I have seen that earlier Church fathers such as Tertullian and Origen - among others - were subordinationists. Why are they correct/wrong? I appreciate both biblical and logic arguments.
4
-
Where have you seen evidence to suggest that Tertullian and Origen were subordinationists? What research have you already done?– LesleyCommented Jun 19 at 15:26
-
@Lesley I read Origen and it is quite clear. For example he says: "the Son, being less than the father, is superior to rational creatures alone (for he is second to the father); the holy spirit is still less, and dwells within the saints alone". I haven't yet read Tertullian, but Wikipedia says he is known for being one, so I will just take their word - "[S]ome of his teachings, such as the subordination of the Son and Spirit to the Father, were later rejected by the Church". It is possible, however, that he was just an economic subordinationist.– dimoCommented Jun 19 at 15:32
-
1Thank you, dimo. It's just that you didn't produce any information at all to show the basis for your question. I see information from the answer given by Anne that Origen believed in subordinationism.– LesleyCommented Jun 19 at 15:54
-
Questions on this site can only ask about one side of a debate like this. A second question can be asked about the other side.– curiousdannii ♦Commented Jun 21 at 23:14
Add a comment
|
2 Answers
A scholarly book I have which deals with theology from the earliest days of Christianity has a little to say about this, so I hope this extract will contribute towards the start of an answer.
"In this more Greco-Roman environment, challenges to Christ's full deity owed more to philosophical objections than to any defense of Jewish monotheism. "One" is the favorite number in Greek philosophy, so it was unimaginable that the ultimate reality might be three. Problems with Christ's deity were really problems with the Trinity, and vice versa. It has been argued that this tendency was already present in Origen of Alexandria (184-253), who emphasized the sole monarchy of the Father. Origen did teach that the Son was subordinate to the Father not only economically (that is, in his state of humiliation as the incarnate Lord), which the orthodox also affirmed, but ontologically (in his essence). This heresy is identified as Subordinationism." Pilgrim Theology, Michael Horton, p.178, Zondervan
The book gives a helpful table on the spectrum of Christological heresies (p. 183), putting Subordinationism in the same column as Ebionitism, Adoptionisn & Arianism / Semi-Arianism. But of note is the absence of Tertulian in any of that, though Origen is certainly identified with Subordinationism.
Another table (p. 102) puts together Modalism (founder, Sabellius - a thrid-century Roman presbyter) and Subordinationism. It says that later proponents included Origen and Eusebius, but no mention is made of Tertullian.
Indeed, Tertulian was an orthodox Trinitarian - God is one in essence, three in persons. His name should really be removed from any link to Subordinationism.
The question of what arguments can be made both for and against Subordinationism - even if limited to ontologically (as, economically, there is little disagreement) - would require a huge input of quotations / reasoning. Entire chapters in books have been devoted to this! Therefore, my answer will go this far, and no further.
-
In his rebuttal of Praxeas, Tertullian said the following: Tertius enim est spiritus a Deo et Filio - Now the Spirit indeed is third from God and the Son - From these words, one can deduce that Tertullian was an advocate of a hierarchical system in the Trinity, with the Father as the source and the Son and Holy Spirit as his emanations, being second and third - TERTULLIANI ADVERSUS PRAXEAN LIBER - scielo.org.za/…. Commented Jun 19 at 14:22
-
1@JsWitness Calvin studied the ancient works from which you quote, saying that Tertullian "contends against Praxeas that although God is distinguished into three persons, yet this does not make more than one God, nor is his unity sundered. And because according to Praxeas' fabricatrion Christ could not be God without being the same as the Father, he therefore toils mightily over this distinction." (Institutes Vol1 chap. X111 p.157 in ed. by John T McNeill, Westminster) Tertullian coined the Latin 'trinitas' from which we get the word 'trinity'. It's in ch. 2 Against Praxeas, 3:598– AnneCommented Jun 19 at 15:30
Tertulian: Fathers of the Third Century: Tertullian, Part Fourth
Chapter II.—On Christ. Point 1.
In the first place, we must note that the nature of that deity which is in Christ in respect246 of His being the only-begotten Son of God is one thing, and that human nature which He assumed in these last times for the purposes of the dispensation (of grace) is another. And therefore we have first to ascertain what the only-begotten Son of God is, seeing He is called by many different names, according to the circumstances and views of individuals. For He is termed Wisdom, according to the expression of Solomon: (Prov 5:22-25) “The Lord created me—the beginning of His ways, and among His works, before He made any other thing; He founded me before the ages. In the beginning, before He formed the earth, before He brought forth the fountains of waters, before the mountains were made strong, before all the hills, He brought me forth.”
Point 4. [...]
But it is monstrous and unlawful to compare God the Father, in the generation of His only-begotten Son, and in the substance of the same, to any man or other living thing engaged in such an act; for we must of necessity hold that there is something exceptional and worthy of God which does not admit of any comparison at all, not merely in things, but which cannot even be conceived by thought or discovered by perception, so that a human mind should be able to apprehend how the unbegotten God is made the Father of the only-begotten Son. Because His generation is as eternal and everlasting as the brilliancy which is produced from the sun. For it is not by receiving the breath of life that He is made a Son, by any outward act, but by His own nature.
Origen. Commentary on John
Book II
6. HOW THE WORD IS THE MAKER OF ALL THINGS, AND EVEN THE HOLY SPIRIT WAS MADE THROUGH HIM.
Now if, as we have seen, all things were made through Him, we have to enquire if the Holy Spirit also was made through Him. it appears to me that those who hold the Holy Spirit to be created, and who also admit that "all things were made through Him," must necessarily assume that the Holy Spirit was made through the Logos, the Logos accordingly being older than He. And he who shrinks from allowing the Holy Spirit to have been made through Christ must, if he admits the truth of the statements of this Gospel, assume the Spirit to be uncreated. There is a third resource besides these two (that of allowing the Spirit to have been made by the Word, and that of regarding it as uncreated), namely, to assert that the Holy Spirit has no essence of His own beyond the Father and the Son. But on further thought one may perhaps see reason to consider that the Son is second beside the Father, He being the same as the Father, while manifestly a distinction is drawn between the Spirit and the Son in the passage, "Whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of Man. it shall be forgiven him, but whosoever shall blaspheme against the Holy Spirit, he shall not have forgiveness, either in this world or in the world to come." We consider, therefore, that there are three hypostases, the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit; and at the same thee we believe nothing to be uncreated but the Father. We therefore, as the more pious and the truer course, admit that all things were made by the Logos, and that the Holy Spirit is the most excellent and the first in order of all that was made by the Father through Christ.And this, perhaps, is the reason why the Spirit is not said to be God's own Son. The Only-begotten only is by nature and from the beginning a Son, and the Holy Spirit seems to have need of the Son, to minister to Him His essence, so as to enable Him not only to exist, but to be wise and reasonable and just, and all that we must think of Him as being. All this He has by participation of the character of Christ, of which we have spoken above
Make your own conclusions, and also see various quotes. The CARM site Subordinationism as:
This is the teaching attributing a lower status to either at the Son or the Holy Spirit within the doctrine of the Trinity. In regards to the Son, subordinationism holds that even though the Son is eternal, divine, and uncreated, he is not equal to the Father in essence and attributes. It states that the Son is inferior or subordinate to the Father. The same would apply to the Holy Spirit in this error.
