A critical analysis of David Coffey`s and Colin E. Gunton´s treatment of Augustine´s mutual-love theory
Abstract
Both the Catholic theologian David Coffey and the late Protestant theologian Colin E. Gunton
treat Augustine’s Trinitarian theology in their work. One major common point of their
treatment is the theory of the Holy Spirit as the mutual-love between the Father and the Son
which Augustine developed. I look upon the two theologians’ treatment of Augustine’s theory
and claim that the difference in their interpretation is shaped by their use and balance of the
four sources of theology: scripture, tradition, reason, and experience. I support my claim
through four main chapters organized by the four sources. Coffey uses scripture more freely
while Gunton is stricter in discussing Augustine foundation of the theory in scripture. Both
Coffey and Gunton reflects their respective traditions where Coffey put emphasis on
Augustine as Western tradition, while Gunton is overall critical to Augustinian theology. Both
theologians uses the terms ‘immanent’ and ‘economic’ Trinity. Coffey’s view is emphasizes
the ‘immanent’ and shows a blurring use of the terms. Gunton is stresses distinction between
the terms, but is careful in going farther than allowed by the economy. As for religious
experience Coffey and Gunton are different in their use and emphasis on the Holy Spirit and
experience. Gunton stresses the Spirit as active both in eschatology and in Christian
community. Coffey are more concerned with the Holy Spirit as love between the Father and
the Son. Through these four main chapters: scripture, tradition, reason and experience, I
thereby show how Coffey’s and Gunton’s different weight in the sources shape how they
interpret Augustine’s pneumatological theory.
Description
Masteroppgave i religion- Universitetet i
Agder 2009