Journal: Southeastern Theological Review
Volume: STR 12:1 (Spring 2021)
Article: Inseparable Operations Of The Trinity: Outdated Relic Or Valuable Tool?
Author: Torey Teer

STR 12:1 (Spring 2021) p. 37

Inseparable Operations Of The Trinity: Outdated Relic Or Valuable Tool?

Torey J. S. Teer

The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary

The doctrine of inseparable operations has fallen out of favor for many theologians of the Trinity, though it continues to flourish in the trinitarian discourse of many others. Is the axiom to be regarded, per the first camp, as an irrelevant or inconsistent vestige of theology past or, per the second camp, a fruitful device for theology present? By surveying the voice of the fourth-century fathers, critiquing an alternative approach to the Trinity (social trinitarianism), and addressing potential problems regarding the axiom’s coherence, I offer a three-stranded evidentiary cord (historical, methodological, and theological) in support of the inseparability principle’s ongoing vitality for Christian conversation.

Key Words: Catherine Mowry LaCugna, Church Fathers, Divine Missions, Inseparable Operations, Social Trinitarianism, Trinitarianism

The twentieth-century resurgence of interest in trinitarianism led to the reconsideration, reformulation, or rejection of the doctrine of the Trinity and many of its classical tenets. One casualty of this historical and theological development is the doctrine of inseparable operations.1 In some circles, the inseparability principle has fallen out of fashion in trinitarian discourse—it is eyed with suspicion, reinterpreted, or repudiated. On the other hand, many theologians are defending, clarifying, and employing the doctrine for their own theological endeavors. Thus, a sort of tug-of-war manifests, prompting me to ask the question, “Is the doctrine of inseparable operations incompatible with, or irrelevant for, contemporary pursuits in Christian theology, or is it a valuable theological tool to be guarded and applied?”

STR 12:1 (Spring 2021) p. 38

In this article, I argue in favor of the latter option—the inseparability rule possesses fecundity for ongoing theological conversation and construction. I proffer this argument by way of three “strands” of evidence. First, I canvass the fourth-century fathers’ unanimous witness vis-à-vis the unity of the Godhead in nature and in work to validate the historical merit of inseparable operations. Next, I review the twentieth-century revival in trinitarianism that led to social conceptions of the Trinity and then evaluate Catherine Mowry LaCugna’s paradigmatic approach, revealing the weaknesses of her model and preserving classical trinitarianism as the methodologically viable basis for the inseparability principle. Finally, I address two concerns regarding inseparable operations in order to exhibit the axio...