Deification

Pneuma 28,1_f3_4-20II
3/16/06
4:19 PM
Page 5
PNEUMA: The Journal of the Society for Pentecostal Studies, Volume 28, No. 1, Spring 2006
S
P
S
Articles
Integrating Pneumatology and Christology:

A Trinitarian Modification of
Clark H. Pinnocks Spirit Christology
Steven M. Studebaker
Clark H. Pinnocks Flame of Love: A Theology of the Holy Spirit is
one of the most significant evangelical theologies produced in the last
decade of the twentieth century.1 Pinnock has written an innovative, ecumenical, and constructive pneumatology from within the evangelical
tradition and, at the very least, touching the Pentecostal Movement. Pinnock
has become an important evangelical dialogue partner for Pentecostals
because he respectively treats and converses with Pentecostal theological
insight and scholarship. Reflecting and encouraging this convivial relationship, Journal of Pentecostal Theology showcased Flame of Love with
review articles of it by prominent Pentecostal theologians Terry L. Cross
and Frank D. Macchia, along with Pinnocks response to Cross and
Macchia.2 Pinnock also delivered a plenary address at the thirty-fourth
annual meeting of the Society for Pentecostal Studies.3
Flame of Love addresses topics such as the Trinity, creation, ecclesiology,
and redemption from the vantage point of the doctrine of the Holy Spirit.
Pinnock dialogues with contemporary theologians and those from the
history of Christian thought from a variety of traditions to construct a
fresh and vibrant pneumatology. Christology is one of the doctrines that
1
(Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1996).

Terry L. Cross, A Critical Review of Clark Pinnocks Flame of Love: A Theology
of the Holy Spirit, Journal of Pentecostal Theology 13 (1998): 329; Frank D. Macchia,
Tradition and the Novum of the Spirit: A Review of Clark Pinnocks Flame of Love,
Journal of Pentecostal Theology 13 (1998): 3148; and Clark H. Pinnock, A Bridge and
Some Points of Growth: A Reply to Cross and Macchia, Journal of Pentecostal Theology
13 (1998): 4954.
3 Plenary session: A Conversation with Professor Clark Pinnock, thirty-fourth annual
meeting of the Society for Pentecostal Studies, March 1012, 2005.
2
2006 Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden
pp. 520
3/16/06
4:19 PM
Page 6
Pinnock engages in a way that is unique and even groundbreaking among

evangelicals. The result is a Spirit Christology. The contribution this makes
to evangelical and Pentecostal scholarship is to give the Holy Spirit a central role in the life and ministry of Jesus Christ.
Pinnock emphasizes the Spirits anointing of Jesus. By anointing Jesus
Christ, the Spirit provides him with the power to be faithful to the Father.
In a representative statement, Pinnock remarks that it was the anointing
by the Spirit that made Jesus Christ, not the hypostatic union, and it was
the anointing that made him effective in history as the absolute savior,
Jesus was ontologically Son of God from the moment of conception, but
he became Christ by the power of the Spirit.4 The role of the Spirit is,
then, to empower the Son to achieve his redemptive purposes. Pentecostals
are drawn naturally to the notion of the Spirit empowering Jesus in his
redemptive mission because it dovetails with their understanding of the
Spirits empowerment of believers for ministry. The logic of the theology
is that since the Spirit enabled Jesus to fulfill his mission, so also the
Spirit enables Jesus followers to carry out their mission.5
Although the intent is otherwise, however, conceiving the primary work
of the Spirit in terms of empowerment extends a subordination of the
Spirit in christological thinking and in the doctrine of grace. This is the
case because the Spirit does not play a constitutional role in the incarnation,
but rather comes upon something that is already given: namely, the incarnated divine Son. Thus the consequence of portraying the Spirit empowering Jesus work is to reduce the Spirit to a super-additum. Transposed
to the doctrine of grace the result is the same. The Spirits work in the
believer, whether understood in the traditional Protestant category of
sanctification or the Pentecostal/Charismatic one of empowerment, is an
addendum to an already given datum, namely, salvation in Christ. Thus,
the problem with Pinnocks construction is not that it portrays the Spirit
enabling Jesus Christ to fulfill his mission, but rather that it misplaces the
primary work of the Spirit.
An alternative vision is to see the principal work of the Spirit in the
incarnation as uniting the divine Son with the humanity of Jesus Christ.
The anointing of Christs humanity is the precondition of the union, but
the latter is the ultimate and fundamental activity of the Spirit. The unitive role becomes clear when Spirit Christology is articulated in terms of
Pinnock, Flame of Love, 8081.

Pinnock encourages the correlation between the Spirits empowerment of Jesus to
fulfill his ministry and the believers walk in the Spirit (Pinnock, Flame of Love, 8586).
5
3/16/06
4:19 PM
Page 7
Integrating Pneumatology and Christology: A Trinitarian Modification of Clark H. Pinnocks Spirit Christology
the Trinity. Stated briefly, Pinnocks Spirit Christology needs refinement

from the perspective of the doctrine of the Trinity. The purpose here is
constructive and affirmative in relation to Pinnocks project. I want to
bring a modification to it that gives the Holy Spirit a constitutional role
in the incarnation and, thereby, to fortify its Pentecostal nature.
In order to illustrate the advancement that a trinitarian perspective
brings to Pinnocks Spirit Christology, I first outline Pinnocks account
of Spirit Christology and the problematic of identifying anointing as the
Spirits primary work in the life of Jesus Christ. The second section details
the mutual love model of the Trinity, which is implicit but undeveloped
in Pinnocks treatment. Finally, I argue that, based on the Spirits identity in the triune God, the Spirits cardinal role in the incarnation is that
of uniting the divine Son with the humanity of Jesus Christ.
Clark Pinnocks Spirit Christology
Pinnock begins by noting the traditional overemphasis on Logos
Christology in the evangelical tradition. The typical portrait relies almost
exclusively on the imagery of the divine Logos or Son assuming humanity.
The result is a pneumatological deficit in christological reflection. A case
in point is Millard J. Ericksons The Word Became Flesh, which is perhaps
the most extended evangelical account of Christology in the latter twentieth
century. Erickson develops the Spirits role in the life of Jesus no further
than a few comments on his conception based on Luke 1:35.6
Although Spirit Christology critiques the dominance of Logos Christology, it does not supplant Logos Christology. Some scholars do in fact
suggest the substitution of Spirit Christology for Logos Christology, but
they do so because they operate from a nontraditional trinitarian perspective, which is not the case for Pinnock.7 In contrast to replacement,
6 Millard J. Erickson, The Word Became Flesh (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House,
1991), 2324 and 39.
7 Roger Haights, The Case for Spirit Christology, Theological Studies 53 (1992):
25787 and Jesus: Symbol of God (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1999), 44566 and 47691
are important examples of Spirit Christology conducted without adherence to traditional
trinitarian theology. For a review of non-trinitarian Spirit Christologies, see Myk Habets,
Spirit Christology: Seeing in Stereo, Journal of Pentecostal Theology 11, no. 2 (2003):
2049. Pentecostal scholar Harold Hunter critiqued the early non-trinitarian forms of Spirit
Christology; see Spirit Christology: Dilemma and Promise (1), Heythrop Journal 24
(1983): 12740, and Spirit Christology: Dilemma and Promise (2), Heythrop Journal 24
(1983): 26677. The Spirit Christology presented here and advocated by Pinnock, however, is immune to his criticisms.
3/16/06
4:19 PM
Page 8
Spirit Christology that operates from a trinitarian perspective complements

the traditional accent on the Logos assumption of human nature.8
The benefit of Spirit Christology is that it better reflects the biblical
data than does the one-sided emphasis of Logos Christology. The Old
Testament defines the coming Messiah in terms of pneumatology (Isaiah
11:2; 42:1; and 61:1). The New Testament presents Jesus Christ fulfilling
these expectations. Luke 1:35 and Matthew 1:1820 portray the Spirit
bringing about the incarnation. The activity of the Holy Spirit characterizes
the life and ministry of Jesus: the Spirit descends on him at his baptism
(Mark 1:913; Matt 3:1317; Luke 3:2122; and John 1:3234), leads
him into the wilderness and helps him to overcome temptation (Mark
1:1213; Matt 4:111; and Luke 4:113), and resurrects him (Rom 8:911).
Jesus consciousness of being Messiah was in terms of bearing the Spirit
in a unique fashion (Luke 4:1421). The early Christians understood Jesus
Christs ministry as a product of the Holy Spirits presence (Acts 10:38).
Additionally, the New Testament casts the redemption of Christ in pneumatological categories. One of the clearest identifications of Christs
redemption as the gift of the Spirit is John 7:3739. Developing the springs
of living water metaphor previously presented in John 4:1314, Jesus
promises that he who believes in me . . . out of his heart shall flow rivers
of living water (7:38), which the narrator clarifies as the gift of the Holy
Spirit in 7:39: Now this he said about the Spirit, which those who believed
in him were to receive. Thus, assigning a central role to the Spirit in
Jesus Christs life and redemption has biblical justification.9
Spirit Christology helps to avoid unintentionally subordinating the work
of the Spirit to that of Christ. In evangelical and Pentecostal theology, the
Spirit is not typically related to the historical life of Jesus Christ. Rather,
the Spirit is linked to the subjective application of Christs work and
thereby subsumed under the category of spiritual illumination and sanctification in evangelical theology, and the second work of grace and/or spiritual gifts in Pentecostal and Charismatic theology. In both cases, an
integral work of the Spirit in the fundamental salvific activity of Christ
is absent. In contrast, Spirit Christology maintains that the Holy Spirit
plays a central role in the incarnation and subsequent ministry of Christ.10
Spirit Christology also emphasizes the life of Jesus Christ as emblematic
of the Christian life. Understanding Christ as the pattern of redemption
8
Pinnock, Flame of Love, 80 and 9192.

For Pinnocks discussion of the biblical texts relating to the Spirits activity in Christ,
see Flame of Love, 7980 and 8391.
10 Ibid., 80 and 9192.
9
3/16/06
4:19 PM
Page 9
is not a form of moral exemplarism in which Christ is primarily a model

of ethics and Christian behavior (although he is not less than that). It
means that the dynamic empowerment and unity of God in the humanity
of Christ is the paradigm of redemption. Pinnock affirms that in Christ
God recapitulates by the Spirits empowerment what human beings were
unable to do in their power. The gospel provides human persons the ability
to turn away from sin and live in devotion to God through the power of
Gods Spirit.11
Perhaps most importantly, Spirit Christology brings Christology into
a trinitarian focus. The incarnation is the result of the activity of the trinitarian God. The Son is incarnated, but the Father and Spirit are involved
in the process that constitutes the incarnation of the Son in Jesus Christ.
Pinnock recognizes the trinitarian foundation of his Spirit Christology,
but leaves it in respect to the incarnation in an undeveloped state.12 However,
the constitutional role of the Spirit in the incarnation needs refinement
through a clear consolidation with the doctrine of the Trinity. Articulating
the integration of the Trinity with Spirit Christology is the purpose of the
following sections. Before developing the case for a Spirit Christology
from the vantage of the trinitarian God, however, I first describe the role
of the Spirits anointing in Pinnocks Christology and the problematic it
poses for a trinitarian Spirit Christology.
Pinnocks primary metaphor for understanding the Spirits work in
Jesus Christ is anointing. The biblical warrant for this is that Christ literally means anointed one and that Jesus Christ identified himself as
the one anointed by the Spirit (Luke 4:18). Pinnock interprets anointing
as a symbol of empowerment. The Spirits anointing of Jesus relates to
the Spirits empowerment of Jesus to fulfill faithfully his redemptive mission. Pinnock employs a version of kenotic theory to describe the Sons
abnegation of divine prerogatives in the assumption of humanity. In the
incarnation the Son divested himself of independent use of divine power
and relied on the Spirit for divine operation. In light of the self-emptying
of divine power, the incarnate Son drew on the power of the Holy Spirit
to fulfill the mission entrusted to him by the Father.13 The Spirit enabled
Jesus Christ to remain faithful to the Father from the temptations in the
11
Ibid., 9398.
Ibid., 92 and 10811. He does, however, integrate his trinitarian theology with his
reformulation of the doctrine of the atonement in the chapter on Christology; see Flame
of Love, 10211.
13 Ibid., 88.
12
3/16/06
4:19 PM
Page 10
wilderness to the agonies of the cross.14 He emphasizes the Spirits anointing of Jesus to underline the continuity between the Spirits work in Christ
and the believer. As the Spirit equipped Jesus to follow the Father faithfully, so the Spirit enables the believer to do so.15 With the accent on the
Spirits empowerment of Jesus, however, the intrinsic role of the Spirit
in the incarnation may be overlooked.
Pinnocks distinction between Logos Christology as ontologically
focused and Spirit Christology as functionally focused indicates the
problem with emphasizing anointing as the primary work of the Spirit in
Jesus Christ.16 The implication is that the Spirit has nothing to do with
the assumption of human nature by the divine Son because anointing
relates to Christs function and not to his ontological status. The Spirit
does not play an ontological role in the incarnation, but rather a functional one. Pinnock remarks that Jesus was ontologically Son of God
from the moment of conception, but he became Christ by the power of
the Spirit.17 The association of the Spirit with Christs functions or work,
such as overcoming temptation and remaining faithful to the Father, misses
the Spirits role in bringing about the incarnation itself. It does not allow
a constitutive role of the Holy Spirit in the incarnation. Rather, it portrays
the Spirit coming alongside of Jesus and assisting the realization of the
incarnation of the Son in Jesus life.
On the one hand, Pinnock is correct to see the Spirit facilitating the
concrete development and expression of the divine Son in the humanity
of Jesus Christ. On the other hand, his use of anointing and his understanding of it in terms of empowerment as the primary symbol of the
Spirits work neglects the more fundamental role of the Spirit in facilitating the union of the divine Son with the humanity of Jesus. Moreover,
it is this latter activity of the Spirit producing that union of the Son and
humanity that is the basis for the Spirits empowerment of Jesus Christ
to actualize his divine Sonship in his concrete life. The outcome in Pinnocks
account is that the Spirit is a super-additum to the incarnation, even though
he does not intend this implication.
14
15
16
17
Ibid.,
Ibid.,
Ibid.,
Ibid.,
8591.
93101.
91.
8081.
10
3/16/06
4:19 PM
Page 11
Trinitarian Foundation of Spirit Christology

Before giving the rationale for the point that union is the goal of anointing, first I need to establish the trinitarian theology that supports it. The
specific form of trinitarian theology to which I appeal is the mutual love
model. The mutual love model of the Trinity has a long history in Western
theology. Historians of the Christian traditions identify its origin with
Augustine of Hippo (354430). Although overshadowed by the psychological analogy, it features prominently in the thought of central Western
theological figures such as Thomas Aquinas (d. 1274) and Bonaventure
(12171274).18 I am indebted to Catholic theologian David M. Coffey,
who introduced me to both the mutual love model and Spirit Christology
and their intrinsic relationship. Thus, my contribution to Pinnocks Spirit
Christology relies significantly on Coffeys trinitarian theology.19 The following discussion first defines the mutual love model of the Trinity. Next,
it shows that the model provides a more biblically comprehensive understanding of the incarnation than Logos Christology and assigns a constitutive role to the Holy Spirit in the incarnation.
The mutual love model posits that the Father from eternity generated
the Son and that the Holy Spirit proceeds and subsists as the mutual love
of the Father for the Son and of the Son for the Father. Although the categories of knowledge and will of the psychological analogy are used often
to elaborate the processions of the divine persons in the mutual love model,
they are not consistent with its basic assumption. The mutual love model
posits interpersonal relations and not the intrapersonal distinctions of the
18
Edmund J. Fortman, The Triune God: A Historical Study of the Doctrine of the
Trinity, Theological Resources (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1972), 20417.
19 Of course, the identification of any conceptual problems with the mutual love model
and its application to Spirit Christology should be limited to my appropriation and not
transposed to Coffeys theology. Coffey developed his trinitarian theology and its implications for grace and Christology in a series of books and articles. These are in chronological order: Grace: The Gift of the Holy Spirit, Faith and Culture 2, ed. Neil Brown
(Sydney: Catholic Institute of Sydney, 1979); The Incarnation of the Holy Spirit,
Theological Studies 45 (1984): 46680; A Proper Mission of the Holy Spirit, Theological
Studies 47 (1986): 22750; The Holy Spirit as the Mutual Love of the Father and the
Son, Theological Studies 51 (1990): 193229; The Theandric Nature of Christ, Theological
Studies 60 (1999): 40531; Deus Trinitas: The Doctrine of the Triune God (New York:
Oxford University Press, 1999); Spirit Christology and the Trinity, in Advents of the
Spirit: An Introduction to Pneumatology, ed. Bradford E. Hinze and D. Lyle Dabney,
Marquette Studies in Theology 30 (Milwaukee: Marquette University Press, 2001), 31538;
and Did You Receive the Holy Spirit When You Believed? Some Basic Questions for
Pneumatology, 36th Annual Pre Marquette Theology Lecture 2005 (Milwaukee: Marquette
University Press, 2005).
11
3/16/06
4:19 PM
Page 12
psychological analogy. The mutual love model affirms that the Father
begets the Son from eternity, but it does not illustrate this in terms of the
relative intellectual operations of one mind. In the mutual love model, the
Son is a subject who loves the Father. The Father and the Son in their
concordant love for one another bring forth the Holy Spirit. The personal
identity of the Holy Spirit is the objectification of the Fathers and Sons
mutual love. As mutual love, the Holy Spirits primary characteristic is
union. The Spirit is the love that indissolubly unites the Father and the
Son. The identity of the Holy Spirit as mutual love does not depersonalize
the Spirit. The Spirit is a unique divine person whose activity is that of
uniting the other two divine persons.20
The use of the mutual love model to modify Pinnocks Spirit Christology
is not interposing a foreign theological concept to his theology. He adopts
it when he refers to the Holy Spirit as the bond of love that binds the
Father and the Son together in eternity and presents his social model of
the Trinity in terms of its framework.21 Like most who employ the model,
however, he also notes the ambiguity of the Spirits personal identity as
unitive love and affirms that the Spirit is, along with the Father and the
Son, a genuine person in the trinitarian God.22
Pinnock also accepts Karl Rahners principle that the economic
Trinity is the immanent Trinity and the immanent Trinity is the economic
20 Theologians routinely critique the mutual love model as embodying the Western traditions preoccupation with divine oneness over and against the primacy of divine threeness in the Eastern tradition. For examples of this characterization, see Leonardo Boff,
Trinity and Society, trans. Paul Burns, Theology and Liberation Series (Maryknoll, NY:
Orbis Books, 1988), 7785; David Brown, The Divine Trinity (La Salle, IL: Open Court,
1985), 24344; Colin Gunton, Augustine, the Trinity, and the Theological Crisis in the
West, in The Promise of Trinitarian Theology, 2d ed. (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1997),
32; Catherine Mowry LaCugna, God for Us: The Trinity and Christian Life (New York:
HarperCollins, 1991), 9697 and 101; Jrgen Moltmann, Trinitt und Reich Gottes: zur
Gotteslehre (Munich: Kaiser, 1980), 166 and 19394; and John D. Zizioulas, Being as
Communion: Studies in Personhood and the Church, Contemporary Greek Theologians 4
(Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimirs Seminary Press, 1985), 17 and 8788.
For a criticism of the oneness-threeness/Western-Eastern/Augustinian-Cappadocian paradigms problematic premise that the mutual love tradition cannot incorporate a relational
understanding of the Trinity, see my Jonathan Edwardss Social Augustinian Trinitarianism:
An Alternative to a Recent Trend, Scottish Journal of Theology 56 (2003): 26885.
21 Pinnock, Flame of Love, 92, 21, 3740. In a later article on the social Trinity, although
Pinnock sees his notion of the Trinity as a communion of love as a development of the
Augustinian mutual love model, its connection is less explicit than it is in Flame of Love
(Pinnock, Gods Fair Beauty: The Social Trinity, The Spirit and Church 4, no. 1 [2002]:
6780).
22 Pinnock, Flame of Love, 4042.
12
3/16/06
4:19 PM
Page 13
Trinity.23 Rahners axiom requires coalescence between the trinitarian

God and the redemptive activities of God. Since God is the Trinity of
Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, redemption must reflect the triune structure
of God. The unique identities of the divine persons determine their redemptive missions. The Father sends the Son and ultimately the Holy Spirit in
redemption (Luke 11:13 and 24:49; Acts 1:49 and 2:14; and John 14:16
and 25 and 15:26) because the Son and the Holy Spirit eternally proceed
from the Father. The Son comes as the revelation of the Father (John
1:18) because he eternally subsists from the Father as the communication
of the Father. The Holy Spirit subsists as the eternal mutual love who
binds the Father and the Son in love and, therefore, serves an assimilative
role in the incarnation and grace (Eph 2:18 and 3:1617).
Theology refers to the economic activity attributed to one divine person
as a mission. Traditional theology has identified the incarnation as the
proper mission of the Son, so that it is not appropriate to consider the
Father or the Holy Spirit as being incarnated. The identity of the Son as
the divine person from the Father renders him the only divine person
appropriate for incarnation. The Son descends and assumes humanity in
the person of Jesus Christ. The biblical basis for this is John 1:1, which
states the Word was God, and John 1:14, which specifies that this Word
became flesh. The foregoing theology is called Logos Christology,
because it highlights the incarnation as the Sons assumption of humanity.
The problem with Logos Christology is not that it identifies the Son
as the divine person united to the humanity of Jesus Christ, but rather
that it is too exclusive from a biblical perspective. The conceptual foundation of Logos Christology is the Gospel of John. However, the Gospels
of Matthew and Luke describe the incarnation as a result of the Spirits
activity. Matthew attributes the conception of Jesus to the Holy Spirit and
the effectiveness of his redemptive ministry to his pneumatic conception
(Matt 1:1821). Lukes account clarifies that the identity of Jesus as the
Son of God is the product of the activity of the Holy Spirit (Luke 1:35).
The Synoptic Gospels, therefore, define the Spirits work in constitutional
terms. The mission of the Spirit is not limited to empowering the ministry
of Jesus Christ, but more profoundly it is essential to his identity as the
incarnation of the divine Son. Therefore, the christological language of
John 1 that emphasizes the incarnation of the Word needs integration with
the pneumatological emphasis of the conception narratives of Matthew
23 Ibid., 32. For Rahners articulation, see Rahner, The Trinity, trans. Joseph Donceel;
intro. Catherine Mowry LaCugna (1970; reprint, New York: Crossroad, 1998), 22.
13
3/16/06
4:19 PM
Page 14
and Luke. Spirit Christology seeks to redress the traditional Logos

Christology that tends to neglect the Spirits function in realizing the incarnation by coordinating the Johannine and Synoptic accounts.
The mutual love model provides a trinitarian understanding of God
that brings together the two biblical accounts of the incarnation. It accomplishes this task by placing the Spirits work in proper focus. As noted,
the personal identity of the Holy Spirit defines the Spirits role in the two
fundamental redemptive activities of God: incarnation and grace. Since
the Spirit is the mutual love who unites the Father and the Son, the Spirits
role in the economy of redemption is also one of fusion. Moreover, the
Spirits activity in the incarnation correlates with the Spirits activity in
grace, although in an analogous and not completely symmetrical manner.
Our main concern here, however, is with the incarnation.
In the immanent Trinity, although the love between the Father and the
Son is mutual, a certain priority (without, of course, admitting any temporal sequence) pertains to the Fathers love for the Son. The reason for
this is that the Son subsists as the perfect objectified self-communication
of the Father. The Father bestows his love on the Son, who then returns
love to the Father. The Holy Spirit subsists as the unifying mutual love
of the Father and the Son. Based on the principle of the congruity between
the immanent and economic Trinity, the redemptive process should
reflect the outgoing of love from the Father to the Son and the return of
love to the Father from the Son.
Coffey specifies that the identity of the Holy Spirit in the incarnation
is mutual love; the Holy Spirit is the Fathers love for the Son in the
incarnation and the incarnate Sons returned love to the Father.24 The identity of the Holy Spirit in the mutual love model includes three indispensable
elements: the Fathers love for the Son, the Sons love for the Father, and
the Spirit as the mutual love that unites the Father and the Son. The second element or the Sons returned love to the Father is essential to the
model. If the Holy Spirits economic work in the incarnation matches the
Spirits immanent identity, then the Spirits role in the incarnation must
reflect the mutuality of the love between the Father and the Son because
it is their mutual love that establishes the Spirits personal identity. The
Holy Spirit, as mutual love, must be both the Fathers love that brings
about the incarnation and the incarnate Sons return of love to the Father.25
24
Coffey, A Proper Mission of the Holy Spirit, 232.

Coffey also calls this the centrifugal and centripetal aspects of the economy (Coffey,
The Incarnation of the Holy Spirit, 470).
25
14
3/16/06
4:19 PM
Page 15
The details of the life of Jesus Christ allow interpretation in terms of the
structure of the mutual love model.
Stated in summary, the Holy Spirit creates, sanctifies, and unites the
divine Son with the humanity of Jesus Christ. Central to this understanding
is that the Spirits economic work terminates in uniting the Son with the
humanity of Christ and that this unifying activity of the Spirit is equivalent
with the economic communication of the Fathers love. The Spirits role
in the incarnation, then, includes two fundamental facets: the Spirit is the
love of the Father expressed ad extra and the Spirit unites humanity with
the divine Son. Moreover, the latter is the necessary result of the former.
With the basic trinitarian theology expressed, we can turn to develop the
trinitarian rationale first for the Spirit as the Fathers love and then for
the Spirits unifying activity in the incarnation.
Coffey interprets the activity of the Spirit in the conception narratives
as the radical expression and bestowal of the Fathers love toward and
on humanity that achieves the incarnation of the Son. He sees it as an act
of the Fathers love because it reflects the essence of love, which is selfoffer. Self-offer as the essence of love derives from the notion in the
Gospel of John that Jesus Christ loves believers by giving his life for
them and ultimately his presence to them through the Holy Spirit (John
7:3739; 14:1521; 16:1215; and 20:1923).26 An additional biblical
basis for identifying the Spirit as the Fathers love is John 3:16: for God
so loved the world that he sent his one and only Son. The Fathers love
is equivalent with sending the Son; God loves the world by sending the
Son. Thus, John portrays the sending of the Son as an act of the Fathers
love, which, according to the trinitarian model, is the Holy Spirit.
The union of the Son with the humanity is the inevitable result of the
economic expression of the Fathers love. The divine Son is the proper
term of the Fathers love, and thus all secondary objects of his love are
brought into union with the Son. In other words, the term of the Fathers
love is ultimately always the Son, so that when the Fathers love for
humanity is objectified in the economy it brings the humanity into existence and into union with the Son. The creation of the humanity is necessary, otherwise the objectification of the Fathers love in creation would
not transpire. The union of the humanity with the Son takes place because
all expressions of the Fathers love have the Son as their final end and,
therefore, bring the object into union with the Son.
26
Coffey, Deus Trinitas, 38.

15
3/16/06
4:19 PM
Page 16
At this point, we can provide the theological integration of the Johannine

and Synoptic Gospel incarnation narratives. The Synoptic Gospel conception
narratives state that the Holy Spirit actualizes the incarnation. The Gospel
of John presents the incarnation in terms of the Logos descending and
assuming humanity. A legitimate theological conclusion is that the sending
of the Son in the Gospel of John and the pneumatic conception in Matthew
and Luke refer to the same reality. They both point to the union of the
divine Son with humanity by the Fathers expression of love objectified
in the humanity of Christ. John identifies the incarnation as the product
of an act of the Fathers love and the Synoptic Gospels as an act of the
Holy Spirit; thus, the conclusion is that the Holy Spirit is the love of God
expressed ad extra who unites the divine Son with humanity in Jesus
Christ.27
To this point, I have shown that the Holy Spirit is the Fathers love
that brings about the incarnation. However, the illustration of an essential
aspect of the Spirits personal identity remains outstanding in the economy
of redemption. The Spirit as the mutual love of the Father and the Son
requires demonstration. Specifically, it is left to show that the Holy Spirit
is also the incarnate Sons returned love to the Father. The incarnate Sons
return of love to the Father is necessary for the Spirit to be in the economy of redemption what the Spirit is in the immanent Trinity. In order
to elucidate this, Coffey returns to the Gospel of John and draws on
Rahners principle of the indivisibility of the love of God and neighbor.28
Coffey argues that Scripture depicts Christ communicating his presence to believers by sending the Holy Spirit (John 14:1618 and 16:57).
Christ is present with his followers through the presence of the Spirit.
Coffey reasons that since the essence of love is self-offer, to give oneself
over to another is love. Understanding love as self-offer or self-communication is not primarily a philosophical principle, but a biblical one. As
previously indicated, the self-communication of God in Christ is an act
of Gods love. God loves human beings by becoming God with us or
Emmanuel (Matt 1:23). Since Christ gives his presence by giving the Holy
Spirit, the gift of the Spirit is Christs love shed on his followers.29 Moreover,
27 Coffey, A Proper Mission of the Holy Spirit, 231; Deus Trinitas, 3538; The
Incarnation of the Holy Spirit in Christ, 47980; Spirit Christology and the Trinity,
32425.
28 For Rahners discussion of this point, see Karl Rahner, Reflections on the
Unity of the Love of Neighbor and the Love of God, in Theological Investigations, ed.
Karl-H. and Boniface Kruger (Baltimore: Helicon, 1969), 6:23149.
29 Coffey, Deus Trinitas, 38, and Grace, 14955.
16
3/16/06
4:19 PM
Page 17
with recourse to Rahners insight of the inseparable nature of the love of

God and neighbor, Coffey argues that the love of Christ expressed toward
believers is the same love of Christ for God the Father. He refers to Christs
love for the Father as the incarnation of the Holy Spirit. He does so
because in the death of Christ human nature, through its union with the
divine Son, attains its highest possible expression of love to God. Jesus
Christ, as the incarnate divine Son, radically loves the Father by yielding
himself over to death, which is his realization of utter devotion to the
Father and to the rest of humanity.30 Since the Sons love for the Father
in the immanent Trinity is the Holy Spirit, his love for the Father in the
incarnation is also the Holy Spirit, but it is an incarnated love because
it is the Sons love expressed through Christs humanity. Thus, the economic activity of the Holy Spirit displays the full personal identity of the
Spirit as the mutual love of the Father and the Son. The economic expression of the Fathers love that unites the humanity with the divine Son and
the incarnate Sons reciprocation of love to the Father and his disciples
economically objectifies the Holy Spirit.
The Holy Spirit as the Principle of the Hypostatic Union
Having established the Holy Spirits role in the incarnation from the
perspective of trinitarian theology, we can return to Pinnocks Spirit
Christology and offer a revision of it. Pinnocks identification of anointing as the Spirits primary work in the life of Jesus Christ has two limitations. First, anointing emphasizes the Spirits empowerment of Jesus.
As such, it does not correlate the work of the Spirit in the incarnation
with the personal identity of the Holy Spirit in the trinitarian Godhead.
Second, anointing does not correct the pneumatological deficit in traditional Christology, but rather continues it by seeing the Spirits work as
one that empowers an already given incarnate divine Son. The Spirit
Christology devolving from the mutual love model effectively resolves
these two issues.
The work of the Spirit in the incarnation culminates in uniting the
divine Son with the humanity of Jesus Christ. The unitive role of the Holy
Spirit in the incarnation derives from the Spirits immanent identity as
the mutual love of the Father and the Son. The Holy Spirit is the divine
person who brings the Father and the Son into union and, therefore, is
also the divine person who draws the Son into unity with the humanity
30
Coffey, The Incarnation of the Holy Spirit in Christ, 47780.

17
3/16/06
4:19 PM
Page 18
of Christ. This conclusion rests on a unification of the incarnation with

trinitarian theology. Moreover, it does not deprecate the biblical description
of Jesus Christ as the anointed one. It does, however, maintain that
anointing is not an end in itself, but that it leads to hypostatic union. The
Spirits anointing of the humanity is the sanctification of the humanity
that makes it fit for union with the divine Son and then brings it into
union with the Son. Thus, seeing the Spirit as that divine person who
unites humanity and the divine Son in the person of Christ gives symmetry
to the economic and the immanent Trinity.
Identifying the hypostatic union as the Spirits primary work gives the
Spirit a constitutional role in the incarnation. The conceptualization allows
a reformulation of Pinnocks association of Logos Christology with Christs
ontological or personal status and Spirit Christology with his function.
Pinnocks notion does not assign a role to the Spirit in the incarnation
itself or the ontological status of Jesus as the incarnate divine Son. The
hypostatic union is already established and expressed theologically in
terms of Logos Christology. According to Pinnocks Spirit Christology,
the Spirit facilitates the already incarnate divine Son to accomplish his
redemptive mission. The placement of the role of the Spirit in the functional
category and not the ontological one introduces an extrinsicism of the
Spirit to the theology of the incarnation. It does so because the Spirit
plays no role in establishing the incarnation.
With recourse to the mutual love model, we can posit an intrinsic role
to the Holy Spirit in the incarnation. In respect to the person or ontological
status of Christ, the anointing of Jesus Christ is the Fathers bestowal of
the Spirit that creates, sanctifies, and brings the humanity into union with
the divine Son. Functionally or in the experience of Jesus the anointing
empowers the humanity itself to attain its full realization of divine Sonship
through its union with the divine Son. The anointing is not a particular
empowerment for this or that miracle or act of faithfulness or even a permanent power that rests on Jesus, but the fundamental elevation of the
humanity of Christ that enables it to achieve union with the divine Son
and then to attain the actualization of the divine Son in and through the
humanity of Jesus. Additionally, the functional anointing reaches its term
or goal in the experience of Jesus when he attains to the full expression
or realization of the divine Son in the humanity through his radical act
of faithfulness to the Father in the cross and resurrection, and subsequently
in his return/ascension to the Father. The critical point is that the ontological and functional realities of Christ are not really distinct, but rather
the latter derives from the former. Moreover, the Spirit is central to both
18
3/16/06
4:19 PM
Page 19
who Christ is and what he did. Ontologically, Jesus Christ is the union
of the divine Son with humanity because the Spirit creates, sanctifies, and
unites the humanity to the divine Son. Functionally, Christ can perform
his redemptive mission precisely because of the activity of Gods Spirit
in realizing the hypostatic union.
At this point, it is appropriate to state why the Spirit Christology presented here advances a Pentecostal Christology. The modification of
Christology with Pentecostal raises the broader issue of pinpointing the
unique feature of Pentecostal theology vis--vis other theological traditions and movements. A number of Pentecostal scholars maintain that a
deliberate integration of the Pentecostal experience of the Spirit with theological reflection is the key distinguishing factor of Pentecostal theology.31
The move toward interfacing theology with religious experience is legitimate primarily because it is experience of the Spirit; although, as Amos
Yong makes clear, the discernment of the Spirit is crucial.32 This is true
for analyzing and incorporating religious experience in both Christian and
non-Christian contexts. However, moving away from modes of theological expression that marginalize the Holy Spirit is also central to what
defines Pentecostal theology. A robust pneumatology should characterize
Pentecostal theology. A Pentecostal theology is not only one that reflects
on experience and, on the basis of this, modifies perceptions of the Spirit,
but one that conceives the breadth of Christian thought with an integral
pneumatology. Pneumatology has been largely absent from Pentecostal
accounts of Christology. The case presented here attempts to set forth a
31 For examples, see Terry L. Cross, A Proposal to Break the Ice: What Can Pentecostal
Theology offer Evangelical Theology, Journal of Pentecostal Theology 10, no. 2 (2002):
4473, and The Rich Feast of Theology: Can Pentecostals Bring the Main Course or Only
the Relish Tray? Journal of Pentecostal Theology 16 (2000): 3236; Cheryl Bridges Johns,
The Adolescence of Pentecostalism: In Search of a Legitimate Sectarian Identity, Pneuma:
The Journal of the Society for Pentecostal Studies 17 (1995): 317; Steven J. Land,
Pentecostal Spirituality: A Passion for the Kingdom, Journal of Pentecostal Theology
Supplement Series 1, ed. John C. Thomas, Rick D. Moore, and Steven J. Land (Sheffield,
England: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993), 34; James K. A. Smith, Scandalizing Theology:
A Pentecostal Response to Nolls Scandal, Pneuma: The Journal of the Society for
Pentecostal Studies 19 (1997): 23437; and Amos Yongs response to Smith: Whither
Systematic Theology? A Systematician chimes in on a Scandalous Conversation, Pneuma:
The Journal of the Society for Pentecostal Studies 20 (1998): 8593.
32 Amos Yong, Beyond the Impasse: Toward a Pneumatological Theology of Religions
(Grand Rapids: Baker, 2003), 12992, and Discerning the Spirit(s): A Pentecostal-Charismatic
Contribution to Christian Theology of Religions, Journal of Pentecostal Theology Supplement
Series 20, ed. John C. Thomas, Rickie D. Moore, and Steven J. Land (Sheffield, England:
Sheffield Academic Press, 2000).
19
3/16/06
4:19 PM
Page 20
Pentecostal Christology by retrieving the Spirit from the periphery and

restoring the Spirit to the center of Christology.
Conclusion
In Flame of Love, Clark H. Pinnock advocates and points the way for
evangelicals and Pentecostals to re-envision Christology in terms of a
Spirit Christology. He does so by highlighting the Spirits anointing or
empowerment of Jesus Christs redemptive mission. Pentecostals should
follow the direction indicated by Pinnock, but also extend its pneumatological dimension. The reason for this is that Pinnocks formulation does
not specify the Spirits role in the incarnation itself. The result is an implicit
(although not intentional) dislocation of the Spirit from the constitutive
activity that produced the incarnation of the divine Son. Formulating a
Spirit Christology from a fundamental trinitarian theology furthers the
pneumatological orientation of Pinnocks proposal. Specifically, the mutual
love model of the Trinity offers a way to posit an integral role for the
Holy Spirit in the incarnation. Based on the Spirits identity as the mutual
love who binds the Father and the Son in an indissoluble union, the Spirit
is the divine person who brings the humanity of Jesus Christ into personal union with the divine Son. By correlating the Spirits personal identity in the immanent Trinity with the Spirits role in the incarnation,
pneumatology attains a constitutive role in Christology. Moreover, the
correlation of pneumatology, the Trinity, and Christology assigns the Holy
Spirit an essential role in the incarnation and in so doing reinforces its
use as a Pentecostal Christology.
20

Deification

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Deification

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Pneuma 28,1_f3_4-20II

Integrating Pneumatology and Christology:

(Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1996).

2006 Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden

Pinnock engages in a way that is unique and even groundbreaking among

Pinnock, Flame of Love, 8081.

the Trinity. Stated briefly, Pinnocks Spirit Christology needs refinement

Spirit Christology that operates from a trinitarian perspective complements

Pinnock, Flame of Love, 80 and 9192.

is not a form of moral exemplarism in which Christ is primarily a model

Trinitarian Foundation of Spirit Christology

Trinity.23 Rahners axiom requires coalescence between the trinitarian

and Luke. Spirit Christology seeks to redress the traditional Logos

Coffey, A Proper Mission of the Holy Spirit, 232.

Coffey, Deus Trinitas, 38.

At this point, we can provide the theological integration of the Johannine

with recourse to Rahners insight of the inseparable nature of the love of

Coffey, The Incarnation of the Holy Spirit in Christ, 47780.

of Christ. This conclusion rests on a unification of the incarnation with

Pentecostal Christology by retrieving the Spirit from the periphery and

You might also like