Professional Documents
Culture Documents
http://journals.cambridge.org/SJT
I
The Fellowship of the Holy Spirit
C~|-IHE grace of our Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God the Father
JL and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with us all.' This is an
ancient form of benediction very generally used in the Christian
church. I should like to take it up here, asking what is meant by 'the
fellowship of the Holy Spirit'? Does the divine Spirit enter into
community with us human beings? Does he admit us into his
'community' with the Father and the Son? Why does the benediction
not talk about divine sovereignty and absolute human dependence in
connection with the Holy Spirit? Why does it so emphatically use the
word 'fellowship' instead?
Our spontaneous reaction may be that 'fellowship' does not
overpower or violate; it liberates. Fellowship does not subjugate; it
brings the other person to himself. Fellowship means openness for the
other, entering into each other's concerns, respect for one another.
Fellowship is the mutual communication of everything a person has
and is. What does this mean for the Holy Spirit, in his life-giving
fellowship with us and for us, in the trinitarian fellowship of the Spirit
with the Father and the Son?
If we are to become receptive for the experience of the fellowship of
the Holy Spirit, we have to recognise that in some respects traditional
pneumatology is too abbreviated too narrow. And these shortcom-
ings have to be surmounted. I shall be confining myself to the
pneumatology of the Western church, and shall concentrate on
Protestant problems for the most part. But I believe that some general
Christian difficulties can be found here too.
Generally speaking, what is in question here is the relation between
the Trinity and the sovereignty of God trinitas and monarchic. This
relationship has remained unelucidated ever since the beginnings of
Christian theology.1 The divine sovereignty can only be exercised by a
1
J. Moltmann, The Trinity and the Kingdom of God, trans. Margaret Kohl (London:
SCM Press; New York: Harper & Row, 1981). I am here developing further some ideas
put forward there.
287
288 SCOTTISH JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY
single subject. The only possible attitude to the sovereign rule of the
One God is obedience. To the One God, therefore, even the Son must
be subordinated; and the Spirit must be subordinated to the Son. But
the triune God is in himself a community or fellowship of a unique
kind, in which the Spirit 'with the Father and the Son together is
worshipped and glorified' (Nicene Creed). Anyone who is worshipped
'together with' others, cannot be subordinate to those others. He has
the same eternal dignity and the same divine quality. Most of the
theological disputes in the church of the patristic period were coloured
by the conflict between the fundamental outlook of monarchical
theism, and the trinitarian belief in community and fellowship. The
Arians' intention was not to diminish the position of the Son. What
they were concerned about was the august monarchy of the One God.
That was why they subordinated the Son. The Pneumatomacheans'
intention was not to diminish the position of the Spirit. Their concern
was to safequard the unique monarchy of the One God. That was why
they subordinated the Spirit to the Son, and the Son to the Father.
Even after the decisions of the Ecumenical Councils, the pneuma-
tology we find in the tradition of the Western church continually took
a monarchical form, which meant that it was subordinationist and not
trinitarian: God rules through Christ, and the efficacy of his rule is the
Spirit. In the universal monarchy of the One God, the Spirit is nothing
other than the efficacy of his rule, the subjective side of his objective
revelation, and the inner fruit of his external word and sacrament.
Once this view becomes the sole way of looking at God and his
revelation, the result is the truncated and restricted pneumatology
which has increasingly come under attack, and rightly so. This
monarchical pneumatology has to be absorbed into a trinitarian one if
it is not to be one-sided.
How ought we to interpret the trinitarian fellowship of the Spirit
with the Father and Son? There are a number of different possible
ways of defining the unity of the triune God. Tertullian proceeded
from the unity of the one, homogeneous, divine being and essence: una
substantia tres personae. The precedence he gave to the one divine
essence over the tri-unity of the divine Persons was long accepted as a
matter of course in the tradition of the Western church. When, at the
beginning of the modern period in Europe, the metaphysic of
subjectivity replaced the metaphysic of substance, God ceased to be
thought of solely as supreme substance. He was now also conceived of as
the absolute subject (e.g. by Fichte and Hegel). The unity of the triune
TRINITARIAN PNEUMATOLOGY 289
God then no longer lay solely in the homogeneity of the divine
substance; it was also to be found in the identity of the one divine
subject. This led to the modern formulation of trinitarian doctrine: one
divine subject three different modes of being (cf. Hegel, Dorner,
Barth and Rahner). In this formula too the unity of God takes
precedence over the Trinity of the divine Persons.
We are going to a step beyond this when we say: the unity of the
triune God is not to be found solely in the single divine substance, or
merely in the identical divine subject; it consists above all in the unique
community of the three Persons. The trinitarian Persons possess in
common the divine essence, and exercise in common the divine
sovereignty. This means that their trinitarian community precedes
their substantial and their subjective unity ad extra. The expression 'tri-
unity' means: three Persons one fellowship, in a singular union or at-
oneness. In saying this we are putting the trinitarian concept of God's
unity before the metaphysical concept of that unity. In their
relationship to one another the divine Persons, Father, Son and Holy
Spirit, exist simultaneously for one another and in one another in so
intimate a way that in themselves they constitute their complete, trini-
tarian unity. The ancient concepts of circumincessio and perichoresis are
ways of describing this unique at-oneness, in which the three Persons
live by virtue of their mutual relationships. When we call this at-
oneness of the Trinity 'fellowship' (koinonia), we are expressing what
links the Holy Spirit 'with the Father and the Son'. We mean that this
is a community that is special and incomparable, but which human
beings seek after in their community with one another, a community
of which they have a presentiment in their love for one another, and
which they experience from afar in moments of mystical union.
The at-oneness of the triune God is truly manifested, however, in the
event about which Jesus, the Son, says: 'That they may all be one, even
as Thou, Father, art in me and I in Thee, that they may also be in us'
(John 17.21). The fellowship of the triune God is so open and inviting
that it finds its true reflection in the fellowship of the Holy Spirit which
human beings experience with one another: 'Even as Thou, Father, art
in me and I in Thee'; it draws this true human fellowship into itself and
gives it a share in itself: 'That they also may be in us.' The true human
fellowship is designed to correspond to the triune God and to be his
image on earth. The true human fellowship will participate in the
inner life of the triune God. We shall now consider the meaning of'the
fellowship of the Holy Spirit' at the three keypoints of Christian doc-
290 SCOTTISH JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY
trine: anthropology, ecclesiology, and the doctrine of the Scriptures;
and we shall then conclude with some reflections about the unity of
the monarchical, eucharistic and doxological concepts of the Trinity.
II
Trinitarian Anthropology: the Social Image of God
In the course of its history Christian theology has taken two different
analogies to help it to comprehend the mystery of human beings in
their likeness to God. One is the analogy of the soul which dominates
the body. The other is the analogy of the community between man
and woman. That is to say, it has drawn on an individual analogy and
on a social one. Ever since Augustine, the first of these has led to the
development of the psychological doctrine of the Trinity in the West,
whereas the second has led to the development of a social doctrine of
the Trinity in the East.
Gregory of Nazianzus discovered the analogy and image of the triune
God on earth in the primal 'nuclear' family of Adam and Eve and
Seth. It is not the human individual all by himself or herself that
corresponds to the triune God; it is this elemental cell of human
community. For these three persons share onefleshand blood, and form
a single family. In the primal human community of husband, wife and
child the triune God sees himself reflected.2
Augustine considered this social analogy and rejected it.3 If it were
correct, he argues, the man would only be the image of God from the
moment when he finds a wife and she has a child. But when Scripture
talks about imago Dei it is talking about individual persons. Seth is not
yet mentioned at all in the account of the creation. Paul clinched the
matter for Augustine when, in I Cor. 11.7, he calls the man 'the image
and glory of God', while the woman is only 'the glory of man'.
Augustine concludes from this that the woman is certainly God's
image in that she shares a common human nature with the man; but
inasmuch as according to the Yahwist's creation account she was
created to be man's 'helper', she is not in herself and independently the
image of God. The man, on the other hand, is the image of God himself
and independently. Augustine consequently maintains first, that
2
Greg. Naz., Or. 31, n .
5
Augustine, Dt trinitate, XII c. 5. Also Thomas Aquinas, S.Th., I, q. 93 a.4. Cf. also
the comments of F. K. Mayr, 'Trinitatstheologie und theologische Anthropologie',
^rAA"68(1971), pp. 427-77.
TRINITARIAN PNEUMATOLOGY 291
likeness to God is a quality of soul, and is as such sexless; and second,
that the woman can only be viewed as God's image in subordination to
her head, the man.
Michael Schmaus considered that this was 'a profound and
ingenious solution' to the problem.4 But it is a solution that takes no
account of'the fellowship of the Holy Spirit'. Of course the image of the
primal 'nuclear' family of Adam, Eve and Seth is open to misunder-
standing; and the only evidence for it comes from the Priestly Document,
which shows no knowledge of the Fall. Nor can human likeness to
God be made dependent on family status. Yet the answer is not
individualism, for the anthropological triangle determines the
existence of every human being. Everyone is man or woman and the
child of his or her parents. Man and woman show the ingrained
sociality of human beings, while parents and child make clear their
equally essential generative nature. The first is human community in
space; the second, human community in time. If the whole, true
human being is made and meant to be the image of God, then this is
also true of the communtiy in which human beings are their whole and
veritable selves: the community of the sexes and the community
between the generations.
Augustine, however, reduced the likeness to God to the human soul.
The soul dominates the body in the same way that God dominates the
world. The soul is the best part of a human being, for it is higher and
nobler than the body, which it animates, dominates, and uses as its
instrument. The soul operates on the body, but the body does not
operate on the soul. The soul is the side of human beings which is
related to God: 'Nothing is mightier than that creation which we call
the reasonable soul', declared Augustine. 'If thou art in the soul thou
art in the centre: if thou lookest down, there is the body; if thou lookest
up, there is God.'5 Only the body-dominating soul is the likeness of
God (imago Dei). The subjected body shows merely traces of God
(vestigia Dei). Because in every individual person the soul is the subject,
every person, each for himself, is the image of God on earth. This is the
substance of Augustine's so-called 'psychological doctrine of the
Trinity': the human subject corresponds to the divine subject through
mind knowledge love. The analogy of the likeness to God is
IV
The Trinitarian Doctrine of the Scriptures: the Fulfilment of the
Scriptures in the Spirit
V
Trinitarian Doxology: the Fellowship of the Spirit 'with the Father and the Son'