Discussion Leadership and Presentation

Introduction

In his book The Theology of the Presence and Absence of God, Anthony Godzieba provides a detailed analysis of the various ways that God can be experienced as both present and absent in our lives. He begins by exploring the concept of the hiddenness of God, noting that even though we may not always be able to see or hear God, He is always with us. Godziebaexplains that the mystery of God requires our participation; we cannot really know God as present unless we are willing to engage with Him. It is when we are not open to the mystery of God that His absence becomes a problem for us. He notes that people often ask, Where is God? and, Who is God? (pg.181) In my section, which is The Trinitarian Rule of Faith and Its Interpretation, Godzieba tackles this question of Who is God? and explains God in terms of the Holy Trinity of Father, Son, and Spirit.

Chapter 4 section 3

The purpose of Godzieba in this section is to explore what the Fathers of the Church said about the Trinity so that we today can more fully understand where this doctrine of the Trinity came from and what it is supposed to mean. He provides historical context to a very important element of the Faith, which answers the question, Who is God? In doing so, Godzieba appeals to Irenaeus, Tertullian, Origen, and several of the early councils, like the one in 325 (pg. 225) that condemned the Arian position. The Arian position and its condemnation by the Church in Antioch in 325(pg. 225) shows how serious the question about the relationship between Father, Son, and Spirit was and isfor to get just one aspect of that relationship wrong is to open the door to all sorts of theological and practical errors that could in the end cause one to lose faith. The Churchs mission has always been about safeguarding the deposit of faith, and so it is Godziebas purpose to provide support for that mission by framing the question of Who is God? in a historical context that helps us today to see why we believe what we do. He shows how the Nicene council was very focused on making it clear that only certain views of Gods personhood would be accepted in the Church.

What Godzieba is Saying

Godzieba goes into the significance of the Arian heresy, as it essentially served as the crisis of the ancient churchs Platonismbut he also describes the Council of Nicaea and how it represented a parallel crisis of scriptural interpretation [which] had to be faced as well.[footnoteRef:2]Godzieba goes on to explain that it was really a question of subordination of the Son to the Father. Logically, the Nicene Fathers said, the Son is subordinate to the Father, but ontologically there is no subordinationmeaning, the Father and the Son are the same in terms of divinity. Godzieba likely found this interesting because there were others in the Church, like Arius, who had a different view on the matter (p. 232). But it was the view...…of This Class

This section supports the goals and themes of this class by highlighting the historical basis for Christian doctrinehow it came to be, and what factors influenced the course of theological thought. By highlighting the past, it is easier to understand the present. A historical lens helps us to see our own situation in the present day more clearly; we can rise above the noise and distractions of early criticisms and get back to fostering the kind of spiritual experience that is important for us to really be united togood.

Most Interesting Claims Advanced in This Section

The most interesting claim advanced in this section is that the Nicene and post-Nicene discussions resulted in the differentiation of two types of subordination one permitted, one banneda logical subordination of Son to Father permitted; an ontological subordination of Son to Father banned. I think it is interesting because the Church was taking a definite position and saying that this is the doctrine one must believe to be part of the Church. It was like putting a fence up around Christian thought.

Question 1: Why did the Nicene Fathers permit the logical subordination of the Son to the Father in understanding the Trinity but not the ontological subordination favored by Arius?

Question 2: The Logos Himself was made human so that we might become Godthis is a time-honored phrase summed up by Athanasius, which Godzieba discusses (p. 233). What does this phrase mean to you and what are its implications for ministry, i.e., are the people with and to whom you minister aware of…