Christian Theology: The Essential Questions I CHRIST, TRINITY, AND THE SPIRIT

Theology 2401, Academic Year 2011-12 Professor Mark McIntosh (module coordinator) and Dr Bernhard Nausner, with Professor Lewis Ayres, Durham University Department of Theology and Religion Mark A. McIntosh mark.mcintosh@durham.ac.uk Van Mildert Professor of Divinity, Canon Residentiary, Durham Cathedral Office hours: Mondays, 11:15am-12:15pm and other times by appointment. Dun Cow Cottage, Ground Floor Bernhard Nausner bernhard.nausner@durham.ac.uk Teaching Fellow, Department of Theology and Religion, Interfaith Tutor in Collingwood College Office hours: to be announced (please contact Dr Nausner via the email address above)
Course Content What are the essential questions and momentous debates that have shaped the history of Christian theology? This module immerses students in these fundamental ideas, not only to deepen critical understanding of them but to engage them creatively as case studies in the constructive tasks and methods of theological reflection. Students investigate the theological visions that have resourced chief developments in belief, led to adaptations in theological imagination and language, and engendered the spiritual and theological quest of faith in search of understanding. In order to advance students own skills in theological interpretation, the module will explore both the landmark thinkers who have defined the discussion of each topic, as well as key modern and contemporary developments in each question. Aims and Objectives The course aims: To present the landmark theological questions, ideas, debates, and figures that have shaped the history of Christian theology. To investigate the language, metaphors, conceptual schemes, and spiritual and metaphysical visions implicit in the theological task. To explore the varied range of approaches taken by very different theologians to similar theological questions, and to analyze the strengths and liabilities of each. This course is intended to help you: To analyze theological questions with intellectual sophistication, historical understanding, and a creative sense of the matters of religious belief at stake. To interpret and critically analyze the major approaches in Christian theology, with a nuanced ability to work creatively with multiple traditions and cultural assumptions. To develop a capacity to work constructively with the tools and methods of theological reflection. To refine skills in theological research, exposition, and the construction of large-scale theoretical claims.

2011-12 Class Programme at a Glance All lectures are held on Thursdays from 10-11am (i.e., 10:05-10:55am). Seminar groups meet as follows: Group 1: Thursday, 15:00-16:30; Group 2: Friday, 11am12:30pm; Group 3: Friday, 15:00-16:30 6 October Introductory Lecture: The Mysteries of Faith and the Theological Task (McIntosh)

PART I: CHRISTOLOGY
Ancient 13 October Recognizing the Divinity of Jesus Early Developments (Nausner) 20 October Towards Chalcedon Two Natures Christology and Hypostatic Union (Nausner) 27, 28 October Seminar on Cyril, Nestorius, and the Chalcedonian Definition Modern 3 November Christology from Below: Jesus Personal Unity with God (Nausner) 10 November Christology in the Light of Divine Transcendence: Kathryn Tanner (Nausner) 17, 18 November Seminar on Pannenberg and Tanner **Monday, 21 November: Formative Essay Due, 1pm, hard copy in Abbey House, and e-copy**

PART II: THE MYSTERY OF THE TRINITY Ancient 24 November Nicaea and Gregory of Nyssa (Ayres) 1 December The Trinitarian Theology of Augustine (Ayres) 8, 9 December Seminar on Nicaea, Gregory, and Augustine
Modern 19 January Karl Barth on the Trinity (McIntosh) 26 January Balthasar and the Thomist Revival (McIntosh) 2, 3 February Seminar on Barth, Balthasar, and McCabe

PART III: THE HOLY SPIRIT AND THE CHRISTIAN LIFE Ancient 9 February The Cappadocian Fathers (McIntosh) 16 February Pneumatology in Bonaventure and Aquinas (McIntosh)
**Friday, 17 February: Summative Essay Due 1pm, hard copy in Abbey House, and e-copy** 23, 24 February Seminar on Basil and Aquinas

Modern 1 March Trinitarian Indwelling and the Mystical Life: John of the Cross (McIntosh) 8 March Contemporary Eastern Orthodox Pneumatology: Dumitru Staniloae (McIntosh) 15, 16 March Seminar on John of the Cross and Staniloae ***26 April Revision Class***

Work Required 1. Completion of required reading before the lecture session for which it is assigned, and readiness to ask questions about the material in a thoughtful and well-considered manner. If you dont ask about what you dont understand, we wont know how to help you understand more clearly. 2. Preparation for seminar discussions of key questions and assigned texts. The primary sources assigned for each lecture are the same primary sources under discussion in the seminars. The questions listed under each seminar may be used as discussion topics during the seminar and also as questions to be answered in formative and summative essays. Students may not use the same topic or question for both the formative and the summative essay not only is this close to being re-submission of the same work but it degrades your own readiness for the final examination. 3. Regular attendance and informed participation at lectures and seminars. Poor attendance will adversely affect your final mark for the module. These are very challenging works to comprehend on your own, so your presence in class will be imperative: you will not do well on the formative and summative essays or the final exam if you do not attend class. The analytical interpretation and discussion of texts in class will prepare you to think constructively about these works for yourself, but only if you conscientiously practice these skills in class. Students will be expected to discuss with insight and balance all the works we are studying. All students may be called on, both in lectures and seminars, throughout the module to answer particular questions based on the readings and lectures and to propose cogent and well-substantiated responses. Note carefully: this is a research-led module, in other words, by far the largest portion of this module is in your own hands; the primary instructors of this module are the authors of the texts we will be reading, and if you intend to learn from them you will need to devote time and energy to reading their words, developing cogent interpretations, and pondering their implications for the tasks of theology. This means you really need to allow yourself time not simply to read the assigned texts, but to think patiently and creatively about them and in an important sense with them, to try out different ways of understanding them, and to explore the relevant secondary literature in order to deepen your interpretation. All these are crucial steps in the development of research. 4. Formative essay: you must submit one formative essay of 2,000 words by 1pm on Monday the Friday the 21st of November, 2011; the essay must be submitted in two forms: one hardcopy in the second year essay box in Abbey House, and one electronic copy as per instructions on DUO. The formative essay will give you experience of preparing for and responding to the sorts of questions likely to be encountered in the summative essay and the final exam paper. **** KEY TO THIS MODULE: Both formative and summative essays, as well as the final examination, will measure your skills in three crucial tasks: a. reading the PRIMARY SOURCES with insight, informed by relevant secondary literature, b. offering nuanced INTERPRETATIONS of crucial passages from the primary sources in order to show how they may be seen as evidence supporting a particular claim,

c. organizing your evidence drawn from the primary sources into a cogent and convincing argument that aims to prove or demonstrate a very precise and definite CLAIM. See McIntosh document on duo regarding how to write an essay. KEY TO THIS MODULE *** 5. Summative essay: you must submit one summative essay, with a maximum length of 3,000 words by 1pm on Friday the 17th of February 2012; the essay must be submitted in two forms: one hardcopy in the second year essay box in Abbey House, and one electronic copy as per instructions on DUO. This essay is worth 25% of your assessment for the module. 6. One assessed final exam covering the readings, lectures, and seminar discussions for the entire year's module. This exam counts for 75% of your final mark for this module. The exam paper, of three hour's duration, will ask you to analyze and interpret four gobbets chosen from the assigned primary source readings for fifteen minutes each (one hour), and to write two essays for one hour each. You will be given a choice of gobbets and of essays. A sample or specimen exam paper for this module is included in this handbook (i.e., these will not be the gobbets or questions on the actual final exam but will give a clear indication of what may expected).

Academic Integrity: Please read carefully the material on plagiarism in the Department Handbook. These guidelines are, it scarcely needs saying, in effect for this course. Personal honesty is the foundation for all scholarship. If we as an academic community cannot trust one another then we soon come to believe that one anothers ideas are not the honest results of the difficult search for truth but merely mendacious bids for unmerited advancement. For this reason, plagiarism or academic dishonesty (including, of course, on exams) in any form whatsoever including the use of any material or ideas found on the internet, or provided by family members or friends, without appropriate citation and attribution (see the University guidelines and tutorial for a detailed description) may result, at minimum, in a failing mark for this entire module.

Reading Schedule Be sure to read the texts assigned for each class prior to class so that you will be able to follow the lecture and discussion, ask informed questions, and make insightful contributions. The precise reading assignments for each work are stated below but changes may always be announced in class (all page references refer to the particular edition made available to you on DUO). Note on Readings All primary source readings will be available on DUO; you should print out these texts, read them before the lectures keyed to these texts, and bring them with you to the lectures and seminars along with your questions about passages you find difficult or that you wish to discuss. Discussion of these texts in your seminars will be your best way of preparing to analyse them on the Final Examination. For suggested ancillary (secondary) reading both in terms of general one-volume introductions to Theology and for particular subjects, see the separate bibliography prepared for this module available on DUO. A few secondary sources are also mentioned below in relation to each unit.

Michaelmas Term PART I: THE IDENTITY OF JESUS CHRIST

Lecture 1: Recognizing the Divinity of Jesus Early Developments Reading: Extracts from Tertullian, Eusebius, Athanasius, Theodore of Mopsuestia in Maurice Wiles and Mark Santer (eds.), Documents in Early Christian Thought (Cambridge: CUP, 1977), pp. 43-61. Lecture 2: Towards Chalcedon Two Natures Christology and Hypostatic Union Reading: Nestorius (Sermon 1), Cyril, (Letter 2), Cyril (Letter to John of Antioch). Seminar: Nestorius vs. Cyril and the Christological definition of Chalcedon. Discussion topics/essay questions: (remember that all responses MUST be grounded in evidence from the primary texts, ideally supported by secondary literature) 1. Would it be best to describe the Chalcedonian Definition as a compromise, a paradox, or a necessary framework for approaching a mystery? Be sure to give reasons for your answer that grow out of evidence that you find and interpret in the relevant primary sources. 2. What are the chief differences and similarities between the views of Athanasius and Cyril? In what ways, if any, might one see continuities of thought between these thinkers? What are their priorities in teaching about Christ, and why are those facets so important to them? 3. What was really at issue in the argument between Cyril and Nestorius? What was each thinker most concerned to teach about Jesus, and why? 4. As you analyse the developing patterns of Christology in the first five centuries of the Christian era, what views about Christ and understandings of the incarnation seem to be most wide-spread and enduring, and what views are most broadly found to be objectionable? 5. It might be argued that the theology of the hypostatic union was the single most important development in the first 500 years of Christian theology. Drawing on the texts from Cyril and the Chalcedonian Definition, explain the theology of the hypostatic union, and why it might be considered so important a contribution to Christian teaching about both God and humanity. Background reading for Classical Christology: J.N.D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines; Basil Studer, Trinity and Incarnation: The Faith of the Early Church; Robert Wilken, The Spirit of Early Christian Thought: Seeking the Face of God (Yale, 2005).

Lecture 3: Christology from Below: Jesus Personal Unity with God Reading: Extracts from Wolfhart Pannenberg, Jesus God and Man (London: SCM Press, [1968] 2002), pp. 319-24; 361-68 / 369-73; 376-88; 391-94; 400; 405-8; 414-18. Lecture 4: Christology revisited through a radical interpretation of divine transcendence and non-competitive relations Reading: Kathryn Tanner, Jesus, Humanity and the Trinity (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2001), chapter 1, pp. 1-33.

Seminar: Pannenberg, Tanner, and Modern Concern for the Humanity of Christ Discussion topics/essay questions: (remember that all responses MUST be grounded in evidence from the primary texts, ideally supported by secondary literature) 1. Do Pannenberg and Tanner move beyond Chalcedon, or do they recover central aims of the Definition in a new way? How and why so for each thinker? 2. The mystery of Jesus is, like all mysteries, the mystery of what God means (Herbert McCabe, God Matters, p. 57). How would either Pannenberg or Tanner understand this statement, and in what sense would either of them agree or disagree? 3. How would either Pannenberg or Tanner respond to the (theologically erroneous but sadly widespread view) that if someone is human, then he or she cant also be divine? 4. What are the key points of difference between the Christological views of Pannenberg and Tanner, and in what ways do you see these views related to other elements in their thought? Background reading for modern Christology: Stephen T. Davis, editor, et al. The Incarnation: An Interdisciplinary Symposium on the Incarnation of the Son of God; Veli-Matti Karkkainen, Christology: A Global Introduction; Roch Kereszty, Jesus Christ: Fundamentals of Christology; John Macquarrie, Jesus Christ in Modern Thought; Mark McIntosh, Mystical Theology: The Integrity of Spirituality and Theology. Blackwell, 1998. Chap. 6, The Hiddenness of God and the Self-Understanding of Jesus; Alan Spence, Christology: A Guide for the Perplexed.

PART II: THE MYSTERY OF THE TRINITY

Lecture 5: Classical Trinitarian Theology: Reading: The Nicene Creed; Gregory of Nyssa, Catechetical Oration (selection). Lecture 6: Classical Trinitarian Theology: Reading: Augustine, Tractate 39 on John, On the Trinity Book 15 (selection). Seminar on material of November Lectures 5 & 6 Discussion topics/essay questions: (remember that all responses MUST be grounded in evidence from the primary texts, ideally supported by secondary literature) 1. What is the role of the Father in classical Trinitarian doctrine? 2. Do the descriptions of the Trinity that you have read describe a hierarchically ordered divine sequence or a communion of equals? 3. How far do these texts maintain a balance between describing the divine existence and emphasizing that God's existence is beyond our grasp? 4. Analyse, by comparison, the teachings of Gregory of Nyssa and Augustine on the Trinity. Background (Secondary Literature) Reading for classical Trinitarian Theology: L. Ayres, The Grammar of Augustines Trinitarian theology, in Robert Dodaro & George Lawless (eds.), Augustine and his Critics (London & New York: Routledge, 1999), 56-71; L. Ayres, Augustine, Christology and God as Love: An Introduction to the Homilies on 1 John, Kevin Vanhoozer (ed.)

Nothing Greater, Nothing Better: Theological Essays on the Love of God (Grand Rapids MI: Eerdmans, 2001), 67-93; also Wilken, passim.

Epiphany Term
Lecture 7: Modern Trinitarian Theology: Reading: Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics, Vol. 1/1 The Doctrine of the Word of God Part One, pp. 295-333 (2nd ed., of the English Translation, 1975). Lecture 8: Modern Trinitarian Theology: Hans Urs von Balthasar, Theo-Drama, vol. IV, The Action, Part III, C, 1 (The Cross and the Trinity), pp. 317-332. and Prayer, pp. 36-63. Seminar on material of Lectures 7 and 8. Discussion topics/essay questions: (remember that all responses MUST be grounded in evidence from the primary texts, ideally supported by secondary literature) 1. God reveals himself: explain what this statement means in the theology of Karl Barth and how it relates to his understanding of the Trinity? 2. What elements might Barth criticize in the theology of Balthasar, and vice versa? 3. Draw on any two of our authors in this unit (i.e., Barth, Balthasar, and McCabe) to explain how the doctrine of the Trinity and the doctrine of salvation are most intelligible in the light of each other. In other words, in what sense could we say that the the doctrine of the Trinity is a way of understanding salvation, or that the doctrine of salvation is an account of the Trinity? 4. Draw on any two of our authors in this unit to answer the question, What does it mean to pray? with theological insight and creativity. Background reading for modern Trinitarian theology: Edmund J. Fortman, The Triune God: A Historical Study of the Doctrine of the Trinity; Mark McIntosh, Divine Teaching: An Introduction to Christian Theology, Chap. 6, Divine Life: Trinity, Incarnation, and the Breathing of the Spirit; Mark McIntosh, Mystical Theology: The Integrity of Spirituality and Theology, Chap. 5, Trinitarian Self-Abandon and the Problem of Divine Suffering; Angelo Scola, Hans Urs Von Balthasar: A Theological Style; John Webster, editor, The Cambridge Companion to Karl Barth. AND Herbert McCabe, O.P., God Still Matters, chap. 4 Aquinas on the Trinity and chap. 5 The Trinity

PART III: THE HOLY SPIRIT AND THE CHRISTIAN LIFE

Lecture 9: Classical Pneumatology and the Christian Life: Reading: Basil, On the Holy Spirit (selection). Lecture 10: Classical Pneumatology and the Christian Life: Reading: Thomas Aquinas, Summa theologiae, First Part, Questions 36-38, 43, in St Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, vol. 7 Father, Son and Holy Ghost, trans, T. C. OBrien, 1976;

Cambridge reprint. 2006; pp. 51-97, 209-237. Seminar on material of Lectures 9 and 10 Discussion topics/essay questions: (remember that all responses MUST be grounded in evidence from the primary texts, ideally supported by secondary literature) 1. What aspects of the teaching of Thomas Aquinas on the Holy Spirit seem to be a development of Basils views, and in what respects a divergence from Basil or even a rejection? 2. How does Thomas understand the relation of the Spirit to the Father and to the Son? 3. Compare and contrast the teachings of Basil and Thomas on the role of the Spirit in the life of creation, the Christian community, or the individual human person? 4. What could it mean, according to Basil and Thomas, to say that the Spirit is the giver of life (Nicene Creed)? Background reading for classical Pneumatology: Denis Edwards, Breath of Life: A Theology of

the Creator Spirit, chap. 2 Basil on the Holy Spirit; Declan Marmion and Rik Van
Nieuwenhove, An Introduction to the Trinity (Cambridge, 2011), chaps. 3 & 4; John Anthony McGuckin, The Trinity in the Greek Fathers, chap. 4 in the Cambridge Companion to the Trinity, edited by Peter C. Phan; Jean-Pierre Torrell, Saint Thomas Aquinas, vol.2, Spiritual Master, trans. Robert Royal, chap. VII To Speak of the Holy Spirit.

Lecture 11: Modern Pneumatology and the Christian Life: John of the Cross, The Living Flame of Love, selections in John of the Cross: Selected Writings, ed. K. Kavanagh, Classics of Western Spirituality series, pp. 292-316. Lecture 12: Modern Pneumatology and the Christian Life: Dumitru Staniloae, The Experience of God, translated and edited by I. Ionita and R. Barringer, chap. 10 The Holy Trinity: Structure of Supreme Love, pp. 245-278. Seminar on material of Lectures 11 and 12 Discussion topics/essay questions: (remember that all responses MUST be grounded in evidence from the primary texts, ideally supported by secondary literature) 1. How does John of the Cross understand the role of the Holy Spirit in the human journey towards God? 2. Compare the views of Staniloae with those of any other single thinker whose (primary source) texts we have studied in this module. What, if anything, strikes you as perhaps particularly expressive of Eastern Orthodoxy in Staniloae? 3. Draw insightfully on the views of John and Staniloae to explain the relationship between Trinitarian thought and theological epistemology (i.e., a theological understanding of how human beings know and think). 4. According to John and Staniloae, what might it mean to say that the Spirit makes Christ known?

Background reading for modern Pneumatology: Yves Congar, I Believe in the Holy Spirit; VeliMatti Karkkainen, Pneumatology: The Holy Spirit in Ecumenical, International, and Contextual Perspective; Iain Matthew, The Impact of God: Soundings from St. John of The Cross.; Declan Marmion and Rik Van Nieuwenhove, An Introduction to the Trinity, chaps. 5 & 6.

*****

Christian Theology: Essential Questions 1 SAMPLE Final Examination Time allowed: Three hours Examination material provided: None Additional Materials Permitted: None Instructions: Comment on FOUR quotations from Part A; Answer TWO questions from Part B. PART A Part A: Comment on any FOUR of the following. a) Now the great and holy synod stated that the unique Son himself-naturally begotten out of God the Father, true God out of true God - descended, was enfleshed, became human, rose on the third day, and ascended into heavanwe say that while the natures which were brought together into a true unity were different, there is nevertheless, because of the inseparable and unutterable convergence into unity, one Christ and one Son out of two It is not that the Logos of God suffered in his own nature Since, however, the body that had become his own underwent suffering, he is said to have suffered these things for our sakes, for the impassible one was within the suffering body. (Cyril of Alexandria, Second Letter to Nestorius) b) Thus, Jesus, to all appearances and as far as any metaphysical inquiry can tell, weeps and feels terror before death just as any human would: what is odd is the way Jesus overcomes these anxieties and fears for example, the way he nevertheless conforms his will to the Fathers as the Fathers own Son would and the saving consequences of such acts Jesus overcomes our weeping and terror by weeping and being terrified. Tanner, Jesus, Humanity and the Trinity c) In humanity we observe a certain power and life and wisdom. But, by using the same words, nobody would attribute to God the same life, power, and wisdom [as ours]. If then we attribute the spoken word to God it will not be thought to derive its subsistence from the impulse of the speaker, and like our speech to pass into non-existence. But, just as our nature, by being perishable, has a speech which is perishable, so the incorruptible and eternal nature has a speech which is eternal and substantial in just the same way we shall be brought to the conception of the Spirit, by observing in our own nature certain hints and likenesses of this ineffable power when we learn that God has a Spirit, which accompanies his Word and manifests his activity, we do not think of it as an emission of breath.. on the contrary we think of its as a power really existing by itself and in its own special subsistence. (Gregory of Nyssa, Catechetical Oration).

d) It is the drama of the emptying of the Fathers heart, in the generation of the Son, that contains and surpasses all possible drama between God and a world. For any world only has its place within that distinction between Father and Son that is maintained and bridged by the Holy Spirit. The drama of the Trinity lasts forever: the Father was never without the Son, nor were Father and Son ever without the Spirit. Everything temporal takes place within the embrace of the eternal action and as its consequence. (Hans Urs von Balthasar, Theo-Drama IV) e) The obedience of Jesus is the projection [onto our world] of his eternal sonship, and the outpouring of the Spirit is the projection of his eternal procession from the Father through the son. It is because of these missions in time that the life of the Trinity becomes available to us: I mean both in the sense that we know of it, believe in it, and in the sense that we belong to it. These are of course the same thing. (Herbert McCabe, Aquinas on the Trinity, in God Still Matters. f) Because the soul in this gift to God offers Him the Holy Spirit, with voluntary surrender, as something of its own (so that God loves Himself in the Holy Spirit as He deserves), it enjoys inestimable delight and fruition, seeing that it gives God something of its own which is suited to Him according to His infinite being. Although it is true that the soul cannot give God again to Himself, since in Himself He is ever Himself, nevertheless it does this truly and perfectly, giving all that was given it by Him in order to repay love, which is to repay as much as is given. (John of the Cross, The Living Flame of Love) PART B Part B: Essays Answer TWO, drawing insightfully on concrete specifics from the primary texts or authors we have studied this year as the substance of your argument. Avoid generalizations at all costs, especially any that you cannot support with evidence from the texts. 1. God was in Christ (2Cor. 5.19). How would a Trinitarian Christian who held to the Councils of Nicaea, Constantinople and Chalcedon explain what this phrase meant and means? 2. Analyze the thought of any three of our authors this year on the question of what it could mean to say that, according to Christian belief, there is one God in three persons. 3. How do John of the Cross and Dumitru Staniloae understand the role of the Holy Spirit in the life of God and in the life of believers? 4. Compare the theological principles and methodological priorities of any one of our ancient authors with those of any one of our modern authors. END OF EXAMINATION * * * * A more extensive bibliography of resources for this module is available on DUO under Course Documents titled Module Bibliography. For each of the three units of the module (Christology, Trinity, and Pneumatology), it provides both classical and modern primary and secondary sources, as well as both historical and systematic introductions.

10