몰트만의 사회적 삼위일체론에 대한 비판적 고찰 ― 판넨베르크의 관점에서

Abstract

The purpose of this thesis is to evaluate Moltmann’s sociological trinity from Pannenberg’s perspective. In the Christian tradition, the inner trinity and the economic trinity have been separated. By this separation, traditional theology has wanted to represent that God is transcendent and essentially different from the creation. This separation has also been shown by distinguishing De Deo Uno and De Deo Trino. For when the divine three persons are not united, the doctrine of God might fall into the theory of three gods. This is emphasized by the substance-trinity and the subject-trinity. However, Jurgen Moltmann argues that if the trinity is expressed by substance or subject, the trinity might fall into an abstract monotheism because the three-ness will return to the oneness. Then the Christian doctrine of God loses its identity. So Moltmann says that the unity of the three divine persons should not depend on substance or subject. Rather he understands the unity as the perichoresis among them. Through this perichoresis, he asserts that the trinity becomes a community based on the fellowship of love among the three divine persons. And since love is always tending toward others, the trinitarian community is not closed, but opened to the world. In this sense, the trinity can be called an idealistic model of communion for all kinds of community on earth. This may be Moltmann’s contribution for the trinitarian theology. In spite of this, Moltmann distinguishes between the Father’s monarchy and the life of the trinity, and he says that the relations of the trinity depend on the monarchy of the Father, while the life of the trinity is accomplished by the perichoresis among the three persons. However, in this case, Pannenberg says that the trinity finally returns to the monarchy of God. Then the trinity will be reduced to monotheism. In order to solve this problem, Pannenberg suggests the concept of “spirit” or “deity” and the theory of the monachy of the Father. According to Pannenberg, when the concept of spirit and the Father’s monachy apply to the trinity, the three divine persons become one only by expressing the spirit, and the Father’s monarchy is maintained and fulfilled by the commitment of the Son and ths Spirit. So Pannenberg asserts that the trinity will not be reduced to monotheism. Thus Pannenberg’s trinity seems to be a good compliment for Moltmann’s one.