Unity in the Triune God: Trinitarian Theology in the Full-Communion Agreements of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America

Unity in the Triune God

Trinitarian Theology in the Full-Communion Agreements of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America

Timo Tavast

Unity in the Triune God

Trinitarian Theology in the Full-Communion Agreements of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America

Copyright © 2013 Timo Tavast. All rights reserved. Except for brief quotations in critical publications or reviews, no part of this book may be reproduced in any manner without prior written permission from the publisher. Write: Permissions, Wipf and Stock Publishers, 199 W. 8th Ave., Suite 3, Eugene, OR 97401.

Wipf & Stock

An Imprint of Wipf and Stock Publishers

199 W. 8th Ave., Suite 3

Eugene, OR 97401

www.wipfandstock.com

ISBN 13: 978-1-61097-901-6

EISBN 13: 978-1-62189-897-9

Manufactured in the U.S.A.

All scripture quotations, unless otherwise indicated, are taken from the Holy Bible, New International Version®, NIV®. Copyright ©1973, 1978, 1984 by Biblica, Inc.™ Used by permission of Zondervan. All rights reserved worldwide.

Table of Contents

Title Page

Preface

Chapter 1: Introduction: Toward a Distinct View of the Ecumenical Functions of Trinitarianism

Part One: Analysis of the Agreements

Chapter 2: A Formula of Agreement with the Presbyterian Church (USA), the Reformed Church in America, and the United Church of Christ

Chapter 3: Called to Common Mission with the Episcopal Church

Chapter 4: Following Our Shepherd to Full Communion with the Moravian Church in America

Chapter 5: Confessing Our Faith Together with the United Methodist Church

Part Two: Synthesis of the Findings and New Proposals

Chapter 6: Constructive Goal of the Second Part

Chapter 7: First Function: Trinitarianism as an Evidence of the Confessed Apostolic Tradition

Chapter 8: Second Function: Trinitarianism as the Fundamental Theological Framework

Chapter 9: Third Function: Trinitarian Foundation and Structure of the Church and Its Unity

Chapter 10: Summa Summarum: Recommendations for the ELCA’s Future Ecumenism

Bibliography

To the faculty members and staff of the Lutheran Theological Seminary at Gettysburg, who decisively contributed to the creation of this ecumenical study

Preface

The attempts to trace the origins of this book take me back to two constructive phases of my theological carrier. The first one of them, my doctoral studies in ecumenics at the University of Helsinki and later in systematic theology at the University of Joensuu, Finland, led me to the fascinating field of ecumenically-oriented trinitarian theology. Tuomo Mannermaa, famous Finnish Luther scholar and earlier professor of ecumenics, suggested that I could write my dissertation on Robert W. Jenson’s doctrine of the Trinity in order to understand thoroughly what the trinitarian foundation of the theology of this notable American Lutheran ecumenist actually is and what his unique contribution to the interpretation of contemporary trinitarian paradigm has been. I willingly accepted Mannermaa’s suggestion and later wrote my doctoral dissertation on the subject. Professor Eeva Martikainen, now deceased, was my academic advisor.

The study, published in Finnish in 2006,¹ clarified not only Jenson’s trinitarian theology but also awakened me to ponder what the ecumenical relevance of his model of the doctrine of the Trinity might be. Jenson himself answers to this critical question in many ways in his writings, but that was not enough for me. I also wanted to test his and other trinitarian scholars’ ecumenical applications in the field of real ecumenical agreements of those churches that are personally close to me as a theologian and pastor of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland. However, the right time for starting this new scholarly project and for defining its object in detail had to wait because I was living in the most hectic period of my life with a growing family and inspiring work in a congregation.

Theologically, the second constructive phase of my career began in 2009, when I had an exceptional opportunity to spend a half year in the United States at the Lutheran Theological Seminary at Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, thanks to a scholarly grant and my own church’s ecumenical relationships. One of my roles as a postdoctoral scholar was to deliver guest lectures on trinitarian and ecumenical topics. In that spring semester, I had the great privilege of taking an ecumenical course on the full-communion relationships and companion churches of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) given by the ecumenically-minded scholars and good friends of mine professors Gilson A. C. Waldkoenig and Warren M. Eshbach in addition to other courses in the Master of Sacred Theology (STM) program. Inspired by this particular course, I found the focus of my new postdoctoral study: I would concentrate on the ELCA’s full-communion agreements and try to find out what the varying roles of ecumenically-oriented trinitarian theology in those agreements might be. In this way, my earlier inspiration to test the applicability of the findings of the contemporary trinitarian paradigm in the field of real churches’ ecumenical relationships also found its forum. Thanks to the contribution of many scholars at the Lutheran Theological Seminary at Gettysburg—Robin J. Steinke, the dean of the seminary, as well as professors Kristin Johnston Largen and Maria E. Erling, among others—I was able to create the first unpublished version of the study and, later, the final monograph at hand.

In addition to the decisive phases, described above, when the theological understanding represented in the present study was found, I am delighted to mention the contribution of two leading ecumenical scholars who have emphasized to me critical perspectives necessary for a study that aims to be truly relevant for the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church. Professor Michael Root, who had also participated in certain full-communion processes of the ELCA during his earlier career, read the preliminary version of my manuscript and paid critical attention to some central themes that had to be investigated more profoundly. Without his valuable contribution, the study would not have reached its final, edited form.

Another critical contributor has been Risto Saarinen, the professor of ecumenics at the University of Helsinki. When I was negotiating the academic goals of my postdoctoral study, Saarinen asked me a critical question that roused me from a certain kind of idealistic trinitarian dream. In an important email, he wrote to me, If you wanted to create—after thousands of books already published on trinitarian theology/ecclesiology—something truly new and academically high-leveled, it would be good to submit the whole ‘trinitarian’ paradigm under critical evaluation: what does the constant repetition of this kind of foggy term finally produce? According to my own understanding, Saarinen’s intention was to inspire me as a scholar of ecumenics to perform two combined tasks in my project: first, to analyze in a given ecumenical context what trinitarianism—when used in varying ways and for differing purposes—actually means, and second, to show carefully and with valid arguments what this paradigm’s factual benefits for ecumenical theology and for churches’ ecu-menical strivings might be. The present monograph’s ultimate goal is to answer the presented critical question, on the one hand, in a many-sided and thorough way, and, on the other hand, to stay in a particular ecumenical context that is limited and coherent enough, namely, in the field of the ELCA’s and its partner churches’ full-communion relationships.

1. Tavast, Ajassa identifioituva Jumala.

1

Introduction: Toward a Distinct View of the Ecumenical Functions of Trinitarianism

Trinitarian Theology in Ecumenism

Particularly since the 1960s, trinitarian theology¹ has played a crucial role in ecumenism. This period has also been called the trinitarian renaissance in Western theology in general. In the Eastern Orthodox tradition, the classical trinitarian heritage of the church has always been highly appreciated, but the situation was clearly different in the Western church—particularly in the Protestant tradition—starting with the Enlightenment’s criticism of classical dogma. Karl Barth’s (1886–1968) and Karl Rahner’s (1904–84) trinitarian writings,² as well as the next generation’s contributions to trinitarian theology, radically changed modern Western tradition. After Barth and Rahner, prominent pioneers of trinitarian theology include Wolfhart Pannenberg (1928–), Robert W. Jenson (1930–), Jürgen Moltmann (1926–), and Eberhard Jüngel (1934–). Due to these famous systematic theologians and others inspired by them, the doctrine of the Trinity has been freshly rediscovered in an updated form, and has thus had a profound impact on the church’s life and theological interpretation.³

These trinitarian scholars have also succeeded in answering modern Enlightenment and Neo-Protestant critics. They have shown that the fundamental ideas of the church’s doctrine of the Trinity are not bound to Hellenistic substance metaphysics as the earlier critics had claimed. Instead, trinitarian doctrine has an evident biblical basis and—this is the trinitarian pioneer’s most notable emphasis when responding to modern criticism—this doctrine implies an ontology of its own, namely, relational ontology that has its roots in the biblical economic view of the one God who exists in the mutual relational life of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. All these steps taken by the trinitarian renaissance movement in the latter half of the twentieth century have made remarkable contributions to the recovery of the Great Tradition of the catholic and apostolic church. The classical trinitarian and christological dogma and the church’s doctrinal and liturgical tradition in general are no longer seen as a burden loaded with problematic Hellenistic influences but as a valuable apostolic heritage and highly useful theological potential that can be utilized when the contemporary church meets the new challenges of the postmodern era.⁴

The new trinitarian theology has been ecumenical by nature since its origins. In fact, certain developments in ecumenism were one of the starting points of the whole trinitarian renaissance. The International Missionary Council that was later integrated into the World Council of Churches (WCC) in 1961⁵ had already emphasized the idea of the mission of the triune God (missio Dei) at its conference at Willingen in 1952. This can be regarded as the first preview of the new trinitarian paradigm that later arose and ran parallel with, or even replaced, the christological paradigm that had dominated the missionary movement and ecumenism in the first part of the twentieth century.⁶ In the context of the most notable ecumenical organization, the WCC, the remarkable appearance of trinitarianism occurred at the beginning of the 1960s. Particularly, thanks to the influence of the Eastern Orthodox Church on the ecumenical movement, the explicit reference to the doctrine of the Trinity was added to the basis of the WCC at the Third Assembly held in New Delhi in 1961. Thus the organization and its member churches confessed that classical trinitarian dogma is decisive for the Christian faith and should be used as a fundamental criterion when accepting members to this fellowship of Christian churches.⁷ This example shows one crucial function of the doctrine of the Trinity in ecumenism. In other words, it demonstrates a meaningful way to utilize trinitarian doctrine in the field of ecumenism and manifests one central purpose for which this doctrine is used: it provides a classical standard and an essential criterion for Christian churches in evaluating themselves and their ecumenical companion candidates regarding whether they represent the apostolic Christian faith. In this study, the way to use trinitarian dogma for this purpose in ecumenism is termed the first function of trinitarianism.⁸

When analyzing ecumenical efforts more closely, for example, by some Lutherans and their dialogue partners, it is possible to find another creative way to make use of ecumenical trinitarian theology. In some recent dialogues, ecumenically-oriented trinitarian theology—the classical source of the common Christian faith among different branches of Christianity—has been rediscovered and consciously and profoundly used as a fundamental theological framework within which a given ecumenical process has taken place and on which the results of the process have been grounded. This use of trinitarian dogma and of its theological applications is called the second function of trinitarianism in this study. In many cases, the positive outcomes of this kind of ecumenical trinitarian approach have been evident. Two examples can be given.

The first example is the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification, signed by the representatives of the Lutheran World Federation and the Roman Catholic Church in 1999. Although the topic of this ecumenical declaration is the new Lutheran-Catholic agreement on the doctrine of justification, classical trinitarian and christological dogma is also strongly present in the statement. The doctrine of the Trinity is not investigated as an ecumenical problem or as a separate dogmatic locus since there has never been debate on these themes between Lutherans and Catholics. Instead, the shared trinitarian view of God and the common understanding of the economic deeds of the Trinity are used as the deepest foundation of the new interpretation of the justification represented by both partners of the dialogue. Another way to express the same concept is as follows: classical ecumenical trinitarian theology is the structure within which the current ecumenical problems and solutions are set. The Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification shows us that trinitarian dogma is not some historical relic without any significance or use but that it can contribute to contemporary ecumenical processes.⁹

The second example document, the Porvoo Common Statement (the full-communion¹⁰ agreement produced by the British and Irish Anglican churches and the Nordic and Baltic Lutheran churches, effective since 1996) follows an identical approach. Again, common trinitarian theology shared by different denominations has a significant function in an ecumenical agreement: the doctrine of the Trinity is not investigated separately as a problem that needs some solution; instead it is used as a tool that helps the churches to solve ecumenical problems and as a framework within which common faith and ecumenical solutions are rooted and interpreted.¹¹

A notable element of both dialogues addressed above is the ecumenical method applied when the dialogue partners were searching for unity during the processes and expressing their consensus in the final documents. Before elaborating on some methodological details of the example documents, it should be clarified that generally in ecumenics, ecumenical method means, first of all, a way to unity. In other words, the participants of an ecumenical dialogue follow some conscious or unconscious approach in their process toward deeper unity of the church. This approach (that exists on the meta level) implies the use of certain ecumenical tools and leads to specific proceedings of the dialogue. However, another element is often combined with the idea of ecumenical method. This second element is the model of unity represented by dialogue partners. This aspect of ecumenical methodology addresses the understanding of the church’s true unity and also the view of the goal of a specific ecumenical process. These understandings obviously influence the procedures of a dialogue. Both of the above-mentioned aspects are included in the general definition of the concept of ecumenical method in this study.¹²

With regard to the ecumenical method of the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification and of the Porvoo Common Statement, it is evident that a certain version of the method of differentiated consensus is followed in these documents.¹³ It is not meaningful to describe the details of this method here, but some features of it are noteworthy in order to clarify the interaction of ecumenical methodology and the use of trinitarianism in its second function (that is, as a fundamental theological fabric). As the method of differentiated consensus presupposes, there is a dual pattern of two levels in both agreements mentioned above: the fundamental level is the achieved consensus on the essentials of faith, and the second level consists of remaining doctrinal and ecclesiastical differences that do not challenge the fundamental agreement but are considered to be legitimate. The most notable feature from the viewpoint of the present arguments is as follows: the Catholics and the Lutherans (in the Joint Declaration process) as well as the British and Irish Anglican churches and the Nordic and Baltic Lutheran churches (in the Porvoo dialogue) formulated explicitly and extensively their common understanding of the apostolic faith and the doctrinal consensus that has now been found. This explicitness and expansiveness is not a self-evident feature if seen in the wider context of the different variations of applying the method of differentiated consensus,¹⁴ but it is typical for the version of this method followed in the ecumenical documents mentioned. The described version can also be clarified in the following way: in the Joint Declaration and the Porvoo Common Statement, the dialogue partners did not pass over doctrinal matters quickly and move into practical ecclesiastical fellowship by supposing beforehand that there has to be some invisible spiritual unity beyond all the diversities and doctrinal differences—a unity that is not even necessary or possible to express with human words. Instead, the churches in these dialogues thought very clearly that the unity—if there is one—can and has to be explicated by common doctrinal expressions. Otherwise the consensus or convergence between the dialogue partners is an empty hypothesis without real content.¹⁵ Many ecumenical scholars—particularly in Scandinavia—have criticized the Leuenberg Agreement (that is, the Leuenberg Concord, the full-communion agreement between many Protestant churches in Europe signed originally in 1973) for the opposite methodological emphasis. That is the background that determined, for example, Scandinavian Lutherans to follow a different ecumenical approach (that is to say, the different version of the general method of differentiated consensus) in their full-communion process with Anglicans as well as in their contributions to the Lutheran World Federation’s efforts to achieve agreement on justification with Catholics.¹⁶

Ecumenical methodology also influenced the willingness to apply trinitarian dogma in the Lutheran-Catholic and Lutheran-Anglican dialogues. Logically, when the method obliged the negotiators of these churches to expound extensively upon the achieved doctrinal consensus, this principle also encouraged them to address the trinitarian foundation of all Christian doctrine. So the Lutheran-Catholic dialogue on justification did not discuss the doctrine of justification as a limited locus only; the dialogue connected the doctrine of justification with the doctrine of the Trinity, Christology, theology of the word and sacraments, and soteriology among other doctrinal issues. In an similar way, the Anglicans and Lutherans did not try to solve, for example, the ecumenical problems of episcopacy and apostolic succession only but instead set these questions in the context of the common trinitarian apostolic faith shared by both Anglicans and Lutherans. They used this expansive doctrinal foundation when addressing the most difficult issues. To summarize, in the dialogues evaluated above and in their final documents, the chosen version of the ecumenical method obliged and encouraged the churches to pay attention to the common trinitarian tradition and to utilize this doctrinal basis as the structure within which the ecumenical problems are solved and the solutions broadly explained and disseminated. As can be seen in the Lutheran-Catholic as well as in the Lutheran-Anglican relationships in northern Europe, the ecumenical results of this method are fruitful. Visible unity between the churches is built upon a durable foundation thanks to the commonly explicated trinitarian faith and the extensive consensus on doctrinal matters.

The previous analysis has shown how trinitarian theology can be used in its second ecumenical function, that is, as the fundamental theological framework of all issues discussed in a given dialogue. The next arguments aim to take a further step: in the context of recent ecumenism, the doctrine of the Trinity has been utilized especially as the basis of one theological locus of particular importance ecumenically, namely, ecclesiology. The use of trinitarian dogma and of its ramifications in this ecclesiological role is called the third function of trinitarianism in the study at hand.

Three examples demonstrate the central role of trinitarian theology in ecclesiology. The first of them is connected with the theological findings of the Second Vatican Council (1962–65). As is commonly known, Vatican II was highly influential on the ecumenism of the Roman Catholic Church in general.¹⁷ From the perspective of the present study, it is particularly noteworthy that the Council introduced the model of so-called communion ecclesiology that has not only affected the self-understanding of the Catholic Church but has also contributed to ecumenical ecclesiology generally ever since.¹⁸ This view of the church has also been critical for ecumenical trinitarian theology and for its application in the context of ecclesiology. The opening chapter of Lumen gentium, the Council’s dogmatic constitution on the church, explicates the foundation and origin of the church in a dynamic, narrative way that is clearly trinitarian by nature. In other words, rather than defining the church juridically, this notable constitution interprets the church in the trinitarian framework that emphasizes the economic roles of the three divine persons in the constitution and life of the church. The nature of ecclesiastical reality is to be a communion where people are joined together in the love and unity of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and where they participate in this trinitarian love and unifying communion through Christ and the church’s sacramental life.¹⁹ After Vatican II, these ideas of communion ecclesiology, as well as the concept of communion (communio in Latin, koinonia in Greek), have been further developed by many theologians coming from the Catholic tradition and other denominations. So the foundational work of the Council in the field of trinitarian communion ecclesiology is clearly the source of ecumenical theological inspiration.²⁰

The second example of trinitarian theology’s central role in ecumenically-oriented ecclesiology is taken from Eastern Orthodox tradition, where the concept of communion is generally applied both to the Holy Trinity and to the church. Actually, Eastern tradition has advocated this type of interpretation of the church and the Trinity since the patristic period, but modern Orthodox theologians have started to emphasize these ideas of trinitarian communion ecclesiology again in the modern ecumenical context—and in many cases together with the ecumenists of the post–Vatican II Roman Catholic Church. The influence of Orthodox communion theology can be recognized, for instance, in the famous ecumenical document on the church approved by a joint Roman