Peter Leithart in highlighting parts of the historical work of Philip Dixon (Nice and Hot Disputes), observes that beginning with the English Enlightenment critical writers began launching “moralistic and rationalistic attacks on the doctrine [of the Trinity]. It didn't make sense, and, besides, it made no difference. A doctrine so rationally absurd couldn't be the cornerstone of religion; a doctrine so practically insignificant wasn't worth believing.”
“Dixon argues that the more fateful dynamic came not from outside the church but from within, not from detractors of Trinitarian theology, but from defenders. In responding to attacks, orthodox Christians turned the Trinity into a polemical doctrine, and the rich speculations that characterized the earlier part of the seventeenth century dried up. The Trinity becomes a sheer, irrational datum of revelation, to be believed and defended but not a source of intellectual and spiritual delight...”
“Dixon argues that the more fateful dynamic came not from outside the church but from within, not from detractors of Trinitarian theology, but from defenders. In responding to attacks, orthodox Christians turned the Trinity into a polemical doctrine, and the rich speculations that characterized the earlier part of the seventeenth century dried up. The Trinity becomes a sheer, irrational datum of revelation, to be believed and defended but not a source of intellectual and spiritual delight...”
No comments:
Post a Comment