Tuesday, December 16, 2003

Breath and Word

A few responses to Matt from his Responsio.

1. Surely the Bible utilizes the language of the Spirit in us and in our heart. These refer not to "within" vs "without" but rather to the whole person. Much of the Bible's witness in this regard shows the Spirit's descent or invasion as a wind or breath. Thus, the Spirit is not defined in any way in the Bible as non-corporeal even if the Spirit is eternal and from the Father. The citations you provide from Paul can be seen in the light I put forward here.

2. You still do not address in your responses the questions I raise about freedom interpreted by obedience. This, I think, is central and I appreciate your grounding the matter in the action of the Spirit. Why the result is not freedom blasting open obedience, I leave to you to ponder.

3. We could further discuss this matter in terms of the ordo salutis you indicate on either Catholic or Protestant grounds. I do not appreciate either approach despite the complexity of concern that Lutherans brought to such formulas in the period of Orthodoxy or the Formula of Concord itself.

4. I further find obedience is something that needs to be resisted in understanding inter-Trinitarian relations. The obedience of the Son to the Father does not respect the Son's freedom vis-a-vis the Father much less what the Son does for the Father. The Father is witnessed to by the Son and very much waits on the Son for what the Son will hand over to him (1 Cor 15). The reciprocity of relations and actions among the Triune identities may not be symmetrical or even in some way but obedience should be replaced by sending. Otherwise there are a whole host of issues I can raise concerning the place of Jesus' human action in the divine life either as mirror of the eternal love or its very crucial point.

Yada yada yada!!

No comments:

Post a Comment