Trinity concepts since the Reformation

by koot van wyk (DLitt et Phil; ThD)

Kyungpook National University

Sangju Campus

South Korea

conjoint lecturer of Avondale College

Australia

11 October 2009

Adventism worked with the concept of a trinity since its inception. Some of its leaders came from other denominational backgrounds where the Trinity was not part of their doctrinal view, but Ellen White, as early as 1858 in Spiritual Gifts IV gave definitely indication that she believed in a Trinity. Her husband, James White would also write an article in Review and Herald  in 1877 pointing out that Jesus is equal with God. For a comprehensive treatment of the development of concepts regarding the Trinity with some leaders of the Advent movement, one should read the work of Eric Webster, Crosscurrents in Adventist Christology (Andrews University Press, 1984/1992), 32-47.

Since Adventism came out of protestantism and since much of their theological jargon is tied up with the legacy, all aspects of progressive protestantism (in the sense of a development in theology of the Bible using strictly biblical concepts as opposed to speculative and philosophical systems from the outside) like the Sanctuary Theology in Soteriology (the way of salvation science), should be seen in that light.

What is of interest in this writing is the development if any of the concept of the trinity in protestantism since the Reformation.

Our source for this section is the seminal work of the Calvinist Dutch Reform systematic theologian, J. J. F. Durand, Die Lewende God: Wegwysers in die Dogmatiek (Pretoria: N. G. Kerkboekhandel, 1976).

Durand treated in separate chapters the concept of the trinity in Patristics and the Middle Ages ending with Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274).

Making a separation between God in His being and God in his Revelation (since Augustine in the fourth century BCE) the Middle Ages was characterized for its focus and emphasis of God in His being. The trinity was explained with a focus on the "God in Himself" with lots of speculative and philosophical explanations, which was a manmade system created outside the Scriptures divorced from the role of salvation in all of this.

As Adventists we are all familiar with the focus and emphasis of Ellen White in her book Great Controversy 1889 on the pietistic, spiritual, devotional and scriptural roles that Luther and Calvin and others played during the Reformation. They were pure, undiluted in their endeavorings despite some incomplete aspects. She says nothing of Orthodoxy afterwards or no specific name was singled out. Durand (1976) did all that in the same way as Ellen White but from a non-SDA perspective. After the diluted truths (speculative, he calls them) of the Middle Ages, Durand moves into the Reformation showing that the Trinity was considered in a pure scriptural way by Luther and Calvin. Luther was slightly speculative but abide finally with the Scriptural stance. Calvin refused to be drawn into speculations regarding God and His being. Calvin is just interested in the scriptural "that" of the Trinity not the speculative "how". Then Durand jumped over Orthodoxy as being speculative (even in his own Calvinistic tradition) and arrive at Bavinck in the times of Ellen White, that was more scriptural and less speculative.

Reformation following Scholasticism

Durand indicates that the Reformation was in essence a protest against the metaphysics of the Middle Ages, a protest against human's own attempt to climb up out of the known reality to God and to speculate thus about His being in Himself (Durand 1976: 25). For the Reformers this theological speculation placed the Revelation of God (as in Scripture) to test, against the God in Himself (actual God) stands the God of Revelation (unactuality). In stead of Scholastics focus on Deus apud se, the Reformers discussed the Trinity with the paradigm of Deus erga nos.

Luther

Luther considered the speculation of the Middle Ages as theologia gloriae and he sees this as an attempt of man to come to the "naked" knowledge of God in his absolute majesty. Humans cannot see the light of God's majesty, therefore He revealed Himself covered with flesh. God made Himself concrete and humanize Himself so that humans do not have a vague, indefinite God (Deus vagus). Whoever is looking for God outside Christ will not even find Him in heaven (Durand 1976: 25). That means that theology can only find God to its back (posterior) through the suffering and cross of Christ. Against the Middle Age concept of the Trinity through the spectacles of theologia gloriae, Luther suggested theologia crucis (theology of the cross).

Luther drew a distinction between the Deus absconditus (hidden God) and the Deus revelatus (revealed God). It is not a contrast for Luther between hidden and revealed God. He does not mean that God is hidden behind His revelation but that God, despite His revelation remains hidden in His revelation. It is in this sense that the way of revelation does not satisfied that which we as humans expect. God reveals Himself to his counterpart (sub contraria specie) in the foreign work (opus aleinum) of the cross and wrath, since God wants to be approached only by faith. Faith discovers in the hidden God the revealed God, in God's foreign work His true work (opus proprium) of forgiveness, grace and love.

Luther does not work with a scheme of that static God but the acting God.

Luther also mentioned aspects like almighty, goodness, wisdom and perfection but these aspects are not retrieved from a creation-doctrine or predestination-doctrine. It is a confession of faith that is rooted in the actions of Christ. It is love and wrath is the shadow of the being of God.

Does this mean that God is now the revealed God and can be calculated? The secret of God for Luther is not cancelled by the revelation. This God Who reveals Himself, stays in an unapproachable light. This fact, does not mean that we cannot trust the revealed God of Scripture, we can cling to it. "Who speculates over the hidden God, start to doubt and who doubts does not believe and who does not believe, will be lost" (Durand 1976: 26).

Calvin

It is true that the break with scholastic terminology is not so prevalent with Calvin as with Luther, but he also reject any metaphysical speculation about the being of God (Durand 1976: 26).

Calvin agrees that each person is born with a kind of inherent realization of God and that God reveals Himself as Creator to all people, but he does not want to make this knowledge of God so independent that one can build a rational speculative image of God from it. Due to sin, man needs Scripture to come to a true understanding of God. Sin has clouded the revelation of God in creation to such an extend that man needs the glasses of the leading and teaching of Scripture (scriptura duce et magistra) (Durand 1976: 27). In both the Old and New Testaments the revelation of God in Christ is important. Calvin sees faith as very important since the Word/Bible is the mirror in which faith can see God. Faith is not about empty or flying speculations about God in Himself, but about His value for us as He is towards us (Calvin Institutes I, 10, 2; III, 2,6). God is in His revelation as Deus erga nos, love. Scholastics focussed on Deus apud se in the contrary.

Similarly to Luther, Calvin did not let God become only the revelation. He knows of a hiddenness of God despite His revelation (Durand 1976: 27).

In God there are not two wills (Calvin Institutes I, 18, 3; III, 24, 17). There is a hidden righteousness of God that no-one yet has seen or know of but that does not conflict with the revealed will of God. The eschatological expectation does not reduce the veracity of God in the self-revelation, in fact it establish it (Durand 1976: 27).

It is especially Luther and Calvin's dealing with the Trinity that reveals their conviction that the being of God is not separated from His revelation.

Luther and Calvin, like Augustine felt that the trinity of God's revelation actions are only possible if God is in being the Trinity.

Luther and Calvin differ slightly on their dealing with the topic of the Trinity secret. Luther does not cancel slight speculation to answer wrong speculation during the Middle Ages. At one time he invented new analogies despite the Augustinian and scholastic psychological trinitarian doctrines.

Calvin demonstrates in his Institutes that he is against speculation. He is uncomfortable with the analogies (Calvin Institutes I, 13, 18) and chose to find the Trinitarian God nowhere else but His Scripture (Calvin Institutes I, 13, 21).

Although Calvin is willing to accept the personal distinctions of Father, Son and Spirit to indicate relations within the Trinity, he considers any attempt to explain these relationships as a fake based on speculations that are not realistic (Calvin Institutes I, 13, 19).

Calvin is willing to give up such expression as person and being as long as the faith stands that the Father and Son and Spirit is one God and that the Son is not the Father and the Spirit is not the Son, but that each one is separated by a certain independency. He does not want to discuss these concepts and is prepared to use the word person if it express the idea of independency (hypostasis).

Calvin was thus not willing, like scholastics to attempt to explain how in one being there can be three persons. "Here he [Calvin] kept strictly to God's revealed actions" (Durand 1976: 28).

It is very clear for Calvin that it is not the Father who came to earth, but He that came from the Father; that it is not the Father who died and was resurrected but He who was sent by the Father; and that this distinction did not originate with the incarnation since He was the Only Born on the lap of the Father. Of the Spirit it is said that He went from the Father and Christ called Him the other Comforter who would be sent by Him (Calvin Institutes I, 13, 17). "In this way Calvin maintained the undivisable unity of the being- and revelation-trinity but indicate that the being-trinity can be approached only out of the revelation-trinity" (Durand 1976: 29).

The trinity doctrine of Calvin is not an addendum to his actual Doctrine of God, it is an integral part of it and of his whole theology. Calvin said that if we do not "cling to the Trinity, there is only flying in our minds a senseless name of God without the true God" (Calvin Institutes I, 13, 2). 

Luther maintained that we get to know the eternal Trinity only in His revelation and therefore we need to keep to the declarations of Scripture (Durand 1976: 30). Luther brought in the analogy of movement to explain the Trinity. This is an addition to the psychological analogies. He argued that in all creatures there is movement without a change in their being. So the Father, Son and Spirit is in eternal movement without a change in their being. As opposed the Trinity concept of Thomas Aquinas in scholastics that focussed on the resting being of God as it is revealed in the speculative analysis of human understanding and psychology, Luther focussed on the activity of God in history and revelation (Durand 1976: 30).

In this way, the Reformation was a protest against the theology of God in Himself (being Trinity only concepts).

Durand, similarly to Ellen White's treatment of Reformation History in the Great Controversy, indicated that orthodoxy after Luther and Calvin "unfortunately" (Durand 1976: 30) introduced again speculative metaphysical concepts of the Middle Ages.

The Trinity concepts of Adventism and also of Ellen White were not interested in any form of speculation as was operative during the Middle Ages. Ellen White does not write as if the Trinity does not exist and neither is there a in depth analysis with speculative jargon of how they operate. The Trinity in Adventism is a fact because it is Scriptural, taking the Old and New Testaments as a whole. One speaks about them from the Scripture and as far as the text information goes. God gave us a Mercedes Benz for our benefit but He does not expect us to open the engine to see the technicalities.

End item