Table Of Contentmedieval trinitarian thought from
aquinas to ockham
How can the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit be distinct and yet
identical?PromptedbythedoctrineofthedivineTrinity,thisquestion
sparked centuries of lively debate. In the current context of renewed
interest in trinitarian theology, Russell L. Friedman provides the first
surveyofthescholasticdiscussionoftheTrinityinthe100-yearperiod
stretchingfromThomasAquinas’earliestworkstoWilliamOckham’s
death.
Tracingtwocentralissues–theattempttoexplainhowthethreepersons
aredistinctfromoneanotherbutidenticalasGod,andtheapplication
totheTrinityofa“psychologicalmodel,”onwhichtheSonisamental
wordorconcept,andtheHolySpiritislove–thisvolumeoffersabroad
overviewoftrinitarianthoughtinthethirteenthandfourteenthcenturies,
alongwithfocusedstudiesofthetrinitarianideasofmanyoftheperiod’s
most important theologians. An “Annotated bibliography” points the
readertofurthersecondaryliterature.
russell l. friedman is Professor of Philosophy at the Katholieke
UniversiteitLeuven.
Cambridge Books Online © Cambridge University Press, 2010
Cambridge Books Online © Cambridge University Press, 2010
MEDIEVAL TRINITARIAN
THOUGHT FROM AQUINAS
TO OCKHAM
RUSSELL L. FRIEDMAN
Cambridge Books Online © Cambridge University Press, 2010
cambridgeuniversitypress
Cambridge,NewYork,Melbourne,Madrid,CapeTown,Singapore,Sa˜oPaulo,Delhi,
Dubai,Tokyo
CambridgeUniversityPress
TheEdinburghBuilding,Cambridgecb28ru,UK
PublishedintheUnitedStatesofAmericabyCambridgeUniversityPress,NewYork
www.cambridge.org
Informationonthistitle:www.cambridge.org/9780521117142
(cid:2)c RussellL.Friedman2010
Thispublicationisincopyright.Subjecttostatutoryexception
andtotheprovisionsofrelevantcollectivelicensingagreements,
noreproductionofanypartmaytakeplacewithoutthewritten
permissionofCambridgeUniversityPress.
Firstpublished2010
PrintedintheUnitedKingdomattheUniversityPress,Cambridge
AcataloguerecordforthispublicationisavailablefromtheBritishLibrary
LibraryofCongressCataloguinginPublicationdata
Friedman,RussellL.
MedievaltrinitarianthoughtfromAquinastoOckham/RussellL.Friedman.
p. cm.
Includesindex.
isbn978-0-521-11714-2(hardback)
1.Trinity–Historyofdoctrines–MiddleAges,600–1500. I.Title.
bt109.f75 2010
231(cid:3).0440940902–dc22 2009047110
isbn978-0-521-11714-2Hardback
CambridgeUniversityPresshasnoresponsibilityforthepersistenceor
accuracyofURLsforexternalorthird-partyinternetwebsitesreferredto
inthispublication,anddoesnotguaranteethatanycontentonsuch
websitesis,orwillremain,accurateorappropriate.
Cambridge Books Online © Cambridge University Press, 2010
Contents
Acknowledgments pagevii
Listofsymbols,abbreviations,andconventions viii
Introduction 1
1. TheTrinityandtheAristoteliancategories:differentwaysof
explainingidentityanddistinction 5
6
Background,andtherelationaccount
Theemanationaccountandthefoundationsofthetrinitarian
15
traditions
Emergingtrinitariantraditionsinthelatethirteenthcentury:the
30
caseofJohnPecham
45
HenryofGhentandtherejectionoftherelationaccount
2. TheTrinityandhumanpsychology:“Inthebeginningwasthe
Word” 50
ThepsychologicalmodeloftheTrinityanditsproper
52
interpretation
75
Concepttheoryandtrinitariantheology
3. TheTrinityandmetaphysics:theformaldistinction,divine
simplicity,andthepsychologicalmodel 94
Thedivineattributes,thesearchforsimplicity,andthepossibility
94
oftrinitarianexplanation
113
PeterAuriol
120
FrancisofMarchia
124
WilliamOckham
4. TheTrinity,divinesimplicity,andfideism–or:wasGilson
rightaboutthefourteenthcenturyafterall? 133
Fideism,Praepositinianism,andthedebateoverpersonal
133
constitution
146
WalterChatton
155
RobertHolcot
158
GregoryofRimini
v
Cambridge Books Online © Cambridge University Press, 2010
vi Contents
Appendix:majorelementsinFranciscanandDominicantrinitarian
theologies 171
Bibliographyofprimarysources 174
Annotatedbibliographyofselectedsecondaryliterature 178
Index 187
Cambridge Books Online © Cambridge University Press, 2010
Acknowledgments
ThepresentbookoriginatedasfourlecturesheldattheE´colepratiquedes
hautese´tudesinParisinMarchandApril2008.Thelectureswerearranged
by Ire`ne Rosier-Catach and especially Olivier Boulnois, and I am truly
gratefultothemboth.Ialsowanttothanktheparticipantsatthelecturesfor
offeringanextremelycongenialandtrulyinspiringforumfortheexchange
ofinformation.Forhelpfulcommentsandquestions,thanksgotoBoulnois
and Rosier-Catach, as well as to Alain Boureau, Dragos Calma, Monica
Calma, Dominique Demange, Ana Maria Mora, Dominique Poirel, and
JacobSchmutz.MarkHenninger,SimoKnuuttila,BruceMarshall,andChris
SchabelgaveinvaluablecounselasIplannedpublicationofthebook.Kate
BrettatCambridgeUniversityPresswasthesourceofbothencouragement
andexpertadvice,whilethreeanonymousreadersforthePressofferedme
useful suggestions for improvements. My best reader and editor, here as
always,ismywife,PernilleHarsting.
vii
Cambridge Books Online © Cambridge University Press, 2010
Symbols, abbreviations, and
conventions
a. articulus
BN(C) Bibliotecanazionale(centrale)
c. caput
d(d). distinctio(nes)
f(f). folio(s)
ms(s). manuscript(s)
Ord. Ordinatio
OTh Operatheologica
prin. principium
q(q). questio(nes)
Rep. Reportatio
resp. responsio
Sent. Sententiae
un. unica/us
<x> (inaLatintext):Ihaveaddedxtothetext
[x] (inaLatintext):Ihavedeletedxfromthetext
[x] (inanEnglishtext):Ihaveaddedxtothetext
ReferencestopublishedLatintextsareabbreviatedaccordingtotheeditor’s
ortheseriesnameandkeyedtothe“Bibliographyofprimarysources”;line
numbers in modern critical editions are indicated in superscripts to page
numberreferences.
Translations into English of central Latin texts are numbered and are
cross-referencedbymeansofthisnumberingsystem.
“Atn. x”indicatesthatthereadershouldseethemaintextatfootnote
indicatorx.
viii
Cambridge Books Online © Cambridge University Press, 2010
Introduction
My purpose in this book is to give a broad overview of some of
the central aspects of and developments in the trinitarian theology
1250 1350 1
writtenintheLatinWestbetweenroughly and AD. The
emphasis here will be on philosophical theology, on the rational
investigationoftheTrinitybylater-medievaltheologiansusingthe
fullrangeoftoolsavailabletothemfromespeciallytheAristotelian
tradition of philosophical analysis. Nevertheless, the philosophical
nature of the discussion as it is presented here should not obscure
the fact that the intense interest with which later-medieval theolo-
giansapproachedtheissueisanindicationprimarilyoftheimmense
religiousimportanceithadforthem.ForthedoctrineoftheTrinity
isattheheartoftheChristianfaith.Onthebasisofstatementsfrom
especially the NewTestamentthatsuggestedthatthesavior,Jesus
Christ,istheverysameGodastheFatherwhosenthimandyetisin
2
somewaydistinctfromtheFather, thedoctrineoftheTrinitywas
formulated by the early Church Fathers and in the Creeds issuing
from the ecumenical councils of the second to the fourth centuries
1 Onanumberofissues,theLatinandtheGreekChristiantraditionshad(andhave)rather
divergent trinitarian views; I touch on one of the points of contention – the Filioque
controversy–inChapter1below,atandaroundn.39.
2 StatementsliketheonefromJohn’sGospelfoundinQuotation2a,inChapter2below.
1
Cambridge Books Online © Cambridge University Press, 2010
