approach to atonement. In the light of Freud, the notion of original guilt came under closeinspection. Rather than being seen as something objective, such guilt was seen as something learned inchildhood, imposed on us by our culture. Further, the mood was one of “man come of age”, to quote JohnRobinson. Humanity was now able to take responsibility for itself and did not therefore need a

40

representative to take moral responsibility for it. Finally, questions were asked about the morality ofvicarious punishment – was it just that Jesus should suffer on behalf of the guilty, while being himselfinnocent.

Some of these objections clearly come from an age which overestimated humanity’s capacity for takingmoral responsibility. From the perspective of the early twenty-first century, the reality of the disablingpower of sin is perhaps more apparent than it was in the 1960s. However, the question of how we do takeresponsibility for our own actions remains, as does the question mark over the morality of vicariouspunishment.

‘Example of Love’An approach to atonement which was much more conducive to those in the modern period (the nineteenthand twentieth centuries) than that of Jesus’ death being a satisfaction for sin, is the concept of that death be-ing an example of love. Interestingly, this perspective finds its strongest statement in the work of Abelard, acontemporary of Anselm. Abelard’s main interest, in our terms, is not so much in the objective effect of theCross (although he was not uninterested in this), but rather in the subjective effect on us – in our response toChrist’s death. He suggests that the most important thing about the cross is that it reveals the depth of God’slove for us and provides an example of love that we can emulate – Jesus’ death inspires us to love. Clearlythis is in keeping with the theology of John’s Gospel: “Just as I have loved you, you should love one anoth-er” (John 13.34).

This is without doubt a powerful interpretation in terms of enabling us to respond to Jesus’ death. However,like other approaches, it is inadequate on its own. It leaves unanswered all the questions about the way inwhich the Cross might have a tangible effect on sin and the separation of humanity and God. Whereas otherapproaches appear to take away all responsibility from humanity, this one places too much responsibility onus. Further, this approach, taken on its own, undermines much of the theology of incarnation, which thechurch established over the first five centuries, and which we encountered in earlier sessions. The carefulthinking about Jesus being both fully human and fully divine, in order to save us, is unnecessary if Christ’sdeath is only an example.

‘Inclusion’Another approach draws on traditions in the Eastern Churches that understand the work of God in believersto be the process of theosis, or divinisation. In various forms it is also found particularly in Roman Catholic,Methodist and Anglican thought. This understanding sees the Incarnation as uniting God and God'screation, in order to draw that creation into God's being. The saving work of Christ is seen to be particularlyimportant in this process of Christ "becoming what we are that we might become what he is" (Athanasius).The end goal of creation is to be 'in Christ' and for believers it is to become like God, being without sin andimmortal.

The implications of this theology for understanding the atonement have been set out by Morna Hooker inInterchange and atonement (1978) and From Adam to Christ (1990). She draws on St Paul to argue that theatonement should be understood not as a substitution, where Christ replaces the sinner and dies takingpunishment in their place, but as an inclusion, where Christ joins the sinner and the sinner is joined toChrist. Inclusion sees Jesus on the cross as joining us in our fallenness and alienation from God, joiningwith us in suffering, in being under the curse of the Law and in death. In baptism we are joined with him,die in him, and are raised to new life in him and so we join in his resurrection as he joined us in our death.

Some will however see this theology, which lessens the focus on punishment and Divine anger, asinadequate to deal with the need for justice and punishment of sin. Others will also question the theology oftheosis on which it is based, seeing it as failing to acknowledge sufficiently the gulf between God andcreation.

Reflection

All of the images considered in this session have their origins in particular settings. The idea of sacrificeemerges from a cultic tradition of temple worship in Judaism. This was particularly important forChristianity, because it allowed for an understanding of continuity between Judaism and itself, and for a

41

picture of the effect of Jesus’ death which is rooted in the Hebrew Scriptures. However, as we have seen,we have to work hard to translate the concept so that it works in our contemporary setting and culture.Similarly, the idea of victory, and especially of ransom, emerges out of a world in which were people wereliberated from slavery. This is also true of the image of “satisfaction” which comes, if not from a legalframework, then at least from a legalistic view of life.

Further, we have seen how different models have appealed, or indeed have failed to appeal to latergenerations. Two challenges remain. The first challenge is that we should seek to understand, as far as weare able, the variety of viewpoints, their contribution to our understanding of atonement and theirweaknesses. Secondly, that we should seek to communicate the mystery of Christ’s saving death in wayswhich are both appropriate to, and challenge our own generation.

43

Arrive and worship


Worship together.

Project 1.

What are the key elements of the interpretation of atonement understood as:SacrificeVictorySatisfactionInclusionExample of Love

Which of these speaks most powerfully to our time, and why?

Project 2.

For each of the hymns on Resources Sheet 2, examine the ways in which the saving acts of God inthe incarnation, death and resurrection of Christ are expressed.

How helpful or unhelpful do you find them?

Are there other examples from hymnody that you prefer, and if so why?

Project 3.

Discuss the question:What must I do to be saved?

Reflection.



Worship together.

Planning.


GROUP SESSION 6

44

Resource Sheet 2

Glory be to Jesus, Who in bitter painsPoured for me the life-blood From His sacred veins.

Grace and life eternal In that Blood I find;Blest be His compassion, Infinitely kind.

Blest through endless ages Be the precious stream,Which from endless torments Did the world redeem.

Abel’s blood for vengeance Pleaded to the skies;But the blood of Jesus For our pardon cries.

It the conscience sprinkles, Frees our guilty hearts;Satan in confusion Terror-struck departs.

Thine be the glory, risen, conqu’ring Son;Endless is the victory, Thou o’er death hast won;Angels in bright raiment rolled the stone away,Kept the folded grave clothes where Thy body lay.

RefrainThine is the glory, risen conqu’ring Son,Endless is the vict’ry, Thou o’er death hast won.

Lo! Jesus meets us, risen from the tomb;Lovingly He greets us, scatters fear and gloom;Let the church with gladness, hymns of triumph sing;For her Lord now liveth, death hath lost its sting.

Refrain

In Christ alone my hope is foundHe is my light, my strength, my songThis Cornerstone, this solid groundFirm through the fiercest drought and stormWhat heights of love, what depths of peaceWhen fears are stilled, when strivings ceaseMy Comforter, my All in AllHere in the love of Christ I stand

In Christ alone, who took on fleshFullness of God in helpless babeThis gift of love and righteousnessScorned by the ones He came to save'Til on that cross as Jesus diedThe wrath of God was satisfiedFor every sin on Him was laidHere in the death of Christ I live

There in the ground His body layLight of the World by darkness slainThen bursting forth in glorious DayUp from the grave He rose againAnd as He stands in victorySin's curse has lost its grip on meFor I am His and He is mineBought with the precious blood of Christ

No guilt in life, no fear in deathThis is the power of Christ in meFrom life's first cry to final breathJesus commands my destinyNo power of hell, no scheme of manCan ever pluck me from His hand'Til He returns or calls me homeHere in the power of Christ I'll stand

There is a green hill far away,Outside a city wall,Where the dear Lord was crucified,Who died to save us all.

O dearly, dearly, has He loved,And we must love Him, too,And trust in His redeeming blood,And try His works to do.

We may not know, we cannot tell,What pains He had to bear;But we believe it was for usHe hung and suffered there.

He died that we might be forgiv’n,He died to make us good,That we might go at last to Heav’n,Saved by His precious blood.

There was no other good enoughTo pay the price of sin;He only could unlock the gateOf heaven and let us in.

O dearly, dearly has He loved,And we must love Him, too,And trust in His redeeming blood,And try His works to do.

No more we doubt Thee, glorious Prince of life;Life is naught without Thee; aid us in our strife;Make us more than conqu’rors, through Thy deathless love:Bring us safe through Jordan to Thy home above.

45

SESSION 7

ONE HOLY, CATHOLIC

AND APOSTOLIC

For this session

There in no chapter of Young to be read this week.

Read BOTH of Sources 7 and 8 in the Reading Block Aswin-Siejkowski – TheHoly Church and Marriage, Alwyn History and Reformation.

In 250 words address the question:What does it mean for the Church to be One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic?

46

SESSION 7

ONE HOLY, CATHOLICAND APOSTOLIC

INTRODUCTION

Through the Nicene Creed, the Church proclaims each Sunday, ‘We believe in one, holy, catholic andapostolic church’. These four characteristics have been used throughout Christian history to define theshape and character of the Christian Church. The Anglican Church, as ‘part of’ the Church of God reflectsthese characteristics in its common life, order and ministry. The Preface to the Declaration of Assent, usedprior to ordinations and when a new minister is instituted in the Church in Wales, therefore affirms

The Church in Wales is part of the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church worshipping the one trueGod, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. It professes the faith uniquely revealed in the Holy Scriptures andset forth in the catholic creeds, which faith the Church is called upon to proclaim afresh in each gener-ation.

The New TestamentThe oneness, holiness, catholicity and apostolicity of the Church are all evident in the New Testament wit-ness. The ‘oneness’ of the Church is a constant theme. Paul was concerned about unity when he wrote hisfirst epistle to the church at Corinth. However, unity is most strongly urged in the ‘farewell discourse’ inJohn’s gospel where Jesus prays for the unity of the Church (Jn 17:20). This unity is fundamental because itreflects the unity that exists between Father and Son. Hence Jesus can pray, ‘The glory that you have givenme, I have given them, so that they may be one, as we are one’. (Jn 17:22).

The New Testament Church is also called to be holy. To be holy is to be set apart and used for God’s pur-pose. In Ephesians 2:21 the Church is called a ‘holy temple in the Lord’, in Colossians 3:12 the Churchcommunity is called, ‘God’s chosen ones, holy and beloved’ and in 1 Peter 2: 5 the church is both a ‘holypriesthood’ and then four verses later a ‘holy nation’. The Church is called to be Christ like and Spirit filledand sacred to God.

The word ‘catholic’ does not appear in the scriptures but it is clear that the concept of a Church that is uni-versal, worldwide and institutionally whole is key to much New Testament thinking. Catholicity grew outof the need for the Church to remain one and holy as it began to spread across the Graeco-Roman worldfrom its roots in Palestine. One place in which the need for catholicity is focused is in the Pastoral Epistleswhere Timothy and Titus are urged to proclaim sound teaching and promote stable leadership in a churchthat is experiencing ‘false teaching’ and division. In 2 Timothy 1: 13, Timothy is urged to, ‘Hold to thestandard of sound teaching that you have heard from me (Paul), in the faith and love that are in Jesus Christ.Guard the good treasure entrusted to you with the help of the Holy Spirit living in us’.

With this quote the concept of catholicity merges with the idea of apostolicity. The apostle is one who is‘sent out’ to share the good news of the Gospel, but in the New Testament the apostles became associatedwith authority and order in the Church. An apostolic church is therefore a church that was built upon thewitness and continuing authority of the apostles. This is clearly stated by Paul on many occasions. He pro-claimed that this authority came directly from God. Hence in 1 Corinthians 1:1 Paul is ‘called to be an apos-tle of Christ Jesus by the will of God’ and in 2 Timothy 1:1 ‘an apostle of Christ Jesus by the command ofGod our saviour and of Jesus Christ our hope’. However, even in a Church that accepted the authority of theapostles, his leadership was constantly under threat as the newly founded communities struggled to live andproclaim the gospel in the contexts in which they lived. Hence there was a great deal of diversity in the life

47

of the early Church that was reflected in its theology and practice. However, the Church in the New Testa-ment reflects a body of people that is living with a calling to be one, holy, catholic and apostolic.

An Expanding ChurchIt is already clear from the evidence of the New Testament that the Church was confronting new challengesas it expanded throughout the Graeco Roman world. As the church experienced the death of the first apos-tles and those who had known the earthly Jesus, the direct leadership of figures like St Paul was no longeravailable to support and encourage sound teaching. This was exacerbated by a steady growth in dissensionand false teaching which was to culminate in the great Gnostic heresy that was to threaten the church’s exis-tence in the second century.

Therefore, between the time that the New Testament was written and the beginning of the second centurythere was a significant change in the way that the life and ministry of the Church was conceived and prac-tised. The early charismatically inspired communities of Paul’s New Testament churches, in which eachmember enjoyed a Spirit-filled contribution to its life gradually developed into churches that were closelygathered around a bishop and defined by a threefold ministry of bishop, deacon and elder (presbyter). Thischange to the life and ministry of the Church was mainly the result of the need for the church to retain itsorder and common life and to be one, holy, catholic and apostolic in the face of the challenges it was facing.However, in a church dominated by this threefold order of ministry, the ‘laos’ or laity of the church wereincreasingly excluded from the church’s public ministry.

A Threefold MinistryIn the New Testament the bishop (episcopos) was a leader or overseer of the local Christian community.This role had not yet developed into a formal office in the early church and was not clearly distinguishedfrom the role of the elder (presbyteros) at the time that the New Testament books were written. However,the bishop emerged as the leader and focus of the local church community and this has largely remained hisfunction ever since. Deeply embedded in the church’s tradition is the conviction that the bishop is a sign ofthe church’s unity, universality and apostolicity, called to oversee the work in the area or diocese entrustedto his care.

The word ‘diakonos’ (deacon) is the Greek word for servant and is used in the New Testament of individu-als involved in two related Christian activities. It is used as a person who serves in a practical capacity, forexample organising the food for the fellowship meal and the distribution of food and alms to the poor.However the term was also used to describe a person who acted as a messenger or spokesman for God.From the very beginning therefore the word diakonos (deacon) carried the twin connotations of mission andservice.

For Ignatius, the diaconate focuses the servant ministry of Christ. Writing at the beginning of the secondcentury, he exhorts his church,

‘I bid you do everything in Godly concord, with the bishop presiding in the likeness of God, with thepresbyters (elders) in the likeness of the council of the Apostles, while the deacons, who are so dear tome have been entrusted with the ministry of Christ’.

The order of priesthood gradually emerged from the college of presbyters who supported the bishops in thesecond century. These presbyters or elders took responsibility for the growing number of new churches thatdeveloped within the area managed by the bishop. The change in title from presbyter to priest appears tohave occurred as a result of a change in the way that ministry was conceived.

In the third century Cyprian compared Christian ministry to the Old Testament priesthood and the Eucharistto an Old Testament sacrifice. This understanding of the Eucharist as a sacrifice was combined with an in-creasingly sacerdotal understanding of priesthood. These ideas grew in popularity so that, by the fifth centu-ry, Jerome could insist that there could be no church without priests. By the mediaeval period priesthoodwas considered to be the central office of the church. The role of the deacon was downgraded and used as apreparation period for priesthood.

48

Collaborative ministryIn the New Testament it is the community that is one, holy, catholic and apostolic and when the Church iscalled a ‘holy priesthood’ in 1 Peter 2:5 it is the community that is holy and priestly and not any individualwithin it. This understanding of the priestly nature of the whole Christian community continued to be as-serted into the second century. However, by the third century the distinction between clergy and laity iswidely observed with the laos occupying an inferior position in the church. Scholars argue that the corpo-rate nature of the church and its ministry has been better preserved in the Eastern Church tradition. Howev-er, particularly in the Western Church, the oneness, holiness, catholicity and apostolicity of the church hasbeen increasingly seen to reside in the orders of bishop, priest and deacon, rather than in the broader churchcommunity.

The late twentieth century saw a revival in an understanding of the church as a corporate body and of minis-try as a collaborative undertaking. The Agreed Statement by the Second Anglican-Roman Catholic Interna-tional Convention (ARCIC 11 1991:16) identifies the church as ‘a communion of believers with God andwith each other’ and the report from the Roman Catholic Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales, ‘TheSign We Give’ (1995:27) notes,

Collaborative ministry draws deeply upon faith in the Trinity. It is a way of expressing in our life to-gether what God asks of us and calls us to be. It is therefore a spirituality in itself. Collaborationsearches us, scrutinizes our hearts and mind in the light of the Gospel and the Trinitarian faith. It asksus to reflect what God is like in the ways we live and work together.

Focusing and EnablingAs the church’s understanding of ministry has changed the language that accompanies this ministry haschanged also. Instead of understanding the different ministries as individual offices and activities, thechurch has begun to discover a language that places each ministry in relation to the Christian community asa whole. This language acknowledges that it is the community that is one, holy, catholic and apostolic andit is the community that is episcopal, priestly and diaconal. These characteristics are focused in the ministryof bishops, priests and deacons and the role of these ministries is to enable the community to be and to ex-press these in its life and work. Hence it is the community that participates in, and contributes to, the conti-nuity of the apostolic faith of the church in its common life and order though this is focused for Anglicans inthe historic ministry of the bishop. It is the community that is called to represent people to God and God topeople, to witness to the holy in the midst of life, and to offer the sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving thoughthis is focused for Anglicans in the ministry of the priest.

It is the community that is called to mission and service, to proclaim Christ in church and community, tocare for the needy, the sick and all those in trouble and to strengthen the faithful though this is focused forAnglicans in the ministry of the deacon. As it is still the normal practice in the Anglican Church for deaconsto be made priest after one year, the focus for diaconal ministry is mostly expressed through the ordainedministry of priest and bishop. However, some individuals retain diaconal ministry throughout their lives andecumenical debate is currently stimulating interest in development of the permanent diaconate.

49

Arrive and worship


Worship together.

Project 1.

Read the extract from the Anglican Covenant on Resource Sheet 3.

Identify the ways in which the Covenant tries to express the nature of the Anglican Communion asOneHolyCatholicApostolic.

How does the Covenant also allow for diversity?

Project 2a

In what ways is the Church in Wales (or your denomination):OneHolyCatholicApostolic

How are these characteristics expressed in the daily life and worship of your local church?

How might they be expressed differently in the future.

Project 2b

Who should be empowered to make the decision on controversial subjects such as whether same-sexcouples can be married in Church in Wales Churches?

Consider:The World Council of ChurchesThe PopeThe Anglican CommunionThe Archbishop of CanterburyThe Church in WalesUK Parliament/Welsh Assembly GovernmentThe Local DioceseThe PCCIndividual clergy

GROUP SESSION 7

50

Project 3.

Discuss the question:In the Church in Wales, whose opinion matters?

Reflection.



Worship together.

Planning.


51

Resource Sheet 3 - Extract from the Anglican Covenant

Section Three: Our Unity and Common Life

3.1 Each Church affirms:

(3.1.1) that by our participation in Baptism and Eucharist, we are incorporated into the one body of theChurch of Jesus Christ, and called by Christ to pursue all things that make for peace and build up ourcommon life.

(3.1.2) its resolve to live in a Communion of Churches. Each Church, with its bishops in synod, orders andregulates its own affairs and its local responsibility for mission through its own system of government andlaw and is therefore described as living “in communion with autonomy and accountability”[15]. Trusting inthe Holy Spirit, who calls and enables us to dwell in a shared life of common worship and prayer for oneanother, in mutual affection, commitment and service, we seek to affirm our common life through thoseInstruments of Communion by which our Churches are enabled to be conformed together to the mind ofChrist. Churches of the Anglican Communion are bound together “not by a central legislative and executiveauthority, but by mutual loyalty sustained through the common counsel of the bishops in conference”[16]and of the other instruments of Communion.

(3.1.3) the central role of bishops as guardians and teachers of faith, as leaders in mission, and as a visiblesign of unity, representing the universal Church to the local, and the local Church to the universal and thelocal Churches to one another. This ministry is exercised personally, collegially and within and for theeucharistic community. We receive and maintain the historic threefold ministry of bishops, priests anddeacons, ordained for service in the Church of God, as they call all the baptised into the mission of Christ.

(3.1.4) the importance of instruments in the Anglican Communion to assist in the discernment, articulationand exercise of our shared faith and common life and mission. The life of communion includes an ongoingengagement with the diverse expressions of apostolic authority, from synods and episcopal councils to localwitness, in a way which continually interprets and articulates the common faith of the Church’s members(consensus fidelium). In addition to the many and varied links which sustain our life together, weacknowledge four particular Instruments at the level of the Anglican Communion which express this co-operative service in the life of communion.

We accord the Archbishop of Canterbury, as the bishop of the See of Canterbury with which Anglicanshave historically been in communion, a primacy of honour and respect among the college of bishops in theAnglican Communion as first among equals (primus inter pares). As a focus and means of unity, theArchbishop gathers and works with the Lambeth Conference and Primates’ Meeting, and presides in theAnglican Consultative Council. The Lambeth Conference expresses episcopal collegiality worldwide, and brings together the bishops forcommon worship, counsel, consultation and encouragement in their ministry of guarding the faith and unityof the Communion and equipping the saints for the work of ministry (Eph 4.12) and mission. The Anglican Consultative Council is comprised of lay, clerical and episcopal representatives from ourChurches[17]. It facilitates the co-operative work of the Churches of the Anglican Communion, co-ordinates aspects of international Anglican ecumenical and mission work, calls the Churches into mutualresponsibility and interdependence, and advises on developing provincial structures[18]. The Primates’ Meeting is convened by the Archbishop of Canterbury for mutual support, prayer andcounsel. The authority that primates bring to the meeting arises from their own positions as the seniorbishops of their Provinces, and the fact that they are in conversation with their own Houses of Bishops andlocated within their own synodical structures[19]. In the Primates’ Meeting, the Primates and Moderatorsare called to work as representatives of their Provinces in collaboration with one another in mission and indoctrinal, moral and pastoral matters that have Communion-wide implications.

52

It is the responsibility of each Instrument to consult with, respond to, and support each other Instrument andthe Churches of the Communion[20]. Each Instrument may initiate and commend a process of discernmentand a direction for the Communion and its Churches.

3.2 Acknowledging our interdependent life, each Church, reliant on the Holy Spirit, commits itself:

(3.2.1) to have regard for the common good of the Communion in the exercise of its autonomy, to supportthe work of the Instruments of Communion with the spiritual and material resources available to it, and toreceive their work with a readiness to undertake reflection upon their counsels, and to endeavour toaccommodate their recommendations.

(3.2.2) to respect the constitutional autonomy of all of the Churches of the Anglican Communion, whileupholding our mutual responsibility and interdependence in the Body of Christ[21], and the responsibility ofeach to the Communion as a whole[22].

(3.2.3) to spend time with openness and patience in matters of theological debate and reflection, to listen,pray and study with one another in order to discern the will of God. Such prayer, study and debate is anessential feature of the life of the Church as it seeks to be led by the Spirit into all truth and to proclaim thegospel afresh in each generation. Some issues, which are perceived as controversial or new when they arise,may well evoke a deeper understanding of the implications of God’s revelation to us; others may prove to bedistractions or even obstacles to the faith. All such matters therefore need to be tested by shareddiscernment in the life of the Church.

(3.2.4) to seek a shared mind with other Churches, through the Communion’s councils, about matters ofcommon concern, in a way consistent with the Scriptures, the common standards of faith, and the canonlaws of our churches. Each Church will undertake wide consultation with the other Churches of theAnglican Communion and with the Instruments and Commissions of the Communion.

(3.2.5) to act with diligence, care and caution in respect of any action which may provoke controversy,which by its intensity, substance or extent could threaten the unity of the Communion and the effectivenessor credibility of its mission.

(3.2.6) in situations of conflict, to participate in mediated conversations, which involve face to facemeetings, agreed parameters and a willingness to see such processes through.

(3.2.7) to have in mind that our bonds of affection and the love of Christ compel us always to uphold thehighest degree of communion possible.

53

SESSION 8

‘I BELIEVE IN GOD’

For this session

There is no Chapter from Young to be read this week.

Review the term's work and the notes you have made.

Read Source 9 from the Reading Block from Holloway, Richard, Dancing on theEdge

In 250 words address the question:What factors shaped the formation of the Creeds?

54

SESSION 8

‘I BELIEVE IN GOD’

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this term is to provide opportunities to enter more deeply into the beliefs, questions, debates andcontexts which together make up Christian Doctrine – that which we are responsible for communicating andteaching in our lives of discipleship and ministry. Now is the moment to stop and take stock; to ask whathas been learnt; to consider our response to this exploration of our faith.

Clearly the work of the module has been about belief. We began by seeking to understand the process bywhich the creeds evolved in response to questions arising out of the New Testament period. We continuedby exploring how further questions emerged, giving rise to other ways of articulating the Christian faith. Atthe heart of our study of creeds and definitions and images has been our wrestling with belief in the oneGod, who is Father, Son and Holy Spirit. This has gone hand-in-hand with engaging with the way that Godsaves us, through creation, through the incarnation of Jesus Christ, through the indwelling of the Holy Spiritand through the life and mission of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church

Mapping these beliefs has never been a simple process! We have seen how faith was articulated in responseto questions – particularly the question: Is this Jesus God, and if so what does that say about God and us?But we have also observed that answers to those questions of faith resulted from debate and disagreement,processes which were political in nature (even sometimes Political – with a capital P!). Further, the answersemerged within a particular culture, drawing on the language of a particular society, borrowing terms andconcepts from other traditions and philosophies. This process was both inevitable (we can only use thelanguages we know to articulate our faith) and it was conscious – if we wish other people to respond in faithwhen we speak of God, then we must use language with which they can engage. And of course the earlychurch Fathers were using both Latin and Greek to articulate their beliefs, and translating words betweenthese very different languages was difficult and led a further level of misunderstanding and confusion.

At the outset it might have been that we were expecting to find answers to questions of faith that built oneach other, brick by brick. However, it should now be apparent that the process is rather more fluid, moreorganic, than that. Answers have been arrived at, but in a variety of different ways. Some of those answershave emerged as key statements of the Christian faith, others appear to belong more to a particular period ofchurch history.

But each time a question has been answered, new questions arise – what then do we believe about…?Further, the questions that are important in one generation are not necessarily those that are most telling inanother historical context. We have seen again, and again, how questions have arisen in our time that werenot envisaged by the early church (for example, about the gender of God), or where Christians today finddifferent answers to those of the early church (for example. in relation to the suffering of God). And insome areas of exploration, especially in relation to the atonement, we have had to recognise that there is nosingle answer to the key question. Rather, there are different facets of the truth, each one of which, ifgrasped too firmly, reduces rather than enhances the impact of our belief in God.

So now is the time to stand back, to review not only what we believe, but how we believe it. It is to behoped that this study will have deepened our faith in God. But it is also to be hoped that it will haverevealed something of how it is human beings come to faith, develop in faith, and communicate faith. Thisis vital for discipleship and ministry. For we must be able to welcome questions openly, we need to know

55

when answers (albeit provisional ones) are required and when there are no answers to give. We must beprepared to be alongside people as they let go of their previous answers and reach out for new ones, and wemust be prepared to do that ourselves.

God and SufferingTo focus our review it might be good to turn to a question asked of Christianity repeatedly in different ages,but which is certainly asked today, not least of those in ministry: How can a good God allow suffering?

At least two pictures might be proposed in response to this question. The first focuses on humanresponsibility and the God who steps in to rescue us. This picture starts with God creating a perfect worldwhich is offered to humanity, but which is marred by human disobedience. Again, and again, God steps into rescue humanity until at last he intervenes by sending his Son Jesus Christ to die for humanity so that thegoodness of creation might be restored. In this picture suffering is the consequence, directly or indirectly, ofhuman sinfulness, and salvation is God’s response.

The second image is of God being rather more involved. It is one of God taking a risk in creation, knowingthat if the world and humanity were to share in God’s creativity then the outcome might be positive ornegative. This picture is of a God constantly involved in creation, which is a continuous process rather thantaking place in a moment of time. Thus God’s initial work of creation, God’s relationship with humanityand the whole of creation, God’s incarnation in the midst of creation are all part of a developingrelationship. This relationship involves God accepting limitations so that the creation can grow and developand itself become creative. In this portrayal suffering is a possible consequence of the freedom of creation(including humanity) to become creative. And responsibility for it is shared and struggled with both by Godand by what he creates. This image is one of unfolding salvation worked out in the midst of creation.

Both these approaches to suffering may have something to offer, both represent facets of the truth. Eachwrestles with how an all-powerful God takes responsibility for suffering. They come from differentapproaches to theology and different cultures. The first is concerned to safeguard the transcendence of Godand expresses values that originate in the Greek thought-world. The second emphasises the immanence ofGod, and may be closer to some of the ideas of God to be found in the Old Testament. The first model maywork better in the optimism of modernity, alongside the belief that humanity is learning to takeresponsibility – making progress! The second approach may be more effective in the uncertainty of post-modernity, where an engaged God is much more use than a detached one; not least in the face of theperceived complexity and inter-dependence of life.

But the key question is not ‘Which do you want to opt for’? Rather, the crucial question is ‘How in the lightof this term’s study do you go about answering the question?’ What is the interaction between tackling theissue of suffering and our new understanding(s) of the one God, who is creator, redeemer and sustainer, andof the way faith grows, develops and is communicated?

57

Arrive and worship

Reflect on any issues that have arisen from the last session. Worship together.

Project 1.

The early church theologians reflected on the scriptures, on their own experiences and thephilosophy of their time in order to address the questions of their day.

In the light of your learning this term, explore how a Christian might reflect theologically onsuffering today.What sources, beliefs and experiences would be relevant?

Project 2.

Study the four contemporary Creeds on Resource Sheet 4.

What beliefs about God is each creed expressing?

What is each trying to achieve?

What are the strengths and weaknesses of each?

Project 2b

Write a creed for a person or a community who is suffering today.

Project 3.

Discuss the view that:: Just because it says so in the Nicene Creed, that doesn't mean it's true.

Reflection.



Worship together, offering the term's work to God.

GROUP SESSION 8

58

Resource Sheet 4.

I believe in God, the Limitless Divine,Genderless and loving creator of all:And in Yeshua, who became Christ,The fullest but not the only revelation of God,Born in the line of David, through Joseph and Mary,But sent as a manifestation and incarnation of God for the world.In standing for peace, love and tolerance above all,He offended the authorities,And died a painful and ignominious death on the cross.I believe he passed through the veil of death,But the veil could not hold him,He was not bound by death, and has freed us from those bonds,And he rose again into life, and continues to rise, in us all.He now lives again within the Divine,And can be sought through the Holy Spirit,And continues to seek within us peace, love and tolerance.I believe we are caretakers for the miraculous blessing and purity of creation,Both through the birth of all species and the life of nature.I believe in the fellowship of all persons of faith,And that no boundaries, none at all, can keep one from the immanence of God,And keep one from working for the limitless Divine.I seek the face of Yeshua, who became Christ, in the whole of creation,And seek his peace, his grace, his presence and his love,In the heart of the world,For those living, and those beyond.Amen(Adrian Gibb)

I believe in God, the Father of all, who began and upholds a universe that makes itself through evolving processes. God is Love, granting to creation a freedom that restricts his power.

Through his Son Jesusthis self-giving God rescued us andshowed us what he is like: loving in life and death; sharing our pain; suffering the consequences of our sin; offering forgiveness.

Jesus died for us but was raised by God and now lives with us through his Spirit to build God’s kingdom of unselfish love and lead us, as our judge and Savior, to eternity with him.

(John Morris).

59

We believe in the presence of God in the world.She is our mother, source of deep wisdom, who:holds and protects us, nourishes our bodies, comforts our pain,hears and accepts our times of failure and success.She is our lover and is allowed to touch our pain:healing and recreating, seeking out what is hidden, revealing deep precious mysteries.She is our friend who stands alongside us:working co-operatively for the common good, sharing our concerns,fiercely criticizing our lack of integrityWe believe in the presence of God in our world.We meet her as people met her in Jesus, in countless relationshipswhich are at once human and divine:in simple encounters with men, women and children,in office and schoolroom, home and supermarket,in the community of her people.We believe in the presence of God in our world,whose truth is denied, in anguish, like that of Jesus on the cross, whenever:food is withheld, the earth is poisoned, abused or destroyed,people are oppressed, denied dignity and responsibility, tortured or killed.Together we affirm the truth and goodness of God, our mother, lover and friend and commitourselves to her in following the way of our brother Jesus.(Eco-Feminist/Liberation Theology Creed – 20th Century).

The basis of the Fellowship shall be the fundamental truths of Christianity, as revealed inHoly Scripture, including:a. There is one God in three persons, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.b. God is sovereign in creation, revelation, redemption and final judgement.c. The Bible, as originally given, is the inspired and infallible Word of God. It is the supremeauthority in all matters of belief and behaviour.d. Since the fall, the whole of humankind is sinful and guilty, so that everyone is subject toGod’s wrath and condemnation.e. The Lord Jesus Christ, God’s incarnate Son, is fully God; he was born of a virgin; his hu-manity is real and sinless; he died on the cross, was raised bodily from death and is nowreigning over heaven and earth.f. Sinful human beings are redeemed from the guilt, penalty and power of sin only throughthe sacrificial death once and for all time of their representative and substitute, Jesus Christ,the only mediator between them and God.g. Those who believe in Christ are pardoned all their sins and accepted in God’s sight onlybecause of the righteousness of Christ credited to them; this justification is God’s act of un-deserved mercy, received solely by trust in him and not by their own efforts.h. The Holy Spirit alone makes the work of Christ effective to individual sinners, enablingthem to turn to God from their sin and to trust in Jesus Christ.i. The Holy Spirit lives in all those he has regenerated. He makes them increasingly Christ-like in character and behaviour and gives them power for their witness in the world.j. The one holy universal church is the Body of Christ, to which all true believers belong.k. The Lord Jesus Christ will return in person, to judge everyone, to execute God’s just con-demnation on those who have not repented and to receive the redeemed to eternal glory.(The Intercollegiate Christian Union Doctrinal Basis – 20th Century)

61

ASSIGNMENTS

Doctrine:God as Trinity

62

Dcotrine: God as Trinity

INDIVIDUAL ASSIGNMENTQUESTIONS

ASSIGNMENTS

1 a) In 750 words address the question:Why does the Nicene Creed include the words:of one Being with the Father; through him all things were made?

1 b) In 750 words address the question:Why does the Western form of the Nicene Creed include the words:We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Fatherand the Son?

Your answer in each case should show an awareness of the theological debates in theearly church, the different positions that were taken and the reasons why the WesternChurch adopted this particular formulation.

2 In 1500 words address the question:What might it mean to say we are saved by Christ?

Your answer should show awareness of different models of the atonement that have beenproposed and their strengths and weaknesses in communicating the gospel for today.

3. Choose ONE of the following TWO tasks:

Either

Construct an Act of Worship for Trinity Sunday that celebrates and reflects on what itmeans to live in relationship to a Triune God. Include the outline of a talk or sermon.There is NO word limit.

In 500 words, write a reflection on the theology and content of the service, explainingyour intentions and the choices you have made.

You are free to choose the nature, style, context and length of the Act of Worship foryourself.

Or

In 1500 wordsWrite a reflection on what it means to live in relationship to a Triune God.

You should consider the ways in which the this impacts on the mission and ministry of thechurch, prayer and worship, and the way you live your life. You should draw onScripture, the Doctrine of the Church and your own Experience.

Doctrine: God as Trinitycinw.s3.amazonaws.com/.../uploads/sites/2/2013/03/God-as-Trinity-2… ·...

Documents

Transcript of Doctrine: God as Trinitycinw.s3.amazonaws.com/.../uploads/sites/2/2013/03/God-as-Trinity-2… ·...