[Click here for the companion YouTube video]
QUESTION: The doctrine of perichoresis teaches that each of the Persons of the Trinity indwell the other two. Do you think that the entirety of each Person indwells the other two, or just a portion? Does the belief in one or the other of these views have any theological implications?
MARTIN LUTHER (1483–1546). Martin Luther is considered the Father of Protestantism. He was a priest, theologian, author, hymnwriter, and professor. As a theologian, one of his major breaks from the Catholic church was that each individual can read and interpret Scripture for themselves. To further this goal, Luther eventually translated the entire Bible into German. Luther’s theological approach was very oriented towards Christ’s crucifixion, often referred to as “theology of the cross.” Luther bases his theology only on Scripture, and recognized that Trinity is not a scriptural word. However, Luther is convinced that Scripture testifies to orthodox trinitarian teaching, although indirectly. The following reading is from a sermon that Luther prepared for Trinity Sunday.
LUTHER READING: 1. Today we celebrate the festival of the Holy Trinity, to which we must briefly allude, so that we may not celebrate it in vain. It is indeed true that the name “Trinity” is nowhere to be found in the Holy Scriptures, but has been conceived and invented by man. For this reason it sounds somewhat cold and we had better speak of “God” than of the “Trinity.” 2. This word signifies that there are three persons in God. It is a heavenly mystery which the world cannot understand. I have often told you that this, as well as every other article of faith, must not be based upon reason or comparisons, but must be understood and established by means of passages from the Scriptures, for God has the only perfect knowledge and knows how to speak concerning himself. […] 12. Therefore, we cling to the Scriptures, those passages which testify of the Trinity of God, and we say: I know very well that in God there are the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit; but how they can be one I do not know, neither should I know it. [Sermon for Trinty Sunday, §1]
HULDRYCH ZWINGLI (1484–1531). Huldrych Zwingli was a Swiss priest in the canton of Zürich and the first major Protestant reformer after Luther. Zwingli had a much more aggressive vision of a Reformed church when compared to Luther. Instead of eliminating elements of worship contrary to Biblical teaching, Zwingli advocated only the inclusion of elements specifically taught in the Bible. Like Luther, Zwingli only recognized Scripture as a valid source for theology. In the following writing, Zwingli argues that Scripture clearly teaches that God is One, and also that the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God.
ZWINGLI READING: There is one single, simple, eternal God, whose essence is undivided and without parts. Yet in this one essence there are three Persons, truly and distinctly subsisting: the Father, who is unbegotten and from whom all things have their origin; the Son, who is eternally begotten of the Father, true God from true God; and the Holy Spirit, who proceeds from the Father through the Son, and who is Himself true God. These three are not three gods, but one God: not confounded in person, nor separated in essence; for the essence of God is one and the same, and His will is one. Therefore, the works which God does toward His creatures are not divided among the Persons but are the work of the one divine power. Thus we confess the Trinity, because Scripture clearly teaches that the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God, and yet that God is one. [De Trinitate et Fide Catholica, Opera, vol. 3]
JOHN CALVIN (1509–1564). John Calvin was a French theologian and the second most important person of the Protestant Reformation after Martin Luther. Calvin’s most important work is called Institutes of the Christian Religion, or simply the Institutes. Calvin, like Luther and Zwingli, believes in One God consisting of three Persons. Here, Calvin also shows his agreement with the doctrine of perichoresis (mutual indwelling), and also explains his understanding of the relationship of the Son from the perspective of divine essence versus from the perspective of CALVIN READING. In each hypostasis the whole nature is understood, the only difference being that each has his own peculiar subsistence. The whole Father is in the Son, and the whole Son in the Father, as the Son himself also declares (John 14:10), “I am in the Father, and the Father in me;” nor do ecclesiastical writers admit that the one is separated from the other by any difference of essence. […] [The writings of the Fathers] sometimes appear to be at variance with each other […] At one time they teach that the Father is the beginning of the Son, at another they assert that the Son has both divinity and essence from himself, and therefore is one beginning with the Father. […] when we speak of the Son simply, without reference to the Father, we truly and properly affirm that he is of himself, and, accordingly, call him the only beginning; but when we denote the relation which he bears to the Father, we correctly make the Father the beginning of the Son. [The Institutes, 1.13.19]
Leave a Reply