Summary of Chapter 33: The Trinity in the Incarnation and Life of Christ (from White’s book, The Trinity)

In chapter thirty-three, White exposes what he claims to be a widespread error in modern Christology, that of “inverted monophysitism,”[1] in which “the divinity of the Son is manifest and is in a sense constituted by the kenotic act of being human.”[2] Once again, White claims that what began as a genuine endeavour to express the Trinity in the economy, this time through emphasizing the ideas of kenosis and obedience, paradoxically resulted in empty conclusions and disobedience to the patristic and scholastic heritage. By contrast, Aquinas’ emphasis on “the unicity of the divine nature and will of Christ as God”[3] allows us to see how Jesus’ divine nature and human nature are not in ontological competition but rather are perfectly “coordinated hierarchically within one hypostatic subject, and are symphonic in operation and mutual expression.”[4] With this in mind, White puts forward the Athanasian metaphor of “divine outpouring”[5] as a suitable replacement for “self-emptying” to more fittingly convey how Trinitarian love is revealed in the life of Christ.  


[1] Whereas inverted monophysitism puts forward the idea that “the divinity of the Son is manifest and is in a sense constituted by the kenotic act of being human” (608).

[2] 608. The classic understanding of monophysitism is that the divine nature of the Incarnate Word assimilated the human nature in virtue of the hypostatic union (and thus was condemned at the Council of Chalcedon in 451).

[3] 632. In contrast to “inverted monophysitism,” White re-emphasizes dyothelitism, which is “the classical dogmatic teaching of the Catholic Church that there are two wills and operations in Christ: divine and human” (606). In the one divine will, there is a perfect unicity among the three persons.

[4] 623. White claims this to be “the key contribution of the Thomistic tradition” for Trinitarian Christology (623).

[5] 621. Precisely because the Trinitarian persons “share a common singular being and essence” (Ibid), they are each capable of both an eternal outpouring without any diminishment. Each person of the Trinity has “active potency,” that is, the capacity for perfect self-communication “precisely in virtue of God’s incomprehensible plenitude of perfection” (618). Thus, a perfect communion of undiminishable love is at the heart of Trinitarian relations.