Kristin Graff-Kallevåg PhD Thesis MF Norwegian School of Theology October 2014 Supervisor: Jan-Olav Henriksen

Transcription

1 The Triune God and Baptism An Analysis and Discussion of the Relationship between the Trinity and Baptism in the Theology of Robert W. Jenson and Catherine M. LaCugna Kristin Graff-Kallevåg PhD Thesis MF Norwegian School of Theology October 2014 Supervisor: Jan-Olav Henriksen

2

3 CONTENTS Chapter 1: Introduction Research Problem Research Material Research Method Theoretical Framework Research Contribution Part One: An Analysis of Robert W. Jenson s Theology Chapter 2: Jenson s Theological Project Chapter 3: Jenson s Theology of the Trinity God and Narrative God and Relationality God an Event that Happens to the World Conclusion Chapter 4: Baptized into the Church s Communion with God The Sacraments Baptism a Rite of Initiation Baptism for the Forgiveness of Sins Baptism and Lifelong Growth in Christ Baptism a Source for Living and Interpreting Life Conclusion

4 The Triune God and Baptism Part Two: An Analysis of Catherine M. LaCugna s Theology Chapter 5: LaCugna s Theological Project Chapter 6: LaCugna s Theology of the Trinity God and Narrative God and Relationality A Practical Doctrine Conclusion Chapter 7: Baptized to Communion with God and with One Another The Sacraments Baptism a Rite of Initiation Baptism for the Forgiveness of Sins Baptism and Lifelong Growth into Christ Baptism a Source for Living and Interpreting Life Conclusion Part Three: Concluding Discussion Chapter 8: Two Contemporary Options for Thinking on God and Baptism One God; One Story; One Community: A Reading of Jenson s Theology in Context One God and the many Experiences of God: A Reading of LaCugna s Theology in Context Conclusion Chapter 9: Baptism Revisited through a Hermeneutics of Hospitality Setting the Stage for the Discussion The Hospitable God and Baptism Some Final Considerations Conclusion Epilogue Bibliography

5 3

6 The Triune God and Baptism 4

7 1 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION Pouring water on the head of the baby carried to baptism, the priest says: I baptize you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. In this scene a child is baptized in the name of the triune God, and the scene echoes, as such, Matthew 28:19: Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. 1 The practice of performing baptism in the name of the triune God is rooted in the Bible and it is common to most Christian churches. 2 But what does it mean to be baptized in the name of the triune God? An issue relevant to how one answers this question is how one thinks about God. Our understanding of God is of relevance for our understanding of baptism. Whether we think God exists or not, how we think about Jesus as savior and how we imagine God as present in the world today this matters for how we think about baptism. This thesis explores the implications of the doctrine of the Trinity, of the Christian understanding of God, for baptismal theology. In the last half-century there has been an outstanding renewal of interest in the doctrine of the Trinity in Christian theology and spirituality. 3 One of the characteristics of trinitarian theology in this period is that the categories of temporality and relationality are held forth as important categories for our understanding of God. 4 Theologians such as Jürgen Moltmann, Wolfhart Pannenberg and Robert W. Jenson argue for an understanding of God as someone who truly and fully discloses godself in history, which is viewed as a history 1 All Bible quotations in this thesis are from the New Revised Standard Version. 2 As the ecumenical document One Baptism says, baptism with water in the triune name is regarded by most Christian communions as the heart of the baptismal rite. See One Baptism: Towards Mutual Recognition. A Study Text, Faith and Order Paper No. 210 (Geneva: World Council of Churches, 2011), 5. There are, however, some controversies about the use of the triune formula, and not least in relation to the question of inclusive language. For a brief presentation of this discussion, see Dagmar Heller, Baptized into Christ: A Guide to the Ecumenical Discussion on Baptism (Geneva: World Council of Churches, 2012), The analysis and discussion in this thesis will relate to this question. 3 I will provide a more extensive presentation of this renewal in Sub-Chapter For good introductions to this development in trinitarian theology, see for instance Ted Peters, God as Trinity: Relationality and Temporality in Divine Life (Louisville: Westminster, 1993) and Stanley J. Grenz, Rediscovering the Triune God: The Trinity in Contemporary Theology (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2004). In Sub- Chapter 1.4 I will return more in detail to this development and place this thesis analysis and discussion in relation to it. 5

8 The Triune God and Baptism where God is deeply present in the interaction between the three divine persons. 5 Theologians such as Leonardo Boff, John Zizioulas and Catherine M. LaCugna strongly emphasize the importance of the category of relation for trinitarian theology; God s being is best interpreted in terms of relationality, they argue. 6 This thesis explores the implications of this turn towards understanding relationality and temporality as aspects of the divine life proper for the understanding of baptism. What I will more specifically do in this thesis is to perform an in-depth study of the trinitarian theology of Robert W. Jenson and Catherine M. LaCugna, two major representatives of the recent turn in trinitarian theology referred to above. 7 The main task of this thesis is to analyze their interpretations of the Trinity and explore the implications of their trinitarian theologies for their baptismal theologies. Both Jenson and LaCugna write their theologies in North America in a cultural epoch that can be labeled late-modern or post-modern. 8 In the concluding discussion of the thesis I will discuss how their interpretation of God and of baptism may be seen as efforts to rearticulate Christian belief in God and the Christian understanding of baptism in an altered cultural context. In the concluding discussion I will also, on the basis of this analysis and discussion of Jenson s and LaCugna s theologies, make some constructive suggestions about what could be an adequate Lutheran interpretation of baptism in contemporary cultural context. This discussion will relate to some specific challenges for the church s task of rethinking theology and practice of baptism in my own context, Norway Research Problem The main problem under discussion in this thesis reads as follows: How can recent developments in trinitarian theology contribute resources to rearticulating a Christian 5 For an informative and well written presentation of this turn towards emphasizing temporality and history as central categories in trinitarian theology and of these three theologians contribution to it, see Grenz, Rediscovering the Triune God, This aspect of the renewal of trinitarian theology, and the contributions of these three theologians contribution to it, is also skillfully presented in ibid., The two developments outlined in the last paragraph can be traced in the theology of both Jenson and LaCugna. However, as indicated in the last two footnotes, Jenson goes further than LaCunga in his use of the category of temporality and LaCugna goes further than Jenson in her use of the category of relationality. For this evaluation of their theologies, see the analysis chapters of this thesis. 8 In Sub-Chapter 1.4 I will outline more closely how I understand this context. 9 For my choice of relating the discussion to a Lutheran theological context and for my definition of the cultural context the dissertation relates to, see Sub-Chapters 1.3 and

9 Chapter 1: Introduction theology of baptism? The research problem in this study relates closely to a particular discussion in contemporary trinitarian theology. In 1967 Karl Rahner published an essay about the doctrine of the Trinity that has had a strong significance in contemporary trinitarian theology. 10 In this essay he formulated what was later called Rahner s rule, the proposal that the immanent Trinity is the economic Trinity and vice versa. The immanent Trinity refers to God in se or God within the eternal triune life and the economic Trinity refers to God as disclosed in the history of salvation or God in relation to us. Rahner s point was that God revealed in the history of salvation is who God is in godself; God fully communicates godself to us in the economy of salvation. Almost all discussions on the doctrine of the Trinity written after 1967 have in some way or another dealt with this topic how to understand the relationship between the immanent and economic Trinity; how to understand the relationship between God as God is eternally in se and God as disclosed in history as God pro nobis. 11 This dissertation explores Robert W. Jenson s and Catherine M. LaCugna s positions in this contemporary trinitarian discussion, and the implications of their trinitarian positions for their interpretation of baptism. The study will also use the results of this analysis in a more constructive discussion of contemporary Lutheran theology of baptism. Hence, the main material this dissertation uses to approach the main problem of discussion is the theology of Jenson and LaCugna. Both Jenson and LaCugna argue that God s relatedness and presence in time is constitutive for who God is as God. To put it in other terms, they agree with Karl Rahner that the immanent Trinity is the economic Trinity and vice versa. At the same time their positions differ significantly. While Jenson emphasizes more the narrative aspect of God s self-communication, LaCugna emphasizes more the relational aspect of God s self-communication. While Jenson emphasizes the church as the location of God s presence in the world, LaCugna emphasizes more interpersonal relationships as the location of God s presence. A main task of this thesis is to identify, re-construct, compare and seek a deeper understanding of Jenson s and LaCugna s positions in the immanent and economic Trinity discussion and to explore the implications of their trinitarian positions for their thinking on 10 Karl Rahner, The Trinity, trans. Joseph Donceel (London: Burns & Oates, 1970), The essay was first published in 1967 in a German version Karl Rahner, Der dreifaltige Gott als transzenenter Urgund der Heilsgeschicte, in Die Heilsgeschicte vor Christus, Mysterium Salutis (Einsiedeln: Benzinger, 1967). In 1970 Der dreifaltige Gott was translated into English, and titled The Trinity. 11 In Sub- Chapter 1.4 I will present this contemporary trinitarian discussion more closely. 7

10 The Triune God and Baptism baptism; and on the backdrop of this analysis, to discuss more constructively what could be an adequate contemporary Lutheran theology of baptism. Having briefly sketched the main problem under discussion in this thesis, the material that will be used for discussing this problem, 12 and the main aims of this study, 13 I will now return to the task of presenting more closely the background for the choice of the problem of discussion. There are many studies categorizing and comparing different positions in the immanent-economic Trinity discussion. Almost all these note that the doctrine of the Trinity has implications for how to think about all other theological topics. My interest here is in the implications of the trinitarian renewal for baptismal theology. Why, then, baptismal theology? The choice of exploring how recent developments in trinitarian theology can provide resources for rethinking the theology of baptism is motivated by a particular ecclesial and cultural situation in my own context, Norway. Previously Norway was religiously dominated by one religion, Christianity; and more specifically by one denomination, the Lutheran denomination. 14 When it comes to religiosity the country was thus quite hegemonic. Today the situation has changed, which is not least expressed in a dramatic decrease in the proportion of the population that is baptized in recent years. In 1969 approximately 97 per cent of those born in Norway were baptized in the Church of Norway, but by 2013 this share had decreased to 62 percent. Although the majority of children born in Norway are still baptized in the Church of Norway, the share of baptized children has decreased significantly. Furthermore, the conditions for communicating the theology of baptism have also changed. Knowledge of Christian tradition and faith has decreased in society. 15 This means that when baptismal theology and practice is to be interpreted and communicated, one can no longer take it for granted that people are familiar with a Christian frame of interpretation. 12 In Sub-Chapter 1.2 I will present the research material more in detail. 13 In Sub-Chapters 1.3 and 1.5 I will present the aims of the thesis more in detail. 14 For a more detailed presentation of the religious situation in Norway, see the theory chapter (chapter 1.4). 15 This change is identified in a recent empirical study of religion in Norway. See Ulla Schmidt, Religion i dagens Norge: Sekularisert? Privatisert? Pluralisert?, in Religion i dagens Norge: Mellom sekularisering og sakralisering, ed. Pål Ketil Botvar and Ulla Schmidt (Oslo: Universitetsforlaget, 2010). This study of religion in Norway gives a nuanced picture of a religious situation where, although traditional ways of practicing religion still have relatively strong standing, the religious landscape is increasingly changing. For a more detailed outline of this altered cultural situation, see Sub-Chapter

11 Chapter 1: Introduction The cultural situation described above is not unique to Norway. Western culture can in general be seen as characterized by an increased secularity and religious plurality, a development that results in changed conditions for interpretation and practice of Christian faith. 16 How can the theology of baptism be articulated in this changed context in a way that can give meaning and be relevant? A main assumption motivating this thesis is that recent developments in trinitarian theology towards interpreting God in relational and temporal terms offer some good resources for dealing with this question. Both Jenson and LaCugna are embedded in a North American context, a context that, like that of Norway, is characterized by an increased religious plurality as well as development towards an increasingly secular society. In this study I will explore how they provide trinitarian resources for rearticulating the theology of baptism in this cultural context. I will now end this sub-chapter s outline of the main problem under discussion by presenting three specifications. The main question of research in this thesis can be specified through three sub-questions that identify the areas within the theology of baptism on which the analysis and discussion of Jenson s and LaCugna s theologies will focus in particular. The first sub-question is: How can recent developments in trinitarian theology contribute resources for interpreting baptism within a larger context of lifelong growth in Christ? This question is motivated by current ecumenical work on the topic of baptism. The Faith and Order documents Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry and One Baptism suggest that an interpretation of baptism within the larger context of lifelong growth in Christ can open the way for greater mutual recognition of baptism. 17 In this study I explore how Jenson and LaCugna provide trinitarian resources for approaching such an interpretation of baptism. The second sub-question is: How can recent developments in trinitarian theology open up for new perspectives on the relevance of baptism for interpreting and living life? The first sub-question concerns the ecumenical challenge raised in recent Faith and Order documents about interpreting baptism within the larger context of lifelong growth in Christ. The linguistic expression lifelong growth in Christ is not immediately 16 This claim will be argued further in Sub-Chapter See World Council of Churches, Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry, Faith and Order Paper No. 111 (Geneva: World Council of Churches, 1982) and One Baptism. Later in this thesis I will elaborate more on this ecumenical quest, and most extensively in Sub-Chapter

12 The Triune God and Baptism understandable for people living in secularized societies. Sub-question two focuses on the challenge of articulating theology on baptism in a way that can be conceived as relevant and intelligible in a contemporary cultural context. With sub-question two I aim to explore Jenson s and LaCugna s trinitarian theologies from the perspective of whether these theologies can be considered a resource for the task of interpreting the rite of baptism in a way that can be conceived as intelligible and relevant for people living in contemporary cultural contexts. The third sub-question is: How can recent developments in trinitarian theology provide resources for rearticulating a contemporary theology of forgiveness, as it relates to baptism? In traditional theology, the forgiveness of sins is explained as one of the main gifts of baptism. The Nicene Creed simply explains baptism as for the forgiveness of sins. In a recent empirical study in Norway on the topic of baptism, it was concluded that the parents interviewed in the study found the interpretation of baptism as a rite that bestows forgiveness rather un-intelligible. 18 This study points to what I consider a need for discussing how to think theologically about baptism for the forgiveness of sins today, and then not least in relation to the practice of infant baptism. In this thesis I want to explore whether and how Jenson and LaCugna s interpretation of the Trinity provides new resources for thinking about baptism for the forgiveness of sins. 1.2 Research Material An overarching aim of this dissertation is to explore the implications of a recent turn in contemporary trinitarian theology for baptismal theology. As mentioned, and as will be outlined more in detail in Sub-Chapter 1.4, a main theme in contemporary trinitarian theology concerns how to understand the relationship between the immanent and economic Trinity. This thesis explores the implications of the position of affirming an identity between the immanent and economic Trinity for baptismal theology. What is at play in the immanent-economic Trinity discussion is not only how the relation between the immanent Trinity and the economic Trinity is to be interpreted, but also the definition of the terms in use, the ontology in use, epistemological concerns, and interpretation of closely related concepts such as freedom, eternity, and love. To be 18 See the doctoral thesis of Ida Marie Høeg, Velkommen til oss : Ritualisering av livets begynnelse (Bergen: Universitetet i Bergen, 2008),

13 Chapter 1: Introduction able to take this complexity sufficiently into account I have chosen to focus on only two contributions in the so called radicalizing development of Rahner s rule, in the development towards arguing for a strict identity between the immanent and economic Trinity, with the aim of analyzing and discussing these contributions in more depth and exploring the implications of these specific contributions for baptismal theology. The reasons for having chosen to look closer at Robert W. Jenson s trinitarian theology are manifold. Firstly, his interpretation of the Trinity is seen as one of the most groundbreaking and influential contributions within contemporary trinitarian theology. 19 Secondly, Jenson is a Lutheran theologian. Since the concluding discussion places itself within a Lutheran tradition, 20 it is adequate to include the theology of a Lutheran theologian in the analysis that forms the backdrop to this discussion. 21 Thirdly, Jenson presents his position in the immanent-economic Trinity discussion within the framework of a more encompassing and comprehensive systematic theology that also includes theology on baptism. Jenson s interpretation of the doctrine of the Trinity is most fully developed in his two-volume work Systematic Theology (ST). 22 In this work he presents his trinitarian theology as a comprehensive systematic theology also including other central theological topics such as ecclesiology, Christology and soteriology. Because this is the work where his trinitarian theology and baptismal theology are most extensively presented, this two volume work will be the main material for the analysis and discussion of Jenson s theology. Other published texts of Jenson s will be used as material insofar as they contribute to clarifying Jenson s position with regards to the question under discussion. LaCugna is also chosen for several reasons. Firstly, LaCugna s interpretation of personhood in relational terms represents one of the most developed relational notions of personhood in contemporary theology. Secondly, LaCugna s main work on the doctrine of the Trinity includes an interpretation of the rite of baptism, which makes her theology suitable for an analysis of how her trinitarian theology impacts on baptism 19 I will return to this point in the introduction of his trinitarian theology in chapter This aspect of the thesis discussion will be outlined in chapter Other Lutheran theologians who have contributed to the development of a radicalization of Rahner s rule are Wolfhart Pannenberg and Ted Peters. 22 See Robert W. Jenson, Systematic Theology: The Triune God, vol. I (New York: Oxford University Press, 1997) and Robert W. Jenson, Systematic Theology: The Works of God, vol. II (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999) (hereafter abbreviated Jenson, ST I and Jenson, ST II). 11

14 The Triune God and Baptism theology. Thirdly, LaCugna includes a feminist perspective in her deliberation on the doctrine of the Trinity that is important in the discussion of a doctrine that by some is associated with patriarchism. 23 Why is a Roman Catholic theologian chosen for a study which in its concluding discussion will discuss contemporary theology of baptism from a Lutheran perspective? As I will return to and outline more in detail in 1.4, the concluding discussion of this thesis places itself within a Lutheran tradition, and views the Lutheran tradition within a larger ecumenical tradition. Given this perspective, to include a theologian from a theological tradition other than the Lutheran tradition might be seen as enrichment of the discussion rather than as a problem. I will elaborate more on this point in Sub- Chapter 1.3 where I will outline methodological considerations important for this thesis. LaCugna s theological career lasted only from the middle of the 1980s to her untimely death from cancer in Her main contribution to trinitarian theology is the work God for Us published in In this work she treats other theological topics, included baptismal theology, within the framework of her trinitarian theology. Since this is the work where her trinitarian theology is most comprehensively presented and since her trinitarian theology did not develop significantly after this work, God for Us will be the main material in the analysis and discussion of LaCugna s theology. Her other published works will be used supplementarily as far as they contribute to a clarification of her position in the immanent-economic Trinity discussion, and of her baptismal theology. 1.3 Research Method There is no such thing as one method of theology that can tell the theologian what to do, step by step, to solve a problem under discussion. The method of a study serves the specific purposes and aims of this particular study. As Peter Clough and Cathy Nutbrown confirm in a study on methodology, methods only arise in the service of quite particular needs and purposes. 25 The methodological considerations in this chapter are informed by methodological discussions in the wider field of theology in which this thesis places 23 I will later in this thesis return to how the doctrine of the Trinity, and especially the use of the formula Father, Son and Spirit, has met critique from feminist theologians. 24 Catherine Mowry LaCugna, God for Us: The Trinity and Christian life (New York: HarperCollins, 1991). 25 Peter Clough and Cathy Nutbrown, A Student's Guide to Methodology: Justifying Enquiry (London: Sage, 2012),

15 Chapter 1: Introduction itself. 26 In Sub-Chapter I will present the main methodological considerations that are important for the method of this thesis, and in Sub-Chapter I will present the procedure that the thesis will follow in order to approach the main research question Methodological considerations This dissertation is written within the discipline of systematic theology and more specifically within the discipline called Christian doctrine or dogmatics. Since my choice of how to approach the main problem of discussion in this thesis is impacted by how I understand the aim and purpose of this discipline, I will now briefly outline what I understand as the main aims of systematic theology. Drawing on Danish theologian Niels Henrik Gregersen s notion of systematic theology as contemporary theology, 27 I understand systematic theology as contemporary in a two-fold sense. Gregersen defines systematic theology as the descriptive and normative study of contemporary Christian thought, and he explains systematic theology as contemporary theology in a twofold sense. 28 Systematic theology is contemporary theology in the sense of having contemporary expressions of Christian faith and contemporary theological interpretations of these expressions as its main object of study. And, systematic theology is contemporary theology in the sense of providing suggestions for contemporary articulation and practice of Christian faith. This thesis aims at doing systematic theology as contemporary theology in this twofold sense. The main task of the thesis is to analyze the relationship between trinitarian theology and the baptismal theology in two contemporary systematizations of Christian faith, the systematic theology of Jenson and LaCugna. This analysis will be followed by a discussion of how Jenson s and LaCugna s contemporary interpretations of God and baptism can be understood as efforts to interpret God and baptism into a distinct cultural context and by a constructive 26 I distinguish between the terms method and methodology. For a good discussion of this distinction, see ibid., Niels Henrik Gregersen s theological program, Systematic Theology as Contemporary Theology, is outlined in the Danish journal article: Niels Henrik Gregersen, Dogmatik som samtidsteologi, Dansk Teologisk Tidsskrift 71(2008), and further specified in Niels Henrik Gregersen, Samtidsteologiens fokus og horisont, Dansk Teologisk Tidsskrift 74, no. 2 (2011): 167. The main ideas in his theological program are also reflected in the English article by Niels Henrik Gregersen, Ten Theses on the Future of Lutheran Theology, in The Gift of Grace: The Future of Lutheran Theology, ed. Niels Henrik Gregersen, et al. (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2005). 28 Gregersen, Dogmatik som samtidsteologi,

16 The Triune God and Baptism discussion of what could be an adequate contemporary articulation of Lutheran theology of baptism. Does this understanding of systematic theology as contemporary theology include a view of doctrinal history as irrelevant for Systematic Theology? No, contemporary expressions of Christian belief are not detached from history, but rather inhabited in traditions. 29 Thus, to have contemporary expressions and interpretations of Christian belief as the main object of study means that these expressions are understood as inhabited in traditions. The main perspective of systematic theology is, however, mainly synchronic in difference from the diachronic perspective in the discipline of doctrinal history. To study contemporary theology means to study theology in context. Throughout the twentieth century a certain idea has increasingly gained ground in theology; the idea that the theologian is physically, culturally and linguistically situated in context and that this embeddedness means that all theology is contextual. This insight is characteristic of what is often called a postmodern thinking on theology. 30 As Norwegian theologian Jan-Olav Henriksen says, postmodern epistemological thinking contributes to theology the insight that all theological thinking takes place with cultural resources in the society in which it is articulated. 31 There is no such thing as a noncontextual theology. All theology is written within a cultural context, with resources 29 That Christian belief is inhabited in traditions is an expression I borrow from Delwin Brown, Boundaries of Our Habitations: Tradition and Theological Construction (Albany: Suny, 1994). For the use of this term see also Gregersen, Dogmatik som samtidsteologi, 295. How to understand the concept of tradition is widely debated in contemporary philosophy and theology. Postmodern philosophy and theology have strongly pursued the idea that traditions are not fixed sizes but rather complex, manifold, and dynamically related to other traditions. What we define as a particular tradition is not only based on historical facts but also determined by contemporary and contextual conditioned interests. I agree with this argument. However, I do not agree with those who argue that we should abandon the concept of tradition altogether. For such a position, see for instance Sheila Greeve Davaney, Pragmatic Historicism, A theology for the Twenty-First Century (New York: State University of New York Press, 2000). Although I share the postmodern view on traditions as constructed, complex and manifold, I do consider the concept of tradition as useful for theology. I here share the position of Lieven Boeve who argues for a position between traditionalism and pure constructivism. Boeve understands traditions as living and life giving memory in the present and for the future, living tradition as the fruit of interaction between transmitted memory and actual context. See Lieven Boeve, Interrupting Tradition: An Essay on Christian Faith in a Postmodern Context, Louvain Theological & Pastoral Monographs (Louvain: Peeters, 2003), The two Swedish theologians Ola Sigurdson and Jayne Svenungsson define postmodern theology as a theology that operates on extensively changed epistemological conditions compared with modern theology. One of the crucial changes consists, they argue, in a new consciousness of how the thinking subject is physically, culturally, and linguistically situated. See Ola Sigurdson and Jayne Svenungsson, Postmodern teologi: En introduktion (Stockholm: Verbum, 2006), See Jan-Olav Henriksen, Creation and Construction: On the Theological Appropriation of Postmodern Theory, Modern Theology 18, no. 2 (2002). 14

17 Chapter 1: Introduction from this cultural context and as efforts to interpret the Christian faith into actual context. This idea of the contextuality of theology includes, as a consequence, the view that no theologian can claim to present a non-contextual interpretation of faith. As Henriksen argues, any articulation of faith must therefore be seen as contingent as a proposal for how Christian faith can be interpreted in a particular context and in a particular time. 32 Too many commentaries on the contemporary discussion of the immanenteconomic Trinity position suffer, as I see it, from not taking the cultural context of theology sufficiently into regard. Several studies of the contemporary trinitarian renewal provide skilled analyses of how different contemporary trinitarian positions can be seen in relation to each other and in relation to previous and historical interpretations of the doctrine of the Trinity, as well as of how these positions offer a reinterpretation of central concepts in trinitarian theology such as perichoresis and being. However, in general there is a lack of emphasis in these commentaries on the cultural-contextual dimension of the contributions to contemporary trinitarian theology. 33 A main methodological conviction in this study is that all theology has to be understood as contextual and as impacted by the theologian s embeddedness in a distinct culture. Based on this conviction I will read Jenson s and LaCugna s trinitarian theologies as efforts to re-interpret Christian faith in God into a distinct cultural context. I will also argue that one can only understand their theologies properly if one reads them as theologies-in-context. 32 This insight also includes the understanding of how a theological proposal cannot be properly understood if we do not take into regard its context of use. A philosophical insight that has increasingly gained ground in theology in the wake of Wittgenstein s late philosophy, is that it is not possible to understand a theological proposal if it is not seen in relation to its context of use. For a reference to this epistemological insight, see for instance the introduction to Jan-Olav Henriksen and Tage Kurten, eds., Crisis and Change: Religion, Ethics and Theology under Late Modern Conditions (Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2012), I can here mention the works Peters, God as Trinity; Grenz, Rediscovering the Triune God; Fred Sanders, The Image of the Immanent Trinity: Rahner's Rule and the Theological Interpretation of Scripture, Issues in Systematic Theology (Frankfurt am Main: P. Lang, 2005); Veli-Matti Kärkkäinen, The Trinity: Global Perspectives (Louisville: Westminster, 2007) and Chung-Hyun Baik, The Holy Trinity - God for God and God for Us: Seven Positions on the Immanent-Economic Trinity Relation in Contemporary Trinitarian Theology (Eugene, Oregon: Pickwick, 2011). These are acknowledged and highly skilled works that analyze and compare different contemporary trinitarian positions. In my own study I draw extensively on these works as they provide some good analyses and discussions of contemporary trinitarian theology. However, it is somewhat striking that none of these otherwise skilled works comment in any noteworthy degree on the cultural-contextual character of the contemporary trinitarian proposals. There are of course exceptions. One outstanding exception is Kevin J. Vanhoozer, The Trinity in a Pluralistic Age: Theological Essays on Culture and Religion (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997), where several of the articles in the book focus on the cultural-contextual dimension of contributions to the development of trinitarian theology. 15

18 The Triune God and Baptism That all theology is contextual also means that I, as a theologian, am situated in context, and that this contextual situation influences my thinking. In fact, that I am interested in the contextual dimension of Jenson s and LaCugna s theologies can be seen as influenced by my situation in a contemporary academic context where the contextuality of all thinking is emphasized as an important epistemological condition. I also touch upon the contextual framework of this dissertation in the outline of the backdrop for my choice of research question (see 1.1.1) as well as in the outline of the theoretical framework (see 1.4). What are the criteria for a good theological argument? The theological reasoning in this thesis is influenced by how I think about this question, by my view of what the important criteria for a good theological argument are. In my theological reasoning I sometimes explicitly refer to what I understand as important criteria, but most often I use these criteria more implicitly as integral to, and as guiding, my theological reasoning. Criteria I consider of special importance for the theological reasoning in this thesis are authenticity, applicability, and coherence. Very briefly stated, the criterion of authenticity concerns how a theological proposal relates to the Bible 34 and the general Christian tradition. With general Christian tradition I here mean Christian faith as it is interpreted and practiced in history and in contemporary times. Of special significance is the common Christian (ecumenical) interpretation and practice of Christian faith in previous times and contemporarily. This thesis places itself within a Lutheran tradition, and sees the Lutheran tradition within a larger ecumenical tradition. 35 The criterion of applicability concerns how practical and relevant a theology is for the continuous task of rethinking how to interpret and practice Christian faith in contemporary time and culture. 36 The criterion of applicability is here understood as also concerning the 34 My understanding of this criterion relates closely to Gregersen s outline of this criterion in Niels Henrik Gregersen, How to Cope with Pluralism in Dogmatics. A Proposal, Studia Theologica 44(1990): 134 and in Gregersen, Dogmatik som samtidsteologi, 305. The Bible functions in theology as a point of orientation for evaluating what are good Christian interpretations of faith and good Christian practices. As Niels Henrik Gregersen says, Holy Scripture has, in fact, the function of identifying Christianity and evaluating the authenticity of any later dogmatics. See Gregersen, How to Cope with Pluralism in Dogmatics. A Proposal, Thus, although I in general relate to common Christian interpretations and practices of Christian faith, I also, and especially in the concluding discussion, have a special focus on Christian interpretations and practices of faith in the Lutheran tradition. 36 George Lindbeck George explains this criterion as concerning how relevant and practical theology is in concrete situations. See George A. Lindbeck, The Nature of Doctrine: Religion and Theology in a Postliberal Age (Philadelphia: Westminster, 2009), 110. According to Niels Henrik Gregersen, Christian semantics need to be evaluated with regards to their potential for Christian communication practice in 16

19 Chapter 1: Introduction pragmatic consequences of a theological proposal, the question of whether there are possible unfortunate practical consequences of a theological interpretation. 37 Finally, by the criterion of coherence I here mean the demand for the consistency of an argument, for inner-coherence in theological systematizations of Christian faith, 38 and also for seeing a theological proposal in the larger context of the contemporary complex reality interpretation to which different sciences contribute Research procedure What is the procedure that this thesis will follow in order to approach the main research problem? This thesis explores possible implications of Jenson s and LaCugna s trinitarian theologies for baptismal theology. This aim is approached through a twostepped process. The first and main step is primarily analytical. I will analyze Jenson s and LaCugna s interpretations of the doctrine of the Trinity and the implications of their trinitarian theology for their baptismal theology. The second step is more constructive. I will discuss how their interpretations of God and of baptism may be better understood if they are understood as efforts to articulate the meaning of Christian faith into a distinct cultural context. I will also, and on the basis of the foregoing analysis and discussion, make some constructive suggestions about what could be an adequate interpretation of the Lutheran theology of baptism in a contemporary cultural context. The first step of the dissertation: A textual analysis The analysis in this thesis will balance between analyzing Jenson s and LaCugna s theologies with their own terminology and with a focus on their own apprehension of issues at stake, and by taking an external perspective on their theologies. The external contemporary context. Gregersen emphasizes the theological task of articulating Christian belief in a way that can be conceived intelligible and relevant in a wider cultural context, see Gregersen, Dogmatik som samtidsteologi, 310. In my understanding of this criterion I also adhere to an insight of Jan-Olav Henriksen, the insight that theology has the capacity to be relevant by not simply describing reality with a theological language, but also by opening for new interpretations and experiences of life. This insight he articulates in the Norwegian book Jan-Olav Henriksen, Teologi i dag: Samvittighet og selvkritikk (Bergen: Fagbokforlaget, 2007), as well as in the introduction of Jan-Olav Henriksen, Relating God and the Self: Dynamic Interplay (Farnham: Ashgate, 2013). 37 How this criterion is further understood will be developed in the course of this study. 38 The thesis will, through exploring the relationship between the thinking on the Trinity and the thinking of baptism, use consistency and inner-coherence rather extensively in the theological reasoning. 39 In the frame of this thesis this criterion is used in a limited degree, through using cultural theories found in philosophy and sociology in the discussion of Jenson s and LaCugna s theologies as efforts to communicate Christian faith into contemporary cultural context and in the discussion of what could be an adequate contemporary interpretation of God and baptism (see Chapters 8 and 9). 17

20 The Triune God and Baptism perspective is constituted first and foremost by the research problem (see 1.1). In the analysis I will explore Jenson s and LaCugna s immanent-economic Trinity positions, and the impact of their trinitarian position on their interpretation of baptism. Both Jenson and LaCugna emphasize that the doctrine of the Trinity has implications for all other theological topics. As I read their theologies, their interpretation of the Trinity appears to have an impact on their interpretation of baptism. However, they do not make this connection explicit. The main perspective of the analysis, to explore the connection between their interpretation of the Trinity and their interpretation of baptism, is in this way an external perspective which nevertheless tries to make explicit something implicit in their theologies. The perspective of the analysis is also external in that I make choices about what material needs to be presented and about how to present it. These choices are mainly made out of the concern for making explicit how the trinitarian theology and baptismal theology are related in Jenson s and LaCugna s theology, but also out of concern for what I presume will be relevant for the following concluding discussion of what could be an adequate contemporary articulation of Christian understanding of baptism. 40 As indicated in the last paragraph, my reading of Jenson s and LaCugna s theologies is more hermeneutical-explorative than evaluative. I will seek to identify and present their immanent-economic Trinity positions, explore how their immanenteconomic Trinity positions influence their thinking on baptism, and I will seek a deeper understanding of their theologies by discussing how their interpretations of God and baptism can be understood as efforts to re-interpret the doctrine of the Trinity and baptism into distinct cultural context. This hermeneutical-explorative reading will, however, also include some degree of evaluation of their theologies. For the criteria to be used in this evaluation, see The second step of the dissertation: Concluding discussion The concluding discussion consists of two main parts. I will first argue that Jenson s and LaCugna s interpretation of the Trinity and of the rite of baptism are better understood when they are understood as efforts to interpret Christian faith into a distinct cultural 40 To take an external perspective on the material is not optional. By trying to make crucial concerns, choices and arguments explicit throughout the thesis, I will, however, endeavor to make my perspective sufficiently transparent. 18

21 Chapter 1: Introduction context. Both Jenson and LaCugna write their theologies in contemporary Western postmodern cultural context (for this definition of the cultural context of their theologies, see chapter 1.4.3). In the first part of the concluding discussion I will argue that they offer two different options or strategies of thinking about God and baptism in this distinct cultural context. More precisely, I will argue that they offer two different strategies for interpreting God in contemporary cultural context and that this different strategy for god-talk leads to different interpretations of the rite of baptism. In the second and final section of the concluding part of the thesis I will provide a more constructive discussion of contemporary Lutheran theology regarding baptism. On the basis of the foregoing analysis and discussion, I will contribute some constructive proposals for a contemporary Lutheran theology of baptism. This discussion will relate to what I consider specific current challenges for the Lutheran church in contemporary Western societies, and I will especially relate the discussion to particular challenges in my own context, Norway. I thus aim to make the discussion context-near and relevant for concrete church issues. I firmly agree with John Webster s saying that systematic theology is at its best when it is clearly in touch with real life Theoretical Framework With theoretical framework I here mean research discussions, theories, definitions, and analytic models that are of decisive importance for the thesis analysis and discussion. One might say that the main theories of this thesis are the theology of Jenson and LaCugna, and more specifically their interpretation of the doctrine of the Trinity and of the rite of baptism. What I aim to do in this sub-chapter is to present some areas of research, analytic models, theories and definitions that serve as a backdrop to the thesis analysis and discussion of their theologies, and that need to be clarified in order to place the analysis and discussion more explicitly in context and in order to make the analysis and discussion more transparent. 41 John Webster, Introduction: Systematic Theology, in The Oxford Handbook of Systematic Theology, ed. Kathryn Tanner, Iain R. Torrance, and John Webster (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007). 19

22 The Triune God and Baptism The contemporary immanent-economic Trinity discussion A renewed interest in the doctrine of the Trinity In the last half century there has been an interesting development in trinitarian theology. In his 1967/1970 essay, The Trinity, Karl Rahner complained about a profound marginalization of the doctrine of the Trinity in theology and spirituality. 42 This complaint was at that time quite common in theology. Peter C. Phan says: it was de rigueur to bemoan the marginalization of the Trinity from theology and spirituality and the dearth works on the subject. 43 Today the complaint has quietened. In the last halfcentury the interest in trinitarian theology has increased tremendously. 44 The doctrine of the Trinity is now one of the most acknowledged Christian teachings and it has become one of the main topics on most theological agendas. 45 In the last two decades this so-called renewal of trinitarian theology has increasingly been recognized and commented on. 46 Stanley Grenz characterizes this development as one of the most farreaching theological developments of the century Rahner, The Trinity, Peter C. Phan, Systematic Issues in Trinitarian Theology, in The Cambridge Companion to the Trinity, ed. Peter C. Phan (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011), Claude Welch identified what he considered an emerging renewal of trinitarian theology already in 1952, but first in the 1990s the doctrine of the Trinity has been widely recognized as reappearing at the center of theology. As late as in 1982 Jürgen Moltmann complained about the marginalization of the doctrine of the doctrine of the Trinity in theology Jürgen Moltmann, The Trinity and the Kingdom of God: The Doctrine of God (London: SCM, 1981), 1. Christoph Schwöbel is one of the first to comment on the new situation in trinitarian theology saying that lamentation about the situation in trinitarian theology today would seem to be out of place in today s theological situation. See Christoph Schwöbel, Trinitarian Theology Today: Essays on Divine Being and Act (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1995), Fred Sanders says: it has now become a desideratum of any respectable Christian theology that it should show itself to be throughoutly trinitarian. See Sanders, The Image of the Immanent Trinity, In recent years a great number of comments on this development have been published. In 1993 Ted Peters wrote Trinitarian theology has proved to be one of the best-kept secrets in theology during the last half of the twentieth century. See Peters, God as Trinity, 7. His book God as Trinity published in 1993 was one of the very first comprehensive comments on the trinitarian renewals. This publication has, however, been followed by numerous comments on the renewal of trinitarian theology. Among these comments are those by John Thompson, Modern Trinitarian Perspectives (New York: Oxford University Press, 1994); Schwöbel, Trinitarian Theology Today, David S. Cunningham, These Three are One: The Practice of Trinitarian Theology, Challenges in Contemporary Theology (Malden, Mass.: Blackwell, 1998); Grenz, Rediscovering the Triune God, Sanders, The Image of the Immanent Trinity and Baik, The Holy Trinity. Two Northern contributions are Kärkkäinen, The Trinity and Bo Sandahl, Person, relation och Gud: Konstruktionen av ett relationellt personbegrepp i nutida trinitarisk teologi (Lunds Universitet, 2004). 47 Grenz, Rediscovering the Triune God, 1. 20