vol19no2article1back

7/29/2019 vol19no2article1back

1/19

PACIFICA19(JUNE 2006) 125

Back to a Way Forward: Jacques Dupuis

Trinitarian Christology and the Invisible Missions

of the Word and Spirit_____________________________________________A nne Hunt

Abstract: Jacques Dupuis book, Toward a Christian Theology of ReligiousPluralism, drew an enormous response from theologians, some of themvery concerned by Dupuis argument in terms of the universal presenceand action of the Word and Spirit as extending beyond that of the risenincarnate Word, and his insistence that a divine action of the Word as suchremains, which extends beyond the human action of the risen Christ. Theaim of this essay is to examine the distinctly trinitarian elements of Dupuisargument, in the light of the classical teachings regarding Trinity andChristology, for it is on the basis of his trinitarian christology that

Dupuis grounds his theology of religious pluralism. The author arguesthat, while Dupuis trinitarian christology points the way to a morepositive appreciation of the salvific efficacy of non-Christian religions, hehas confused rather than advanced an understanding of the operation ofWord and Spirit in regard to non-Christian religions. The author arguesthat the classical notion of the divine missions, visible and invisible, astrange omission from Dupuis argument, would facilitate the case heseeks to make, avoid some of the ambiguities that dog his case, and mutethe key concerns which have been raised by reviewers.

THE PUBLICATION OF JACQUES DUPUIS BOOK, Toward a ChristianTheology of Religious Pluralism,1 quickly made available in severallanguages, drew an enormous response from fellow theologians around

the world. Some reviewers were very positive, indeed fulsome, in theirassessment of Dupuis contribution, while others were critical somevery much so in their appraisal of Dupuis argument.2 As is wellknown, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith of the Catholic

1. Jacques Dupuis, Toward a Christian Theology of Religious Pluralism (Maryknoll NY:

Orbis, 1997). Hereafter: Toward.2. Dupuis cites a list of related book reviews and articles in The Truth Will Make You

Free: The Theology of Religious Pluralism Revisited, Louvain Studies 24 (1999) 261-63, andin Christianity and the Religions Revisited, Louvain Studies 28 (2003) 381-83.


2/19

126 PACIFICA19(JUNE 2006)

Church (CDF) eventually published its own Notification, in which itreferred to notable ambiguities and difficulties on important doctrinalpoints, which could lead a reader to erroneous or harmful opinions.3

Although Dupuis response to the CDF inquiry into his work is as yetunpublished in the public domain, Dupuis provided a detailed andcomprehensive reply to the reviews of his book in an article, The TruthWill Make You Free, in the journal Louvain Studies in 1999.4

Dupuis later book, Christianity and the Religions: From Confrontation toDialogue,5 also published in several languages, was written in response

to a request for a more accessible book on the same topic, aimed at abroader audience. As Dupuis himself explains in the introduction, thislater book is more pastoral than academic, more concrete thanabstract.6 References were reduced, more subtle theological points setaside, some new material added, and other material reorganised. Thissecond book also enabled Dupuis to clarify some ambiguities in theearlier work that had come to light in reviews, to present further datafrom Christian revelation and tradition to support his case, and to refinehis argument.7 Despite the critical reviews, there was no resiling fromhis essential argument in this second book: as he explains, I havesimilarly stressed the importance of the enduring saving action of theWord of God as such for a correct appraisal of the centrality of the

mystery of Christ and its universal salvific efficacy.8 This later book didnot attract as strong a response as its predecessor. But, as in regard to hisprevious book, Dupuis subsequently addressed issues raised in articlesand book reviews in an article, Christianity and the ReligionsRevisited, in Louvain Studies in 2003.9

The aim of this essay is to examine the distinctly trinitarian elementsof what Dupuis describes as his trinitarian christology, as expoundedin Toward a Christian Theology of Religious Pluralism and in the later

3. See URL . For a

survey of Dupuis theology, particularly in relation to his christology and his theology ofreligious pluralism, see Anne Hunt, Trinity: Nexus of the Mysteries of Christian Faith(Maryknoll NY: Orbis, 2005). See also Gerald OCollins, Christ and the Religions,Gregorianum 84 (2003) 347-62, and Gerald OCollins, Jacques Dupuis: His Person andWork, in Daniel Kendall and Gerald OCollins (eds.), In Many and Diverse Ways: In Honorof Jacques Dupuis (Maryknoll NY: Orbis Books, 2003) 18-29, particularly in regard to theconcerns raised by the CDF.

4. Dupuis, The Truth Will Make You Free: The Theology of Religious PluralismRevisited, Louvain Studies 24 (1999) 211-63. Hereafter: The Truth.

5. Jacques Dupuis, Christianity and the Religions: From Confrontation to Dialogue(Maryknoll NY: Orbis Books, 2002). Hereafter: Christianity.

6. Dupuis, Christianity, 2.7. Dupuis, Christianity, 262.8. Dupuis, Christianity and the Religions Revisited, Louvain Studies 28 (2003) 381.

Hereafter, Christianity Revisited.9. Dupuis, Christianity Revisited, 363-83.


3/19

HUNT: DUPUIS AND TRINITARIAN CHRISTOLOGY 127

Christianity and the Religions, in the light of the classical teachingsregarding Trinity and christology.10 Admittedly, ecclesiology, which is aclose corollary of Dupuis trinitarian christology, is another very seriousissue, as many reviewers have noted, but it is upon Dupuis trinitariantheology that I wish to focus in this essay, for it lies at the very heart ofDupuis theology of religious pluralism, as Dupuis himself states. It ison the basis of and only in terms of their relatedness to the distinctlytrinitarian mystery of Christ that Dupuis argues for an understanding ofnon-Christian religions as legitimate paths of salvation for their

members.

1. THETRINITARIAN RHYTHM OF GODS SALVIFIC ACTIVITY

In constructing what he calls a trinitarian christology, as analternative to a more traditional Christocentric model, by way ofapproach to a theology which is more positive in its assessment of non-Christian religions, Dupuis first presses for an appreciation of what hedescribes as the distinctly trinitarian rhythm of Gods activitythroughout salvation history. By the trinitarian rhythm of Gods salvificactivity in the economy of salvation, Dupuis means the universallypresent and active involvement of the Son and of the Spirit throughout

salvation history, both before and after the event of the incarnation.Dupuis frequently refers to Irenaeus image of the two hands of God 11

at work in the economy of salvation. It is an image that, for Dupuis,connotes this enduring universal presence and action of the Son andSpirit in human history. The two hands of God, Dupuis insists, areunited and inseparable, but distinct and complementary, in theiroperations in the one unified divine plan for salvation.

In terms of the biblical evidence for this universal presence andaction of the Word in salvation history, Dupuis appeals foremost to thePrologue of Johns Gospel (John 1:1-4), which attests to the universalpresence of the Logos before the incarnation of the Word in Jesus Christ.Similarly, Dupuis argues that the action of the Spirit, who blows whereit wills (John 3:8), is universally present throughout human history.

Clearly rejecting a narrow Christocentric perspective, Dupuis asks:

Could it not, in effect, be thought that, while Christians securesalvation through the economy of Gods Son incarnate in JesusChrist, others receive it through the immediate autonomous actionof the Spirit of God? The hypostatic independence, or personal

10. As noted above, for a more general consideration of Dupuis theology, including his

theology of religious pluralism, see Hunt, Trinity: Nexus of the Mysteries of Christian Faith.11. Irenaeus, Contra Haereses, IV, 7, 4.


4/19


distinction between Gods two hands, is warrant for the twodistinct channels through which Gods saving presence reaches outto people in distinct economies of salvation.12

We note immediately and with a measure of consternation Dupuisuse of the words autonomous and independence in relation to theaction of the Word and Spirit, for such a description stands in starkcontrast with the traditional understanding of the inextricablyintrinsically interrelated actions of the Word and Spirit. But Dupuis

quickly reminds his readers that

Christian faith has it that the action of the Spirit and that of JesusChrist, though distinct, are nevertheless complementary andinseparable. Pneumatocentrism and Christocentrism cannot, there-fore, be construed as two distinct economies of salvation, oneparallel to the other. They constitute two inseparable aspects, orcomplementary elements, within a unique economy of salvation.13

The Spirit of God, he insists, is the Spirit of Christ. The cosmic influenceof the Spirit cannot be severed from the universal action of the risenChrist.14

Explicitly avowing that christology and pneumatology cannot be

construed as two distinct and separate economies of salvation, and thatthere is no dichotomy, but rather total complementarity in the onedivine economy of salvation, Dupuis insists that the hypostaticdistinction between the Word and the Spirit, together with the specificinfluence of each in the trinitarian rhythm of the divine salvific activity,serves as a hermeneutical key for the real differentiation and pluralityin salvation history.15 The roles like the hypostatic identities of theSon and the Spirit may not be confused but must remain distinct.Similarly, Dupuis, again seeking to situate his theology within orthodoxdoctrine, explains that the relationship of order in the economyaccords with the order of the eternal relations of hypostatic origination,i.e., the order of origin of the divine persons, in the Godhead.16

In this way, Dupuis explicitly holds fast to the complementarity ofthe roles of Son and Spirit in the one economy of salvation and arguesagainst any construal whereby christology and pneumatology are two

12. Dupuis, Toward, 196. In The Truth, 242, Dupuis corrects a possible misunder-

standing and explains: One may not hold an autonomous economy of the Spirit,separated from that of the incarnate Word.

13. Dupuis, Toward, 197.14. Dupuis, Toward, 197.15. Dupuis, Toward, 206.16. Dupuis, Toward, 207.


5/19


distinct economies of divine-human relationship. But Dupuis isconvinced that the mystery of the Trinity, which implies both unity andplurality, offers the proper key...for understanding the multiplicity ofinterrelated divine self-manifestations in the world and in history.17

2. THETRINITARIAN STRUCTURE OF REVELATION

Just as salvation history is marked by this trinitarian rhythm of Godsactions, so too is the divine self-communication essentially trinitarian in

its structure. The same trinitarian rhythm of Gods involvement insalvation history is found in Gods self-revelation: Gods communicationis always through his Word, and in the Holy Spirit. It culminates in theincarnation of the Word. Dupuis argues, however: The universalsignificance of the incarnation of Gods Word notwithstanding, roommust be left for his [the Words] anticipated action in history as well ashis enduring influence under other symbols.18 Here is a vital andproblematic point to his argument: the presence and action of theWord is not restricted to its incarnation in the person of Jesus Christ.

In regard to the Spirit, Dupuis continues in a similar vein: The activepresence of the Spirit is universal. It anticipates the event of Jesus Christand, after that event, extends beyond the confines of the Church. The

Spirit spreads throughout the world, vivifying all things.19

At work inevery stage of salvation history, the Spirit, in Dupuis words, is thepoint of entry of divine truth and life into the human spirit. Everypersonal encounter of God with the human being and of the human

being with God occurs in the Holy Spirit.... all authentic experience ofGod is in the Spirit. 20 Here is another vital point to Dupuis argument:the presence and action of the Spirit is not restricted to its outpouringfrom, its conferral through, the incarnate Word, Jesus Christ.

3. DUPUIS TRINITARIAN CHRISTOLOGY

In a discussion of the fullness of revelation in Jesus Christ, Dupuisrepeatedly insists that Jesus Christ is personally the fullness of

revelation, its pinnacle and culmination, and that Jesus Christ is thisfullness of revelation precisely because of his personal identity as theincarnate Son of God. As Dupuis describes it, divine revelation attains

17. Dupuis, Toward, 208.18. Dupuis, Toward, 243.19. Dupuis, Toward, 243.20. Dupuis, Toward, 244.


6/19


its qualitative plenitude in Jesus.21 The revelation of God in JesusChrist is unique and unsurpassable in human experience.

But, as Dupuis explains, appealing to the teaching of Vatican II in theDogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation (Dei Verbum), the fullnessof revelation in Jesus Christ, while unsurpassable, does not precludefurther revelation: The qualitative fullness let us say, the intensity ofthe revelation in Jesus Christ is no obstacle, even after the historicalevent, to a continuing revelation. No revelation, however, either

before or after Christ can either surpass or equal the one vouchsafed in

Jesus Christ, the divine Son incarnate.22 It is in this sense that Dupuisrefers to revelation in Jesus Christ as incomplete and relative,23 aclaim that was to draw considerable negative response from Dupuisreviewers. Dupuis later responded:

I agree that the term relative is ambiguous, and I should havebeen satisfied to speak of the revelation in Jesus remaining limitedor finite.... [I]ssuing as it does from the (created) humanawareness of Jesus..., revelation in Jesus remains limited orincomplete. I have called this fullness qualitative, notquantitative.24

Dupuis repeatedly affirms his understanding of the unique and

transcendent character of Christian revelation.25 Although incomplete,in the sense described by Dupuis, revelation in Jesus Christ isnevertheless unsurpassable.

Dupuis also desists from speaking about the absoluteness of JesusChrist. He argues: No human consciousness, even the human con-sciousness of the Son of God, can exhaust the Divine Mystery.26 It is onthese grounds that Dupuis rejects the use of the descriptor absolute todescribe the fullness of revelation in Jesus Christ, reserving that term forGod alone. Dupuis explains: That Jesus Christ is universal Savior doesnot make him the Absolute Savior who is God himself.27 Accordingto Dupuis, it is the Father alone who, as the ultimate source of the divinesaving action, is absolute.28 It is better, Dupuis insists, to call Jesus

Christ not absolute saviour but the absolute mediator. However, asDupuis later explains, not being absolute does not mean being

21. Dupuis, Toward, 249.22. Dupuis, Toward, 249-50.23. Dupuis, Toward, 248-50.24. Dupuis, The Truth, 235, 247.25. Dupuis, The Truth, 235.26. Dupuis, Toward, 249.27. Dupuis, Toward, 282.28. Dupuis, The Truth, 244.


7/19


relative, as if Jesus Christ were merely one saviour among othersaviours.29 Dupuis thus argues that the uniqueness and universality of

Jesus Christ, while grounded in his personal identity as the Son of God,are neither absolute nor relative. They are constitutive insofar as

Jesus Christ holds saving significance for the whole of humankind andthe Christ-event is cause of salvation, and relational insofar as theyrelate to Gods overall salvific design for humankind and its unfoldingin salvation history.30 As Dupuis explains:

In accordance with the mainline Christian tradition, the constitutiveuniqueness and universality of the Jesus-Christ-event must bemaintained. Such uniqueness must not, however, be construed asabsolute; what is absolute is Gods saving will. Neither absolute norrelative, Jesus uniqueness is constitutive and relational...in thesense that the singularly unique event of Jesus Christ is inscribed inthe overall ambit of Gods personal dealings with humankind inhistory, and, therefore, related to all other divine manifestations topeople in the one history of salvation.31

By the term constitutive uniqueness Dupuis means Jesus Christssalvific significance for all humanity, which flows from Jesusontologically grounded identity as the only-begotten Son of God. But,Dupuis argues: Just as the human consciousness of Jesus as Son couldnot, by nature, exhaust the mystery of God, and therefore left hisrevelation of God incomplete, in like manner neither does or can theChrist-event exhaust Gods saving power.32

Arguing on the basis of a distinction between Logos asarkos (thenonincarnate Word) and Logos ensarkos (the incarnate Word),33 Dupuisinsists that a distinct action of the Logos asarkos endures throughouthistory.34 This means, Dupuis argues, that the saving action of Godthrough the nonincarnate Logos (Logos asarkos)...endures after theincarnation of the Logos.35 Dupuis adds a note of qualification,however: Admittedly, in the mystery of Jesus-the-Christ, the Wordcannot be separated from the flesh it has assumed.... But inseparable as

29. Dupuis, The Truth, 243.30. Dupuis, Toward, 283, 303.31. Dupuis, Trinitarian Christology as a M odel for a Th eology of Religious Pluralism,

in T. Merrigan and J. Hears (eds.), The Myriad Christ: Plurality and the Quest for Unity inContemporary Christology (Leuven : Leuven University Press, 2000) 96-7.

32. Dupuis, Toward, 298.33. In his review, Terrence Merrigan notes that this distinction between Logos asarkos

and Logos ensarkos is fundamental to Dupuis case, and Dupuis agrees, in The Truth,236. Dupuis drops this terminology in later book, however.

34. Dupuis, Toward, 299.35. Dupuis, Toward, 298.


8/19


the divine Word and Jesus human existence may be, they neverthelessremain distinct.36

Dupuis thus affirms, to use his words, the permanent, inclusive,transhistorical (or metahistoric, the term Dupuis uses in the later article,Christianity Revisited37) presence of the mystery of Jesus Christ. 38

Dupuis reiterates: his risen humanity is the obligatory channel, theinstrumental cause, of grace for all people.39 But again Dupuis arguesthat the action of the Word is not restricted to the incarnation in JesusChrist. While insisting that the Christ-event is the culminating and

unsurpassable point of revelation, the universal sacrament, Dupuisargues that it nevertheless does not exhaust, limit or cancel the power ofthe Word of God and the Words universal action throughout history.Dupuis maintains that, as attested in Johns Prologue (John 1:9, referringto the true light that enlightens every human being), the illuminatingpower of the divine Logos is operative throughout human history, in theone economy of salvation. In other words, the agency of the divineLogos continues. According to Dupuis, the centrality of theincarnational event must not obscure the abiding presence and action ofthe divine Word throughout salvation history. The particularity of thathistorical event does not circumscribe the enlightening and savingpower of the Logos, which transcends all boundaries of time and space.

Dupuis argues in this way for the enduring salvific action of theWord and Spirit in history after the resurrection, distinct but notseparate in their activity from the risen incarnate Word. As he explains:Gods saving action...never prescinds from the Christ-event, in which itfinds its historical density. Yet the action of the Word of God is notconstrained by its historically becoming human in Jesus Christ; nor isthe Spirits work in history limited to its outpouring upon the world bythe risen and exalted Christ.40 Divine action, Dupuis insists, quotingJohn Paul IIs Dominum et Vivificantem, bears within itself both achristological aspect and a pneumatological one,41 not as two distincteconomies of salvation, but rather as inseparable and complementaryelements of the one economy of salvation.

Dupuis thus clearly and explicitly rejects pluralist arguments againstthe uniqueness and centrality of Christ. He repeatedly and un-ambiguously affirms Jesus Christs uniqueness and holds fast to

36. Dupuis, Toward, 299.37. Dupuis, Christianity, 373.38. Dupuis, Toward, 316-19.39. Dupuis, Toward, 350.40. Dupuis, Toward, 316.41. Dominum et Vivificantem (On the Holy Spirit in the Life of the Church and the

World [http://www.vatican.va/edocs/ENG0142/_INDEX.HTM]) 53.


9/19


orthodox teaching that the revelation of God in Jesus Christ isunsurpassable. He unswervingly maintains that the uniqueness anduniversality of Christ are of salvific significance for all humankind, thatall are saved in Christ, the ontological basis of this being his identity asonly begotten Son of God. While Dupuis does indeed describe theunsurpassable revelation in the incarnate Son as relative, incomplete,and not absolute, he makes these qualifications in the context of thetrinitarian rhythm and character of salvation. All Dupuis comments onthe mediatory role of non-Christian religions and of other mediations

and paths of salvation, of other saving figures and traditions, are to beclearly situated and understood in this context.

4. THEUNIVERSAL AND UNBOUND ACTION OF THESPIRIT

Dupuis also argues for an understanding of the universal action anddynamic influence of the Spirit throughout salvation history. Just as thesaving action of the Logos ensarkos does not exhaust the action of theLogos asarkos, the Spirit of God is universally present and active, beforeand after the event of the incarnation.42 Here Dupuis recalls John PaulIIs teaching in Redemptoris Missio in regard to the Spirits universalpresence and activity in all human hearts:

[The Spirits] presence and activity are universal, limited neither byspace nor time.... the Spirit is at work in the heart of every person,through the seeds of the Word, to be found in human initiatives including religious ones and in mankinds efforts to attain truth,goodness and God himself.... The Spirits presence and activityaffect not only individuals but also society and history, peoples,cultures, and religions. Indeed, the Spirit is at the origin of the nobleideals and undertakings which benefit humanity on its journeythrough history.... Again, it is the Spirit who sows the seeds of theWord present in various customs and cultures, preparing them forfull maturity in Christ.43

Dupuis insists that the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of God, is the Spirit ofChrist, and that the Spirits actions cannot be severed from the

42. Dupuis, Toward, 300.43. Redemptoris Missio (On the permanent validity of the Churchs missionary mandate

[See URL http://www.vatican.va/edocs/ENG0219/_INDEX.HTM])28. In a similar vein,John Paul II, at the World Day of Prayer for Peace at Assisi in 1986, said that everyauthentic prayer is called forth by the Holy Spirit, who is mysteriously present in the heartof every human person (See URL:http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/speeches/1986/october/documents/hf_jp-ii_spe_19861029_religioni-non-cristiane_en.html)


10/19


universal action of the risen Christ. 44 Dupuis explains: The specificfunction of the Spirit consists in allowing persons to become sharers,whether before or after the event, of the paschal mystery of JesusChrists death and resurrection (see GS 22). Thus, through the power ofthe Spirit, the Jesus Christ-event is being actuated through all times; it ispresent and active in every generation.45 Here Dupuis is also in accordwith the Pontifical Council for Inter-Religious Dialogue which, inDialogue and Proclamation, speaks of the active presence of the HolySpirit in the religious life of the members of the other religious

traditions (a. 28).In his second book, Christianity and the Religions, Dupuis expands at

some length on the universal presence of the Holy Spirit, adding asection with somewhat troubling title, The unbound action of theSpirit.46 Again Dupuis explains that a Trinitarian perspective promptsobservations about the universal presence of the Spirit.47 Dupuisargues that the Spirit is universally present and active before and afterthe Christ event. There is, he explains, a relationship of mutualconditioning between the christological and pneumatological aspects ofsalvation. He reiterates: Gods economy of salvation is only one; theChrist event is both its apex and universal sacrament; but the God whosaves is three-personed: each of the three is personally distinct and

remains active distinctly.48

Again, appealing to Irenaeus image ofGods two hands, Dupuis insists: While they are united and in-separable, they are also distinct and complementary in their distinction.The activity of each is different from that of the other; indeed it is theconcurrence or synergy of the two distinct activities that producesGods saving effect.49 The Christ event does not exhaust the activity ofthe Spirit after the Christ event (and hence the descriptor, unbound).Each of the Word and Spirit has its own personal identity in the divineactivity: the Word is the light which enlightens everyone (John 1:9)and the Spirit blows where he wills (John 3:8). Dupuis is adamant thatto distinguish without separation the different complementary aspectsof the divine economy of salvation is not to posit different economies ofsalvation. He insists that the economy of salvation is one unified yetmultifaceted (because trinitarian) plan.50

44. Dupuis, Toward, 197.45. Dupuis, Toward, 197. (GS refers to Vatican IIs Pastoral Constitution on the Church in

the Modern World, Gaudium et Spes.)46. Dupuis, Christianity, 178-82.47. Dupuis, Christianity, 178.48. Dupuis, Christianity, 178.49. Dupuis, Christianity, 179.50. Dupuis, Christianity, 186.


11/19


Dupuis consequently argues for an understanding of Word and Spiritas genuinely present and active in other religions. As he explains: TheTrinitarian Christology model, the universal enlightenment of the Wordof God, and the enlivening by his Spirit make it possible to discover, inother saving figures and traditions, truth and grace not brought out withthe same vigor and clarity in Gods revelation and manifestation in JesusChrist.51 The Word and the Spirit, Dupuis explains, as the two handsof God, combine, through their universal action, in endowing thereligious life of persons with truth and grace and in impressing saving

values upon the religious traditions to which they belong.52 There isno denying at any point the uniqueness of the mystery of theincarnation in the person of Jesus. But, Dupuis insists, while he alone isthus constituted the image of God, other saving figures maybe...enlightened by the Word or inspired by the Spirit to becomepointers to salvation for their followers, in accordance with Godsoverall design for humankind.53

5. CRITICALTRINITARIAN-CHRISTOLOGICAL ISSUES

Given the creative and somewhat radical nature of Dupuis argumentin regard to the operations of the Word and Spirit, and the conclusions

Dupuis draws for a theology of non-Christian religions and for theirpositive salvific efficacy, it is not surprising that reviews of Dupuiswork raised a number of concerns in specific regard to his trinitarianchristology. These concerns centred on the following questions: (i) doeshe dissociate the post-resurrectional presence and action of the Word ofGod from the incarnate Word, Jesus Christ? and (ii) does he dissociatethe post-resurrectional presence and action of the Spirit from that of theincarnate Word? These same issues also figure among the points ofconcern raised in the CDF Declaration Dominus Iesus54 (2000), and, inspecific regard to Dupuis work, in the Notification of the CDF (2001)which states in regard to these issues:

On the sole and universal salvific mediation of Jesus Christ (a. 2):...

It is therefore contrary to the Catholic faith not only to posit aseparation between the Word and Jesus, or between the Wordssalvific activity and that of Jesus, but also to maintain that there is a

51. Dupuis, Toward, 388.52. Dupuis, Toward, 321.53. Dupuis, Toward,298.54. See URL .


12/19


salvific activity of the Word as such in his divinity, independent ofthe humanity of the Incarnate Word.55

On the universal salvific action of the Holy Spirit (a. 5):... It istherefore contrary to the Catholic faith to hold that the salvific actionof the Holy Spirit extends beyond the one universal salvificeconomy of the Incarnate Word.

Addressing the concerns raised by his reviewers in his article, The

Truth Will Set You Free,56

Dupuis agrees that it is vital to preserve thepersonal identity of Jesus Christ with the Word of God and to reject anyseparation of the two natures. 57 He insists that he never separates themand that his concern is not the separation of the two natures but thedistinction between them. He repeats his argument: The action of theWord, I claim, cannot be constrained and limited to its expressionthrough the human nature. There remains an action of the Word assuch.58 He reiterates: What is being affirmed is that, even after theincarnation and the resurrection, a divine action of the Word as suchremains, which extends beyond the human action of the risen Christ.59

Again Dupuis appeals to the Prologue of Johns Gospel, especially John1:9, which, he argues, seems to imply such an action of the Word. As heexplains:

It seems therefore permissible to speak of an action of the Word ofGod, not only before the incarnation but also after the incarnationand resurrection, extending beyond the saving action of Jesushumanity, provided such continued action be not separated fromthe event in which there takes place the insurpassableconcentration of the self-revelation of God in accordance with theone divine plan for the universal salvation of humankind.... Thecontinued enlightening and life-giving action of the Word as such is,however, correlated to the concentration of divine salvation inthe Word as incarnate in Jesus Christ, and to the lasting actuality ofthe historical event through the risen condition of his humanity.60

Yet, to speak in the way that Dupuis does of the action of theuniversal Logos as extending beyond or not confined to the risen

55. Here the CDF Notification (see note 3 above) recalls Redemptoris Missio (a. 6) in whichPope John Paul II states that to introduce any sort of separation between the Word andJesus Christ is contrary to the Christian faith.

56. Dupuis, The Truth, 236.57. Dupuis, The Truth, 237.58. Dupuis, The Truth, 237.59. Dupuis, The Truth, 238.60. Dupuis, The Truth, 240.


13/19


incarnate Word, that a divine action of the Word as such remains,which extends beyond the human action of the risen Christ, surelythreatens, and actually undermines, his repeated avowal of theconstitutive uniqueness of Jesus Christ as absolute mediator ofsalvation for all people and all times.

Defending his argument in regard to the action of the Spirit, Dupuiswrites: That the Spirit is communicated today through the risenhumanity of Jesus Christ, especially to the Church, is not denied. Thepoint under dispute is whether the action of the Spirit is exclusively

bound to the mediation of the glorified humanity.61 According toDupuis, the action of the Spirit is not exclusively conferred through theglorified humanity. As noted above, Dupuis argues that the inclusive,universal saving mystery of the glorified Christ...does not prevent awider action of the Word as such and of the Spirit. 62 But Dupuisrepeated reference to the operations of the Word and Spirit in terms ofwider action or extending beyond is also problematic in that it risksat least a measure of ambiguity, as it seems to suggest not just adistinction but a separation of the action of the Spirit from that of theWord and, in that event, a rupture in the unity of divine action ad extraand indeed in the trinitarian perichoresis. But, directly addressing theseconcerns, Dupuis avows his adherence to the classical understanding

that the actions of the two are inseparable, while distinct, insisting thatthe effusion of the Spirit is always relational to this event [JesusChrist] in which the process of Gods plan of salvation culminates.63

In defending his argument in regard to both critical issues thepresence and action of the Word of God in relation to the incarnateWord, and the presence and action of the Spirit in relation to that of theWord Dupuis appeals to the christological teachings of the Council ofChalcedon and the Third Council of Constantinople, both of whichaffirm that the two natures of the incarnate Word, while inseparable, aredistinct.64 He expressly notes that no reviewer has questioned his inter-pretation of the two christological definitions, although he admits thatthe two councils do not affirm directly and explicitly that there is andremains an action of the Word as such, even in the state of union; they

61. Dupuis, The Truth, 242.62. Dupuis, The Truth, 238.63. Dupuis, The Truth, 243.64. The Council of Chalcedon (AD 451), in response to monophysite teaching regarding

the mystery of the person of the Christ, declared that the two natures, human and divine,exist in Christ without confusion or change, without division or separation (DS 302; ND615). Later, when monotheletism and mono-energism emerged as matters of controversyregarding the activity of the Incarnate Word, the Third Council of Constantinople (AD 681)proclaimed two natural volitions or wills and two natural actions, without division,without change, without separation, without confusion (DS 556; ND 635).


14/19


are directly concerned with the actions of the Word incarnate in whichboth natures are conjointly engaged.65 However, Dupuis applicationof the teachings of Chalcedon and Constantinople is very unusual. Hismode of arguing clearly stretches the interpretation of the classical chris-tological doctrines beyond their original scope and intention. Thechristological determinations of Chalcedon and Constantinople IIIaddressed questions regarding the nature, operation and will of JesusChrist, as they pertained to the incarnate Logos ad extra, i.e. to theincarnate Word visibly manifest in time and space in the economy of

salvation in the person of Jesus Christ. They concern the nature of theunion of the human and divine in the incarnation. Dupuis extrapolatesthe dogma of the hypostatic union well beyond the context in which itwas fashioned when he applies it to the operation of the divine andhuman natures of the resurrected and exalted and, to use his term, trans-(or meta-) historical, incarnate Word. As his reviewers and the CDFhave noted, it is precisely at this point that Dupuis argument becomeshighly problematic.

6. DUPUISTRINITARIAN CHRISTOLOGY AND THE VISIBLE AND INVISIBLE

MISSIONS OF THEWORD AND SPIRIT

Dupuis goal is a more expansive understanding of the roles of theWord and the Spirit in other religious traditions and hence a morepositive assessment of religious pluralism. An odd omission from hisargument is the traditional teaching concerning the action of the divineWord and Spirit in terms of mission, as it has the potential to serve withgreater clarity and coherence the case Dupuis seeks to make in regard toother religions. Its application, I suggest, would obviate recourse toDupuis very irregular use of the classical christological definitions, andavoid some of the ambiguity that dogs his argument. First, the classicaldefinition of mission formulated by Thomas Aquinas as that whichtakes place only in time,66 as a procession in time,67 is helpful. Itclearly establishes the operation of the mission in the realm of createdtime and space, and averts the problem of confusing the trans- (or meta)

historical with the historical, the eternal with the temporal, which isproblematic in Dupuis explication of the agency of the Word and Spirit.The mission, as Thomas explains, results in a new way of [the divineperson] being present somewhere.68

65. Christianity Revisited, 368.66. STh I, q. 43, a. 2 ad 3.67. STh I, q. 43, a. 3 sed contra.68. STh I, q. 43, a. 1. This authors emphasis.


15/19


Secondly, the tradition acknowledges that the one mission of theLogos is distinctively his own, and properly so, not merely by way ofappropriation. Similarly the Spirit has a mission that is distinctively andproperly its own. The tradition thus clearly allows for the distinctmissions of the Son and the Spirit, in a way that comfortablyaccommodates Dupuis thought.

Thirdly, classical trinitarian theology distinguishes between thevisible and invisible missions of the Word and Spirit. Each of theWord and Spirit has both a visible and an invisible mission. In their

visible missions, the Word (in the incarnation) and Spirit (at Pentecost)are sent in a concrete historical visibility, marked with the particularitiesof space and time, the missions having a beginning and a conclusion intime (though their operation is continued with the ministry of theChurch69). The invisible missions, on the other hand, operate through-out salvation history, concomitant with it, before as well as after theChrist-event, and continue into eternity itself. They are the invisiblesendings of the divine persons, Word and Spirit, to the human person ingrace.70

The visible missions of the divine persons, as Thomas clarifies, are tomake known the invisible missions: For it is connatural to a human

being...to be guided by the seen towards the unseen; this is why the

invisible things of God had to be made known to him through thevisible.71 Visibly manifesting Gods self-giving, the visible missionsattest to Gods invisible presence and indwelling through grace inhuman subjects, leading them to a sharing in the divine life for, in theinvisible mission, the divine person who is sent is also given, and comesto abide or dwell in the human soul.72 Union with God, holiness, isaccomplished through the invisible missions of Son and Spirit. AsThomas explains, in a statement that is pregnant with meaning for atheology of religious pluralism: an unseen mission takes place in orderto make creatures holy. Now every creature who is made holy possessesgrace. To every such creature, then, there is an unseen mission.73

Thomas explicates the distinction between the missions of the Wordand Spirit in terms of their origins, the inner-trinitarian processions.Each of the divine persons is sent according to his personal distinctionand properties:

69. Ad Gentes 2.70. As Thomas Aquinas says of the Son: The Son proceeds in eternity so as to be God,

but in time so as to be man by reason of his visible mission, and so as to be in man byreason of his invisible mission. STh I, q. 43, a. 2.

71. STh I, q. 43, a. 7.72. STh I, q. 43, aa. 3 and 5.73. STh I, q. 43, a. 6 sed contra. This authors emphasis.


16/19


A mission implies both the origin of the person sent and his newpresence through grace. Speaking of mission as to origin then, theSons mission is distinct from the Holy Spirits, even as being

begotten from proceeding. However, speaking with respect to thegrace given, then the two missions have grace as their common root,

but they are distinct as to the effects grace has, i.e. the enlightenmentof the mind and the enkindling of the affections. Plainly, then, oneeffect cannot take place without the other, since neither occurswithout sanctifying grace nor can one person be present without the

other.74

The traditional explication of trinitarian theology thus acknowledgesthat we can indeed make a distinction between the invisible mission ofthe Word operative throughout salvation history and the visible missionmanifest in the Word incarnate, as does Dupuis in his argument. InThomas teaching, the two missions are clearly and inextricably relatedto the one mystery of grace. The respective missions of the Word andSpirit necessarily imply their mutual relationships. Neither divineperson is present without the other. The missions of the Word andSpirit, visible and invisible, have their origin in the one root of grace, theone divine self communication, the one trinitarian salvific will and act;and they have the one goal, the trinitarian indwelling and union withGod.

As noted above, one of the significant risks in Dupuis argument, andidentified as such by both the CDF and reviewers of his work, is adissociation of the post-resurrectional presence and action of the Wordfrom the incarnation as fulfilled in the risen Jesus Christ. This risk isaverted when the discussion is instead expressed in terms of the visibleand invisible mission of the Word. The classical teaching allows for therecognition that the one mission of the Word has both visible andinvisible aspects. It recognises the universal and enduring actionthroughout salvation history of the Word, whose visible mission in theincarnation of the Word in Jesus Christ, now risen and glorified,manifests the invisible mission related to grace. Were Dupuis to argue in

terms of the invisible mission, as manifest in the visible mission of theWord, his point concerning the universal action of the Logos, so criticalto his argument, would hold and without vexation.

In regard to the Spirit, Dupuis notion of the universal presence andaction of the Spirit is fully in accord with the traditional teachingregarding the invisible mission of the Spirit throughout salvationhistory. Moreover, the notion of the invisible mission of the Spirit

74. STh I, q. 43, a. 5 ad 3. This authors emphasis.


17/19


readily accommodates Dupuis concern regarding the distinctionbetween, and the complementarity of, the christological andpneumatological dimensions of salvation history. But Dupuis venturesinto dangerous territory when he speaks of the unbound action of theSpirit, as if implying that the action of the Spirit is in any wayautonomous or independent or exclusive of the Word. Though Dupuisinsists that this is not his meaning, reviewers of his work, as well as theCDF, have expressed concern that here Dupuis risks a separation of theaction of the Spirit and of the Word from Christ, the incarnate Word.

Our study confirms that this is an area of at least the potential forambiguity and confusion in Dupuis theology. This concern is fuelled byDupuis reference to the universal action of the Spirit and of the Word asnot confined to, that it extends beyond, and has a wider action thanthe operation of the incarnate Word. It is fair, I suggest, to say that therelationship between the action of the Word and Spirit is notconsistently clear or coherently expressed in Dupuis writings, nor theirinterconnection in the one root of grace to which Aquinas refers.

Dupuis argument undoubtedly courts ambiguity in regard to therelationship of the post-resurrectional activity of the Word and Spirit increated time and space of salvation history in relation to the eternaltrans- (or meta) historical incarnate Word. The traditional explication of

the operation of the Word and Spirit in salvation history in terms of thevisible and invisible missions is considerably more precise and coherent.On the other hand, Dupuis explication of the universal action of boththe Word and Spirit as different but complementary aspects of the onedivine economy of salvation is not out of tune indeed it is in closeaccord with the traditional understandings concerning the divineinvisible missions.

7. BACK TO A WAY FORWARD?

In constructing a trinitarian christology, the critical elements of whichare the universal enduring presence and action of both the Word and theSpirit throughout salvation history extending beyond the human action

of the risen Christ, Dupuis fundamental aim is a more open andpositive approach to the religious traditions in Gods plan for human-kind, whereby non-Christian religions are recognised as having thepotential for at least some salvific value for their adherents. Dupuis seesno contradiction in holding together the uniqueness of Jesus Christ asuniversal saviour, to which he unswervingly holds, and a positive rolein Gods plan for other religious paths. He rightly appeals to John PaulIIs Redemptoris Missio (a. 5) and its teaching, redolent ofLumen Gentium(a. 62), regarding participated forms of mediation of different kinds


18/19


and degrees, forms of mediation that are not parallel or alternative tothe Christ event, but essentially related to and manifested by it.

I stand with Dupuis that it is both possible and desirable to gobeyond previous Church understandings of the role of non-Christianreligions in Gods salvific plan, while holding fast to Christianitysconviction that Jesus Christ is the one unsurpassable event of Gods self-communication. I concur with Dupuis that a more explicitly trinitarianapproach to the question offers the possibility of a more positive andconstructive approach, as indeed others, including Raimon Panikkar,

Karl Rahner and Michael Barnes, have also suggested. I agree withDupuis, when he states that a more positive approach and attitude, ifwell founded theologically, would help us, to our own astonishment, todiscover new depth and breadth in the Christian message.75 In myassessment, Dupuis contributes to Catholic thinking regarding thedevelopment of a theology of non-Christian religions in arguing for atrinitarian christology as a constructive and valid way forward. Dupuisactual argument is, however, clouded by a not-inconsiderable measureof ambiguity, as reviewers attest. Dupuis himself readily admits that themodel of a trinitarian christology which he has proposed for leading toan inclusivist pluralism of religions certainly needs furtherelaboration and more thorough study.76

I have argued that the notion of the divine missions, visible andinvisible, mutes the key concerns which have been raised by reviewersand the CDF. It is in fact a strange omission from Dupuis argument,given that the distinction between the visible and invisible missionsfacilitates the case he seeks to make, while avoiding some of the pitfalls.To frame the issues Dupuis is tackling the possibility of enlighten-ment by the Word and the inspiration by the Spirit in non-Christianreligions, their founders, sacred texts and rituals in terms of the divinemissions, invisible and invisible, would avoid some of the imprecise andconfusing aspects of his argument. The possibility for an advance in aCatholic understanding of religious pluralism is in fact already there, inembryonic form, in the tradition, in the classical teaching concerning thevisible and invisible missions.

In conclusion, while Dupuis trinitarian christology points the way toa more positive appreciation of the salvific efficacy of non-Christianreligions, his argument confuses as much as it advances an under-standing of the operation of Word and Spirit in regard to non-Christianreligions. The argument is strained and dogged by ambiguity, the issuesat times awkwardly or vexatiously put. Thankfully, the recent dec-

75. Dupuis, The Truth, 261.76. Dupuis, The Truth, 261.


19/19


laration, Dominus Iesus,77 clearly leaves open for further exploration thequestion as to the salvific value and efficacy of other religious paths, asdid Vatican II.78 A constructive and creative retrieval of the classicalteaching concerning the invisible and visible missions offers a morefruitful way forward.79

77. Dupuis, Dominus Iesus, 21.

78. See Ad Gentes 3, 11; Nostra Aetate 2; Gaudium et Spes 22.79. For a thought-provoking article, see Bernard Pottier, Note Sur la Mission Invisibledu Verbe Chez Saint Thomas dAquin, Nouvelle Revue Thologique 123 (2001) 547-57, inwhich Pottier analyses three of Aquinas texts, (STh I, q. 43, the first book of theCommentary of the Sentences, and the commentary on Hebrews 1:1-2) and concludes thatthe notion of the action of the Word extending beyond the visible mission of the Word isnot incompatible with Thomas thought. Pottier also draws attention to a number of textsin Thomas work which are pregnant with possibility in advancing our understanding ofthe issues involved in a theology of religious pluralism. For example, in STh I-II, q. 107, a. 1ad 2, Thomas writes: There were, however, in the state of the Old Covenant men who hadcharity and the grace of the Holy Spirit, who looked forward primarily to spiritual andeternal promises, and in this respect they belonged to the New Law. Again, even in theNew Covenant there are some unspiritual men who do not yet share in the perfection ofthe New Law. Here, as Pottier points out, Thomas implies a temporal co-penetration ofthe Old and New Covenants that is not to be reduced to a simplistic chronology. Pottieralso adverts to Thomas astonishing largesse, when addressing a question concerning theneed for explicit faith for salvation: in STh II-II, q. 2, a. 7, Thomas writes that consequentlythe mystery of Christs Incarnation was to be believed in all ages and by all peoples in somefashion, but in ways differing with the differences of times and of people. Later, in STh II-II, q. 2,a. 7 ad 3, Thomas explains that should any have been saved who had received norevelation, they were not saved without faith in the mediator...even if they did not have anexplicit belief in Christ, they did have an implicit faith in Gods providence, believing thatGod is mans deliverer in ways of his own choosing. (my emphasis) See also the work ofGilles Emery, which provides very rich fare for application to this issue, for example, GillesEmery, The Personal Mode of Trinitarian Action in Saint Thomas Aquinas, The Thomist,69 (2005) 31-77 which superbly demonstrates that Thomas Aquinas recognised in thedivine act, which is common to the three persons, a distinct mode of action of each divineperson. In other words, each divine person is involved in the common work of the three,according to his relative personal property.

Documents

vol19no2article1back