Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T00:11:44.516Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

John Owen and Trinitarian Agency*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 February 2009

Alan Spence
Alan Spence
Affiliation:
University of Zimbabwe48 Glengarry Road Highlands Harare
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

As a faithful young Puritan minister John Owen used to visit his people in the parish of Fordham teaching both adults and children the basic doctrines of Protestantism from two catechisms which he himself composed. In the larger one it is asked: Do we know God as he is? The answer is: No; his glorious being is not of us, in this life, to be comprehended. The same concern is apparent at the end of the section on the Trinity. Question: Can we conceive these things as they are in themselves? Answer: Neither we nor yet the angels of heaven are able to dive into these secrets, as they are internally in God; but in respect of the outward dispensation of themselves to us by creation, redemption, and sanctification, a knowledge may be obtained of these things, saving and heavenly.

Type
Research Article
Information
Scottish Journal of Theology , Volume 43 , Issue 2 , May 1990 , pp. 157 - 173
Copyright
Copyright © Scottish Journal of Theology Ltd 1990

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Toon, Peter, God's Statesman: The Life and Work of John Owen. Exeter, The Paternoster Press, 1971, pp. 17ff.Google Scholar

2 Owen, John, The Works of John Owen, DD., Ed. by Goold, William H., 24 vols., London and EdinburghJohnstone & Hunter, 1850–1855Google Scholar; Edinburgh, T. & T. Clark, 1862; 16 vols., London, The Banner of Truth Trust, 1965–1968; vols. 18–24 have recently been reprinted as An Exposition of the Epistle to the Hebrews, 7 vols., Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1980. I p. 471Google Scholar. (All further references are to The Works unless otherwise indicated.)

3 I p. 473.

4 I p.45.

5 I p. 66.

6 III p. 38.

7 I p. 67.

8 I p. 65.

9 XX p. 99.

10 I p. 69.

11 I p. 65.

12 III p. 158.

13 III p. 158.

14 I p. 69.

15 II p. 377.

16 II p. 380.

17 II pp. 406ff.

18 II p. 407.

19 II p. 407.

20 The Cappadocians used, but were not confined by, the Aristotelian analysis of substance to describe the relation of person to essence in the Trinity. ‘The distinction between ousia and hypostasis is the same as that between the general and the particular; as, for instance, between the animal and the particular man.’ (Basil ep. 236 6, p. 278, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, second series vol. 8, 1978). However, the fact that the essence was seen as a numerical and not just a generic unity meant that the Aristotelian framework was itself inadequate and needed to be supplemented with other models. One of these was the conception of the divine persons as ‘so many ways in which the one indivisible divine substance distributes and presents itself in various ‘modes of coming to be’ (Kelly, , Early Christian Doctrina, 1977, p. 266Google Scholar). Owen's definition is indebted to the Cappadocians for both of these concepts.

21 II p. 407.

22 II p. 407.

23 Mackey, James in The Christian experience of God as Trinity SCM Press Ltd., 1983, shows how the principle was developed by both the Cappadocians and Augustine (pp. 142–163).Google Scholar

24 III p. 93.

25 III p. 162.

26 III p. 162.

27 William J. Hill, The Three-personed God, Washington, D.C., The Catholic University Press, 1982, p. 283.

28 III p. 93.

29 III p. 94.

30 III p. 67.

31 III p. 67.

32 III p. 201.

33 III p. 69.

34 I p. 225.

35 III p. 160.

36 III p. 94.

37 John, of Damascus, , Exposition of the Orthodox Faith, ch. x, p. 12Google Scholar, The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, second series vol. 9, 1976.

38 Ibid pp. 12ff.

39 III p. 198.

40 Mackey op. cit, pp. 149–152.

41 Egan, G. A., The Armenian version of the letters of Athanasius to Bishop Serapion concerning the Holy Spirit 3, 5 p. 205Google Scholar, (Studies and Documents 37), Salt Lake City, 1968.Google Scholar

42 Basil, , de Spiritu Sancto xvi 37, p. 23Google Scholar, The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, second series vol. 8, 1978.

43 Ibid., xvi 39, p. 25.

44 Gregory, of Nazianzen, , Orations xxxi 27, p. 327Google Scholar, The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, second series vol. 7, 1983.

45 Basil, , Letters, ep. 189 6, p. 231Google Scholar, The Nicene and Pos-Nicene Fathers, second series vol. 8, 1978.

46 Augustine, , On the Trinity, I iv (7), p. 20Google Scholar, The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, first series vol. 3, 1980.

47 Ibid., II x (18) pp. 60ff.

48 Ibid., II x (18) p. 61.

49 Ibid., II v(9) p. 50.

50 Barth, Karl, Church Dogmatics, vol. IV/1, Ed. by Bromiley, G. W. & Torrance, T. F., E.T. by Bromiley, G. W., Edinburgh, T. & T. Clark, 1985, p. 65.Google Scholar

51 Basil, op. cit., ep. 234 1, p. 274.