Analytic Ecclesiology: The Paradox of the Unity of the Church
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.36421/veritas.v21i2.575Keywords:
Analytic, Ecclesiology, Unity, Social Ontology, Problem of the ManyAbstract
Analytic Ecclesiology is a new branch within the enterprise of Analytic Theology. The “analytic” part of the name refers to the analytic method employed to explicate the core claims of Christian theology using the tools of analytic philosophy. In the case of Ecclesiology, the concept of ecclesiastical unity demands clarification. The question is not why or how a collection of individuals is united but in what sense they are one. The Scriptural answer to the former is that Christ is the head of the Church. It is the latter that Analytic Ecclesiology is committed to answering. Joshua Cockayne’s work, which focuses on the social ontology and group agency of the Church, has shed some light on the issue. He invites philosophers and theologians in the analytic tradition to think about Ecclesiology analytically. That is my aim in this paper. I hope to expand the discussion on Analytic Ecclesiology, not by building on Cockayne’s work, but rather by taking a step back and arguing that the issue of the unity of the Church must be discussed from the perspective of identity rather than, contra Cockayne, from the perspective of group agency. To achieve this, I shall first assess Cockayne’s account and offer my criticism. Then, drawing insights from Peter Unger’s article “Problem of the Many,” I discuss the paradox of the unity of the Church and conclude that relative identity theory best solves the paradox of the unity of the Church.
Downloads
References
Androutsos, Chrēstos. The Basis for Union. Constantinople, 1905.
Baber, H.E. “The Trinity: Relative Identity Redux.” Faith and Philosophy: Journal of the Society of Christian Philosophers 32, no. 2 (2015): 161–171. https://doi.org/10.5840/faithphil201541336. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5840/faithphil201541336
Brower, Jeffrey E., and Michael C. Rea. “Material Constitution and the Trinity.” Faith and Philosophy: Journal of the Society of Christian Philosophers 22, no. 1 (2005): 57–76. https://doi.org/10.5840/faithphil200522134. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5840/faithphil200522134
Cockayne, Joshua. “Analytic Ecclesiology: The Social Ontology of the Church.” Journal of Analytic Theology 7 (June 2019): 100–123. https://doi.org/10.12978/jat.2019-7.091400021404. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12978/jat.2019-7.091400021404
Cockayne, Joshua. “We Believe in The Holy Spirit … The Holy Catholic Church.” In The Third Person of the Trinity: Explorations in Constructive Dogmatics, edited by Oliver D. Crisp and Fred Sanders, 161-178. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2020.
Cotnoir, A. J., and Achille C. Varzi. Mereology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198749004.001.0001
Crisp, Oliver D. “Analytic Theology as Systematic Theology.” Open Theology 3, no. 1 (2017): 156–166, https://doi.org/10.1515/opth-2017-0012. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/opth-2017-0012
Crisp, Oliver D. “Robert Jenson On the Pre-Existence of Christ.” Modern Theology 23, no. 1 (2007): 27–45. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0025.2007.00351.x. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0025.2007.00351.x
Geach, P.T. “Identity,” The Review of Metaphysics 21, no. 1 (September 1967): 3–12, https://www.jstor.org/stable/20124493.
Glassford, Darwin. “Fostering an Intergenerational Culture.” In The Church of All Ages: Generations Worshiping Together, edited by Howard Vanderwell, 71–94. Herndon: Alban Institute, 2008.
Jenson, Robert. Systematic Theology. Vol. 1, The Triune God. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997.
Leftow, Brian. “The Trinity is Unconstitutional.” Religious Studies 54, no. 3 (2018): 359–376, https://doi.org/10.1017/S0034412518000215. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0034412518000215
Lewis, David K. “Many, But Almost One.” In Causality and Mind: Essays on the Philosophy of D.M. Armstrong, edited by Keith Campbell, John Bacon, and Lloyd Reinhardt, 23–38. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993.
McGee, Vann, and Brian P. McLaughlin. “The Lessons of the Many.” Philosophical Topics 28, no. 1 (Spring 2000): 129–151. https://doi.org/10.5840/philtopics200 028120. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5840/philtopics200028120
Rea, Michael C. “In Defense of Mereological Universalism.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 58, no. 2 (June 1998): 347–360. https://doi.org/10.2307/2653513. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2653513
Rea, Michael C. “Relative Identity and the Doctrine of the Trinity.” Philosophia Christi 5, no. 2 (2003): 431–446. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5840/pc20035247
Rea, Michael C. “The Trinity.” In The Oxford Handbook of Philosophical Theology, edited by Thomas P. Flint and Michael C. Rea, 403–429. New York: Oxford University Press, 2009. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199289202.003.0019
Torrance, T.F. The Trinitarian Faith: The Evangelical Theology of the Ancient Catholic Church. London: T&T Clark. 2016.
Unger, Peter. “I Do Not Exist.” In Perception and Identity, edited by G.F. Macdonald, 235–251. London: Macmillan, 1979. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-04862-5_10
Unger, Peter. “The Mental Problems of the Many.” In Oxford Studies in Metaphysics, vol. 1, edited by Dean Zimmerman, 195–222. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2004.
Unger, Peter. “The Problem of the Many.” Midwest Studies in Philosophy 5, no. 1 (1980): 411–467. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4975.1980.tb00416.x. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4975.1980.tb00416.x
Vanderwell, Howard. “A New Issue for a New Day.” In The Church of All Ages: Generations Worshiping Together, edited by Howard Vanderwell, 1–16. Herndon: Alban Institute, 2008.
van Inwagen, Peter. “And yet there are not three Gods, but one God.” In Philosophy and the Christian Faith, edited by Thomas V. Morris, 241–278. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1988.
Weatherson, Brian. “The Problem of the Many.” The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Winter 2016 edition, edited by Edward N. Zalta. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/problem-of-many.
Zafeiropoulos, Alejandro. “Credo in Unam Sanctam…: Una eclesiología ecuménica a través de la relación metafísica de constitución.” TheoLogica: An International Journal for Philosophy of Religion and Philosophical Theology 4, no. 1 (2020): 88–106. https://doi.org/10.14428/thl.v4i1.23543. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14428/thl.v4i1.23543
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Devina Benlin Oswan
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
