Response To A Theological Paper

Response to Dr. Kevin Daugherty’s PaperTrinity and Missions
International Theological Symposium
"Theology In Context"

December 20, 2004

Baguio City, Philippines

Greetings ladies and gentlemen, colleagues in the theological world. Dr. Kevin Daugherty’s presentation today proves the vitality of theology as it must be able to address the milieu it is located, but also to allow the culture from which theology finds itself in to influence, if not dictate theological agenda. In this well-crafted, meticulously researched, and eloquently explicated presentation, Dr. Daugherty makes a case for a renewed interest in the Trinity, the intricate weaving of the internal connections between the Godhead, and most especially the implications of this “quintessentially Christian,” albeit a “darkly difficult” idea of Trinitarian involvement with humankind. What Dr. Daugherty proposes is that the doctrine of the Trinity has direct bearing to our involvement in missions, that the intricacies of the Trinitarian configuration might show God’s relational characteristics within, but must be taken a point forward as an impetus for missionary work as the Trinity has revelatory aspects that proves God’s desire and nature to relate to humankind. John Thompson’s statement concerning the ultimate and proximate basis of missions and the immediate power of missions is the trinity becomes the central theme from which the paper revolves in. Or as my favorite philosopher/theologian would say, “The metaphysics of the Trinity becomes the ontology for doing missions.”

But the Trinity does not only the give thrust for missions, it becomes a model in itself for missions. God’s willingness to have a loving relationship with the world becomes the power behind the proclamation of the Gospel. The kenotic self-contextualization of God is a sobering and ultimately conclusive basis for the Christian behavior in the process of doing missions. This nullifies the concept of missionary work as an imperialistic enterprise comparable to conquistadors and crusaders invading heathen lands. The idea of missions as a conquering force towards an unsuspecting culture remains a disturbing and yet prevalent notion. The Trinitarian economy underscores the relationship that is needed, not just within the Christian circle, but also with others, and a relationship too that is not necessarily that of a superior to a subordinate, but rather of mutual respect and cooperation.

One of the paper’s strength lies in the survey of important development in the discussion of the nature and understanding of the Trinity throughout history. Although at times relegated to being a “useless relic within the museum of dusty theological tomes,” the Trinitarian concept remains a pivotal, if not a dynamic concept. The pendulum shifts and vigorous discourse shows that although theological views on the Trinity have certainly varied for centuries, one thing remains constant: knowledge of the Trinity and its identities is an important part of a person's understanding of their place in a relationship with God, and a person’s role in the building of the kingdom of God.

One of the more intriguing aspects of the presentation is the attempt to tighten the relationship between the economic and the immanent images of the Trinity as it relates to missions. La Cugna’s as well as Ted Peter’s proposal is an electrifying in that they contend that distinction between the immanent and the economic Trinity as it has been understood within contemporary theology may need to be reassessed. Such a distinction segregates “God in himself" from "God for us," thereby causing an irreconcilable breach between these. This separation renders the Trinitarian God extraneous to the Christian life. In contrast, La Cugna proposes that the whole Trinitarian undertaking must be placed within a soteriological context. Such proposal salvages the Trinitarian conjectures from what has been describe as “mind‑numbing metaphysical vocabularies,” because ultimately, the thought of how to make such concepts as substance, es­sence, nature, person, hypostasis, relation, and real distinction as applied to the Trinity understandable and relevant is of crucial significance, because the whole enterprise of the Christian life is a relationship with each of the divine persons, without in any way separating them.

I commend Dr. Daugherty’s excellent treatment of what is possibly a difficult and often complicated topic. He wrote it with the desire to explicate the matter in a way that would facilitate a better understanding of the Trinitarian concept and its immediate relevance to the Christian life, and to missions. He wrote it with depth, but avoided obfuscation, and also refrained from making the paper too thick as to be confounding. He presented his arguments in a lucid and lucid-inducing manner. And to that effect, Dr. Daugherty did indeed present a compelling argument.

Thank you, and good morning.

theology in context