I shall lightlier and sooner draw all the water of the sea and bring it into this pit than thou shalt bring the mystery of the Trinity and his divinity into thy little understanding as to the regard thereof; for the mystery of the Trinity is greater and larger to the comparison of thy wit and brain than is this great sea unto this little pit.
A child reportedly spoke these words to Saint Augustine in regards to the doctrine of the Trinity, at least according to folklore.[1] Of all the mysteries wrapped into the infinitude that is Christian theology, the doctrine of the Trinity may be the greatest.
Whether by modalism, tritheism, Enlightenment rationalism, or something else, the doctrine has not been without its critics and opponents. And yet it has persisted for approximately two millennia. It invites its students both to elevate and humble their minds: it serves to lift its students up because it asks them to recognize that God’s nature is more complex and more mysterious than they may have previously believed; and humble them, because they are finite creatures studying an infinite Being.
In the past century of Christian theology, especially with the effects of Enlightenment rationalism and modernism wearing off, Trinitarian theology has witnessed a revival in contemporary theology. We’ve seen this, for example, from some of the leading theologians Anglican, Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Lutheran circles. These various contributions reflect varied approaches (whether existentialist, feminist, societal, or something else), and varied motifs (whether ecclesial, kingdom, missional, or something else). Comparatively, much fewer evangelicals have contributed to this revival in Trinitarian theology.
In a popular-level book of recent memory, William Young dramatized this doctrine, representing the three persons of the Trinity as a black woman named Papa (God the Father), Middle-Eastern carpenter (God the Son), and an Asian woman named Sarayu (God the Holy Spirit) in The Shack (2007). Many professional theologians and laymen found this account theologically problematic (and with good reason!). Nevertheless, it illustrates this revival even on a popular level.
Into this revival of Trinitarian theology step Roger Olson (Baptist) and Christopher Hall (Episcopalian) with The Trinity (2001).[2] The purpose of this book is not to offer something creative or new in reference to this doctrine, but to give some historical survey to the doctrine’s development. The book itself comprises just three chapters. Chapter one gives an overview of patristic contributions. Chapter two gives an overview of medieval, reformation, and modern contributions. And chapter three provides an annotated bibliography.
In addition, The Trinity includes an introduction, which offers a short overview of Biblical theology through the Old and New Testaments on the Trinity, and two select bibliographies; an index; and several blank pages for note taking. This six by nine paperback is part of Eerdman’s Guides to Theology series, which also includes Creation (David Ferguson, 2014), The Blessed Virgin Mary (Daniel Kendall, Tim Perry, 2013), and The Holy Spirit (F. LeRon Shults, Andrea Hollingsworth, 2008).
Rather than using an endnote citation method, toward which even some academic books and presses have gone in recent years, it uses a footnote citation method. While this may create convenience for those familiar with seeing footnotes, it may create frustration for those not otherwise accustomed to seeing them. In regards to the writing style, Olson and Hall are not difficult to follow. Thus The Trinity serves, not simply to give an overview of the historical development of the doctrine, but to do so in a fairly easy, simple, straightforward manner, such that a curious layman could likely make sense of it—at least compared to how difficult books on the subject might be.
Throughout this volume, Olson and Hall filter seemingly all of the major voices of Trinitarian theology through church history and boil them to their essence. In consideration to the amount of source material with which they deal—covering more than 2,000 years of church history, and interacting with more than fifty unique contributions—the fact that this book contains only about 125 pages of text is impressive.[3] While their brevity, not to mention their clarity, is a strength of the work, it may also frustrate readers who want more explanation, analysis, and constructive critique. In addition, some may quibble with certain interpretations of source contributions, whether with certain conclusions, or with certain unqualified or under-qualified summary statements or conclusions. Even so, Olson and Hall succeed in what they have set out to accomplish in the whole.
From the outset, Olson and Hall are not concerned simply with intellectual knowledge, but with spiritual and practical implications too. This is another strength of the work. To illustrate, they conclude their chapter on patristic contributions this way: “For Augustine, however, as for all the fathers, spiritual insight and holiness of life were inextricably linked. Theology was to be practiced in both the mind and heart; a diseased life would lead to a diseased theology.”[4] In fact, they conclude this section with a devotional, prayer-like benediction.
Olson and Hall’s division of chapters is awkward, however. Rather than giving one chapter to the patristic period and one chapter to the medieval, reformation, and modern periods; they would have been better to give each period its own chapter. In the very manner by which Olson and Hall have divided the chapters, they emphasize the patristic period in a way they do not for the other periods. This is certainly evident in consideration of the amount of space they give this period in comparison to the others: patristic period, about thirty-five pages; medieval, reformation, and post-reformation periods, about fifteen pages each; and the modern period, about twenty pages.
The reason more attention is given to the patristic and modern periods is that they represent particularly creative and formative periods for Trinitarian theology. “Christian reflection on the triunity of God declined in creativity and depth after the great achievements of the patristic era,” they write[5]; and, “From approximately 1600 until the twentieth century the doctrine of the Trinity remained relatively untouched,”[6] with the twentieth century coming as a “great surprise” in which Trinitarian theology received renewed, refreshed, reinvigorated “constructive attention.”[7] Certainly all of this is true.
Even so, the medieval period, which occupies approximately 1,000 years of church history, is only given fifteen pages. This seems unrepresentative, or at least under-representative. Even if this period “lacked great creative vigor and depth,”[8] it still represents the voice of the church, not to mention, as Olson and Hall point out, an effort of “putting the finishing touches on it [the doctrine of the Trinity].”[9] And even if the medieval period was “overly speculative and too detailed scholastic developments of the Trinitarian dogma,”[10] we could make similar criticisms of other periods—periods that are given more attention. Also, these points seem superficial since Olson and Hall nevertheless give more sustained attention to the reformation and post-reformation periods, which also lack these qualities. All of this aside, readers can be grateful for the fifteen pages they have given the medieval period, which often receives even less attention than that.
In regards to sources, Olson and Hall work primarily with primary sources. Not only this, but they point to passages in the footnotes within these works that would help for further study. They do not work in primary sources solely though, but with secondary contributions too when a given figure or work is controversial or major. For example, with Augustine, whom they describe as “the greatest of the Western church fathers,”[11] they interact with several scholars—some critical, some not—in their evaluation of him. They also point to Karl Barth’s controversial “modes of being” articulation.
In addition, as they interact with a given author and/or contribution, they compare and contrast it with contributions from other periods, thus showing the relationship between ideas. At the same time, Olson and Hall could give more theological analysis to certain controversies, as opposed to historical analysis primarily, since The Trinity is a theology book. For example, I would have liked to see more theological consideration in their discussion on the filioque controversy.
Another feature that this book could have used was a more substantial conclusion, rather than the mere paragraph that is offered—something more akin to the introduction perhaps. Rather than concluding, the book simply ends. However, a conclusion in which they synthesized material, considered the future of Trinitarian theology, and offered application for scholarship, ministry, and spirituality would have been helpful and suitable.
In conclusion, what can we say about the Trinity, as well as The Trinity? Olson and Hall write, “Many Christian theologians have wondered whether one model can ever suffice for giving as complete an account as possible of the Trinity. Might they be complementary rather than competitive?”[12] Their question alludes to an important point in any consideration of the Trinity: its infinitude and inexhaustibility. When considered from this perspective, Olson and Hall’s The Trinity, prior critiques aside, is an appropriate, helpful addition to this larger body of Trinitarian theology, excelling at historical survey, and serving as a suitable entry point and summary of the discussion.
____________________
[1] Jacobus de Voragine, The Golden Legend: Lives of the Saints, trans. William Caxton (London: Catholic Way Publishing, 2015), page numbers not included.
[2] Roger E. Olson, Christopher A. Hall, The Trinity (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2002), pp. 164, $18.00.
[3] This includes, but is not limited to early ante-Nicene contributions: Clement, Ignatius, and Polycarp, works such as The Shepherd of Hermas, The Didache, The Epistle of Barnabas, 2 Clement; the apologists: Justin Martyr; early Alexandrian contributions: Clement of Alexandria and Origin; early Western contributions: Irenaeus and Tertullian; age of and post-Nicene Eastern figures: Athanasius, Gregory of Nazianzus, Basil, and Gregory of Nyssa, John of Damascus; age of and post-Nicene Western figures: Ambrose, Hilary of Poitiers, and Augustine; early medieval contributions: Boethius and Photinus; high and late medieval contributions: Anselm, Richard of St. Victor, Peter Abelard, Joachim of Fiore, Fourth Lateran Council, Thomas Aquinas, and Councils of Soissons, Lyons, and Florence; reformation contributions, orthodox and heretic: Martin Luther, Philip Melanchthon, Ulrich Zwingli, John Calvin, Anabaptists, Michael Servetus, Faustus Socinus, and the Council of Trent; post-Reformation, Puritan, pietistic, Enlightenment, and contributions: Friedrich Schleiermacher, Albrecht Ritschl, John Locke, John Toland, Matthew Tindal, Nikolaus Zinzendorf, Jonathan Edwards, Adolf von Harnack, Walter Rauschenbusch, and the Fundamentalists; and the modern contributions: Karl Barth, Karl Rahner, Jürgen Moltmann, Norman Pittenger, Leonard Hodgson, Leonardo Boff, Catherine Mowry LaCugna, and John Zizioulas.
[4] Roger E. Olson, Christopher A. Hall, The Trinity (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002), 49.
[5] Olson, Hall, The Trinity, 51.
[6] Ibid., 80.
[7] Ibid., 95.
[8] Ibid., 53.
[9] Ibid., 54.
[10] Ibid., 67.
[11] Ibid., 43.
[12] Ibid., 60.
Recent Comments