Professional Documents
Culture Documents
(Download PDF) in Defense of Conciliar Christology A Philosophical Essay 1St Edition Pawl Online Ebook All Chapter PDF
(Download PDF) in Defense of Conciliar Christology A Philosophical Essay 1St Edition Pawl Online Ebook All Chapter PDF
https://textbookfull.com/product/austins-way-with-skepticism-an-
essay-on-philosophical-method-first-edition-edition-mark-kaplan/
https://textbookfull.com/product/the-trinitarian-christology-of-
st-thomas-aquinas-1st-edition-legge/
https://textbookfull.com/product/in-defense-of-israel-a-memoir-
of-a-political-life-1st-edition-moshe-arens/
https://textbookfull.com/product/christology-hermeneutics-and-
hebrews-1st-edition-jon-c-laansma/
A defense of rule origins of political thought in
Greece and India 1st Edition Gray
https://textbookfull.com/product/a-defense-of-rule-origins-of-
political-thought-in-greece-and-india-1st-edition-gray/
https://textbookfull.com/product/ignorance-of-law-a-
philosophical-inquiry-1st-edition-husak/
https://textbookfull.com/product/four-arts-of-photography-an-
essay-in-philosophy-1st-edition-dominic-mciver-lopes/
https://textbookfull.com/product/in-defense-of-julian-assange-
tariq-ali/
https://textbookfull.com/product/a-theory-of-philosophical-
fallacies-1st-edition-leonard-nelson-auth/
OXFORD STUDIES IN ANALYTIC THEOLOGY
Series Editors
Michael C. Rea Oliver D. Crisp
OXFORD STUDIES IN ANALYTIC THEOLOGY
Analytic Theology utilizes the tools and methods of contemporary analytic philosophy for
the purposes of constructive Christian theology, paying attention to the Christian tradition
and development of doctrine. This innovative series of studies showcases high quality,
cutting edge research in this area, in monographs and symposia.
TIMOTHY PAWL
1
3
Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, OX2 6DP,
United Kingdom
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford.
It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship,
and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of
Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries
© Timothy Pawl 2016
The moral rights of the author have been asserted
First Edition published in 2016
Impression: 1
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in
a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the
prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted
by law, by licence, or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics
rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the
above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the
address above
Nihil Obstat Imprimatur
Reverend George Welzbacher The Most Reverend Bernard Hebda
Censor Librorum Apostolic Administrator
September 23, 2015 Archdiocese of Saint Paul and Minneapolis
October 5, 2015
The Nihil Obstat and Imprimatur are official declarations that a book is free of
doctrinal error. No implication is contained therein that those who have
granted the Nihil Obstat and Imprimatur agree with the consent, opinions, or
statements expressed. Nor do they assume any legal responsibility associated
with publication.
You must not circulate this work in any other form
and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer
Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press
198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, United States of America
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
Data available
Library of Congress Control Number: 2015946694
ISBN 978–0–19–876592–9
Printed in Great Britain by
Clays Ltd, St Ives plc
Links to third party websites are provided by Oxford in good faith and
for information only. Oxford disclaims any responsibility for the materials
contained in any third party website referenced in this work.
For my children: Henry Douglas, Mary Sandra,
Beatrice Katherine, Edith Effie, and Agnes Josephine—the best
(non-theological) gifts I have ever received
Acknowledgments
I’d like to thank the many people who helped me in the writing of this book.
I thank William Abraham, Jeffrey Brower, Oliver Crisp, Richard Cross, Thomas
Flint, Michael Gorman, Jonathan Jacobs, Joseph Jedwab, Samuel Newlands,
Timothy O’Connor, Alexander Pruss, Joshua Rasmussen, Michael Rea, Eleonore
Stump, Alan Torrance, Jessica Wilson, and William Wood for helpful discussion;
Heath Curtis, Fr Brian Daley, S.J., Mark DelCogliano, Fr Brian Dunkle, S.J., Paul
Gavrilyuk, Robert Hartman, Stephen Hipp, Peter Martens, Brandon Peterson,
and Christian Washburn for help with the history and conciliar statements; and
Philip Balgeman, Matthews Grant, Andrew Jaeger, Ryan Mullins, Kathryn Pogin,
Bradley Rettler, Michael Rota, Noël Saenz, Jeffrey Snapper, Mark Spencer, and
Jordan Wessling for helpful written comments on these chapters. A special thanks
is due to Faith Glavey Pawl, who read the entire manuscript and provided many
helpful and insightful comments, as she is wont to do.
I thank the audiences at and participants in the Metaphysics of Aquinas and
its Modern Interpreters conference at Fordham University (March 2011), Kevin
Timpe’s Writing Retreat and Workshop on Divine Freedom in Tallahassee
Florida (March 2012), The Notre Dame Center for Philosophy of Religion
weekly reading group in 2012–13 for three helpful meetings, the First Annual
LA Theology Conference (January 2013), the 8th Annual Philosophy of Religion
Conference at Baylor University (March 2013), the Unum, Verum, Bonum
conference in Lisbon, Portugal (April 2013), the Wake Forest Hylemorphism
Workshop (June 2013), my colloquium talk at Cardinal Stefan Wyszyński
University in Warsaw, Poland (June 2014), and the brothers in my weeklong
seminar on Analytic Christology at the Dominican House of Studies in Krakow,
Poland (June 2014).
I also thank the faculty participants in a Cluster Group on Analytic Christology,
funded by the Notre Dame Center for Philosophy of Religion, that I ran
(along with Mark McInroy) during the Spring semester of 2014. Work on this
book was generously supported by the Notre Dame Center for Philosophy of
Religion and the John Templeton Foundation, both in the form of Analytic
Theology Summer Stipends, and in the form of a yearlong Analytic Theology
Research Fellowship.
I thank the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy for permission to use revised
sections of my article on Divine Immutability (Pawl 2009) in Chapter 8, Section II.a.
I thank the Journal for Analytic Theology for permission to reprint, with revision,
my article “A Solution to the Fundamental Philosophical Problem of Christology”
as the majority of Chapter 7. I thank Cambridge University Press for permission
to use the epigram of this book. I thank Scientia et Fides for permission to use
portions of my article, “Conciliar Christology and the Problem of Incompatible
Predications” in Part II of this book. And I thank Bloomsbury Publishing, PLC,
for permission to quote selections from Norman P Tanner’s (1990) excellent
viii Acknowledgments
Introduction 1
P A R T I D O C T R I N E, D EF I N I T I O NS , AN D M E TA P H Y S I C S
1. The Content of Conciliar Christology 11
2. Definitions and Necessary Conditions 29
3. The Theory Enfleshed 58
P A R T I I T H E F U ND A M E N T A L P R O B L E M
P A R T I I I A D D I T I O NA L M ET A PH Y S I C A L O B J E C T I O N S
Bibliography 235
Index 247
Extended Table of Contents
Introduction 1
P A RT I D OC TR I N E , D E F I N I T I O N S , A N D M E T A P H Y S I C S
P A R T I I T H E F U ND A M E N T A L P R O B L E M
4. The Fundamental Problem 75
I. Introduction 75
II. The Argument in Detail 75
II.a. The Argument in the Literature 75
II.b. Definitions of the Terms 77
II.c. The Argument in Deductive Form 79
III. Denying No Complementary Predications 80
III.a. A Plausible Inference 80
III.b. The Standard Definition of Complementarity 81
III.c. No Complementary Predications or No Contrary Predications 82
IV. Some Unsatisfactory Responses 84
IV.a. Deny the Law of Non-Contradiction 84
IV.b. Deny that Candidate Predicates Have Complements 85
IV.c. Appeal to Mystery 88
V. The Shape of Things to Come 91
VI. Conclusion 95
5. Denying the Predications 97
I. Introduction 97
II. The Response from Denying the Divine Candidate
Predicates of Christ 98
II.a. An Example of the Response 98
II.b. The Response is not Generalizable 99
III. The Response from Denying the Human Candidate Predicates
of Christ 100
III.a. An Example of the Response 100
III.b. The Response is not Generalizable 101
IV. The Responses from Denying the Human and Divine Candidate
Predicates of Christ in Conjunction are Insufficient 101
V. The Response of Denying the Predicates “At the Same Time” 104
V.a. An Example of the Response 104
V.b. Kenoticism is Inconsistent with Conciliar Christology 106
V.b.1. Immutability and Kenoticism 107
xii Extended Table of Contents
P A R T I I I A D D I T I O NA L M ET A PH Y S I C A L O B J E C T I O N S
8. Immutability, Impassibility, and Atemporality 179
I. Introduction 179
II. Motivation for the Doctrines 180
II.a. The Motivation for Divine Immutability 181
II.b. The Motivation for Divine Impassibility 184
II.c. The Motivation for Divine Atemporality 187
III. The Truth Conditions for the Predicates 190
IV. Objections to the Incarnation of an Immutable, Impassible,
Atemporal God 191
IV.a. Richard Cross on the Modal Attributes 192
IV.b. Jonathan Hill on the Modal Attributes 194
IV.c. Richard Holland on the Modal Attributes 198
IV.d. Thomas Senor on the Modal Attributes 200
IV.e. A Few General Points about These Objections 203
V. How the Metaphysics Might Work 204
VI. Conclusion 209
xiv Extended Table of Contents
Bibliography 235
Index 247
List of Figures
List of Tables
4.1 The Candidate Predicate Table 91
5.1 The Candidate Predicate Table 97
12 In Defense of Conciliar Christology
much painful controversy and conflict with heretical opinion. Such a deposit is not
lightly to be estimated nor hastily to be set aside as outworn dogma.
This deference to the councils is a common view, even among those who deny that
the councils are supernaturally safeguarded from error.
Call the conjunction of the teachings from these councils concerning the
incarnation Conciliar Christology. The conjuncts of this conjunction come from
definitions and expositions of faith, creeds, canons, and anathemas of the councils.
If such conciliar statements include other documents—for example, as Chalcedon’s
Definition of the Faith accepts Cyril’s second letter to Nestorius and his letter to
John of Antioch, as well as Leo’s Tome to Flavian (Tanner 1990, 85)—then I will
include the Christological teachings from those documents as conjuncts of Con-
ciliar Christology, too.
Determining whether texts are included in the councils is challenging in some
cases. There are some documents that are included on any reasonable evaluation.
These include the creeds, the definitions of faith, the anathemas, and the canons.
Some of these documents explicitly endorse others. For instance, as mentioned
above, Cyril’s second letter and Leo’s Tome are accepted by documents that are
central to the ecumenical councils on any reasonable standard—for instance, the
Expositions of faith from both the Council of Chalcedon (85) and the Third
Council of Constantinople (126–7). These texts call Cyril’s letters “well-suited to
refuting” Nestorius and for providing “understanding of the saving creed,” and
Leo’s Tome as “in agreement with Peter’s confession” and “a pillar of right belief.”
Indeed, Paul Gondreau (2009, 216) claims that Leo’s Tome was “solemnly
endorsed at Chalcedon” and Herbert Relton (1917, 44) says similarly. Bronwen
Neil (2009, 27) writes, in her book, Leo the Great, that the Tome “became the
touchstone of Chalcedonian Orthodoxy.” As far as I can tell, the scholarly
consensus is that the Tome, Cyril’s second letter to Nestorius, John of Antioch’s
Formula of union, and Cyril’s response to John are all official documents of the
councils.4
Cyril’s third letter to Nestorius, and the twelve anathemas attached to it, is a
more difficult case. Thomas Graumann (2011, 36) writes,
The most notorious problem with the use of documents on this occasion is, of course,
the reading (if indeed it took place) of Cyril’s famous Third Letter to Nestorius,
concluding with the Twelve Chapters or Anathemas. Much ink has been spent on
the question whether it was endorsed officially by the council as its Christological
teaching.
Some scholars view them as official documents of the councils. Tanner (1990,
37–8), for instance, includes them among the documents of the council. Edward
Hardy (1954, 349) writes of Cyril’s third letter that:
The letter was read and acted on at Ephesus; at the Council of Chalcedon it was
recognized, along with the Tome of Leo, as an orthodox statement.
4
For some discussion of these points, see Bellitto (2002, 23, 27); Denzinger (2002, 50, footnote 1);
Kelly (2009, 44); Landon (1909a, 1:140, 200); Price (2009, 75); Russell (2000, 35–9); and Weinandy
(1985, 58).
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
Hjalmar Théel, "On a singular Case of Hermaphroditism in
Holothurids," Bih. Svenska Vet. Akad. Hand. xxvii. Af. 4, No. 6,
1901.
[508]
[509]
[510]
[511]
[512]
[513]
[514]
[515]
[516]
[517]
[518]
[519]
[520]
[521]
[522]
"The Metamorphosis of Echinoderms," Quart. Journ. Micr. Sc.
xxxviii. 1895, p. 45.
[523]
[524]
[525]
[526]
[527]
[528]
1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also
govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most
countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside
the United States, check the laws of your country in addition to
the terms of this agreement before downloading, copying,
displaying, performing, distributing or creating derivative works
based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work. The
Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright
status of any work in any country other than the United States.
1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form,
including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if
you provide access to or distribute copies of a Project
Gutenberg™ work in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or
other format used in the official version posted on the official
Project Gutenberg™ website (www.gutenberg.org), you must, at
no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a copy, a
means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
request, of the work in its original “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other
form. Any alternate format must include the full Project
Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the
method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The
fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark,
but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty
payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on
which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your
periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked
as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information
about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation.”
• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.
1.F.
Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org.