Trinity Without Hierarchy: Reclaiming Nicene Orthodoxy in Evangelical Theology

Appreciated gift for an avid reader in the family ♥️

Michael Bird and Scott Harrower have assembled a team of theological avengers to undo the damage done by Wayne thanos Grudem and the dastardly subordinationists. Exegetically sound, theologically rich, and pastorally sensitive, this book is a welcome and decisive addition to one's trinitarian library. Top notch and cracking!NQ

Trinity Without Hierarchy (TWH) is written within the context of a Trinitarian debate. The subject of this debate is the relation between persons of the Trinity. More specifically, does the doctrine of the Trinity teach us a hierarchy of being between the persons of the Trinity and hence a hierarchy of being within mankind? In the 4th century Athanasius, responding to Arius’ teaching that had been circulating throughout the church, left us with a non-subordinationist non-hierarchical affirmation of the doctrine of the Trinity that stated among other things,And in this Trinity none is before or after other; none is greater or less than another; But the whole three Persons are coeternal together, and coequal: so that in all things, as is aforesaid, the Unity in Trinity and the Trinity in Unity is to be worshiped.For there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost is all one: the glory equal, the majesty coeternal. However, apparently the question hasn’t been thoroughly answered. TWH is written in response to modern writers who want to suggest that hierarchy or subordination does exist between persons of the Trinity.Suggestions of hierarchy and subordination in Trinitarian theology are not necessarily baseless beliefs. Typically these categories of hierarchy and subordination are defended through the observation of economic distinctions within the Trinity. These observations are then used to explain distinctions between persons and even gender roles to support a complementarian viewpoint. The question then becomes, is it necessary to posit hierarchy and subordination within the Trinity in order to maintain complementarianism? It is the central thesis of TWH to explain that a complementarian perspective does not necessarily require one to believe in hierarchy within the persons of the Trinity. Hence the title of the book.TWH demonstrates this central thesis by offering a collection of essays written from various perspectives. Some of the authors come from egalitarian backgrounds while others are complementarian. However, each is united in a non-subordinationist non-hierarchical approach to the doctrine of the Trinity. The result is a consistent view of Nicene orthodox Trinitarian theology without hierarchy. That is to say that each of the authors maintain that “the Trinity consists of one God who is three distinct and equal persons, and the distinctions do not entail subordination or hierarchy.”This is an important topic even for those not interested in Trinitarian Theology. It is beneficial to have a working knowledge or at the minimum familiarity of the arguments being represented. This doesn’t seem like a topic that is going away any time in the near future, especially with the current cultural climate’s antagonism against Christianity. Such topics need to be discussed if for no other reason than to refute these false notions. I personally have benefited from the cursery read that I gave it and have appreciated the books organization and broad range of subtopics as they relate to a proper understanding of Trinitarian complementarianism.My personal rating 5 stars out of 5.

In recent years, a group of American evangelical theologians have burst on the scene contending for what some term “eternal functional subordination” (EFS) of the Son to the Father, or “eternal relationships of authority and submission” (ERAS) within the Trinity. The theologians making this contention are what is known as “complementarians,” rooting their understanding of authority and submission in male and female relationships in what they see are similar relationships within the Trinity.This proposal has been challenged as problematic in terms of Trinitarian orthodoxy, and while not intending any of these things, opens the door to tritheism or forms of Arianism and semi-Arianism. [As one who has worked in multi-faith contexts, I believe this perspective also offers ample fodder for Muslim apologists.] While it is true that in the economic out-working of the Triune God in our salvation, the Incarnate Son obeys the Father, it is another move altogether to assert that this reflects the essence of the relationships within the immanent Trinity. There is also the problem of analogs between human relationships and the intra-trinitarian relationships.The contributors of this book argue for what they understand is the orthodox articulation of the nature and relationships of the Triune God, as formulated in the Nicean-Constantinopolitan councils. Editor Michael Bird writes: "The central thesis of this book is that the evangelical consensus, in keeping with its catholic and orthodox heritage, affirms that the Trinity consists of one God who is three distinct and equal persons, and the distinctions do not entail subordination or hierarchy. As such, this volume tries to do two things. First it constitutes a robust restatement of Trinitarian orthodoxy with special attention paid to a non-subordinationist and non-hierarchical account of the relationships within the Godhead. Second, it attempts to wrestle the doctrine of the Trinity away from the trenches of American evangelical debates about gender and authority."One fact that is important to note in this work is that contributors differ on gender and authority roles, with some being egalitarians and some complementarians. Both argue for a Trinity without hierarchy.The sixteen chapters in this work divide into three parts. The first part of the work considers biblical perspectives on the Trinity, particularly in engaging in close exegesis of contended passages in John, 1 Corinthians 11, Hebrews, and Revelation. Beginning with chapter 5, contributors write on the insights to be gained from historical theology for the present discussion with Peter Leithart considering Athanasius, Amy Brown Hughes focusing on Gregory of Nyssa, Tyler Wittman considering Aquinas and the subsequent Reformer: Turretin, Polanus, and Owen, and what their work delineated as to what could and could not be said about the inner life of the Trinity. Other writers focus more deeply on John Owen, the work of Protestant “scholastics,” and Wolfhart Pannenberg. Chapters 12 to 16 then engage the current debate more directly, including a lengthy critique of Bruce Ware’s methodology by co-editor Scott Harrower.The final chapter, also by Harrower, was a succinct summary of why all this matters. He notes that semi-Arian tendencies in the 18th century church led to anti-Trinitarian and unitarian formulations over the next two centuries. His contention is that theological cultures have intergenerational impacts that the framers of subordinationist theologies must also consider.I was impressed with the consistent careful scholarship, the fine-grained discussion pressing against the limits of human grasp of the nature of the Triune God. Nearly every chapter concluded with two to three pages of bibliography, evidence of a resurgence of trinitarian theology. The discussion also both gave me a deep appreciation of the importance of the Nicean-Constantinopolitan formulations regarding the Trinity and yet raised the question of whether this must, or will always be the church’s reference point. At very least, any new formulations must avoid the errors these formulations address. And here it seems, according to these authors, subordinationist theologies of the Trinity are not a step forward, building on the councils, but a step back.________________________________Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary review copy of this book from the publisher. The opinions I have expressed are my own.