Endnotes
1 Myself included.
2 Kevin Giles, The Trinity and Subordinationism, IVP, Downers Grove, 2002, p. 81.
3 See http://www.ajmd.com.au/trinity/. This excellent site pays careful reading, for Moody has acute biblical and theological insights into how Giles’s arguments work.
4 Giles, Trinity and Subordinationism, pp. 21, 25, 85.
5 Giles, Trinity and Subordinationism, pp. 81, 85.
6 With respect to the trinitarian theology of the early church, I am much indebted to Michael Ovey who has been kind enough to share with me the results of his ongoing Ph.D research at the University of London.
7 Giles, Trinity and Subordinationism, p. 38 (emphasis original).
8 Giles, Trinity and Subordinationism, p. 85 (emphasis original).
9 Quoting Bp Dionysius of Rome, Defence
of the Nicene Council/[Definition], paragraph 26; and for his general approval of Dionysius, On the Opinions of Dionysius. Using the table of contents, these can be read in English translation in The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, second series, Vol IV, Eerdmans reprint, Michigan, 1978.
10 Athanasius, Against the Heathen, paragraphs 39-40; emphasis mine. See also Against the Heathen, paragraphs 6-7; also Defence of the Nicene Council/[Definition], 26, 30-31; and On Luke 10.22.
11 See Defence of the Nicene Council/[Definition], 30, On Luke, 4-5.
12 See Defence of the Nicene Council/[Definition], 31, On Luke, 4-5.
13 Giles, Trinity and Subordinationism, p. 113.
14 Giles, Subordinationists: Arians in another Role?, refer Moody, section 4.
15 Augustine, On the Trinity, book I, section 7. Two English translations can be consulted, that of The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, first series, Vol III, and more recently by Stephen McKenna, The Fathers of the Church; a new translation, volume 45.
16 Giles acknowledges this (p. 47, fn.
63), although he continues to use the language of ‘indivisible’ and not
‘inseparable’.
17 On the Trinity, II.3.
18 See, for example, sermonic material on John 5:19; Sermon 52 on Matthew 3:13; and Answer to Maximus.
19 Augustine, Answer to Maximus, II.xiv.89.
20 See On the Trinity, IV.27-28, 32 answering a question raised in II.20-22.
21 On the Trinity, IV.32; cf. II.22.
22 On the Trinity, II.9.
23 Giles, Trinity and Subordinationism, p. 59.
24 Second Helvetic Confession, chapter 3; refer http://www.creeds.net/helvetic/, emphasis mine. Thanks again to Andrew Moody, http://www.ajmd.com.au/trinity/.
25 The parts Giles quotes are at the end of the chapter, and set within the parameters of discussion given earlier; refer above. Giles has also omitted words that point in a different direction to his interpretation.
26 For a more detailed examination of Giles’s treatment of Barth and Rahner, refer to two forthcoming articles by Mark Baddeley, in Southern Cross and Reformed Theological Review.
27 Karl Rahner, On Trinity, p. 28.
28 Rahner, On Trinity, pp. 62-63.
29 Refer to Giles, Trinity and Subordinationism, pp. 29-31; cf. Rahner, On Trinity, pp. 22-33.
30 Refer Giles, Trinity and Subordinationism, p. 88; Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics, IV.1.196.
31 Barth, Church Dogmatics, IV.1.196.
32 Barth, Church Dogmatics, IV.202; cf. Giles, Trinity and Subordinationism, pp. 88-89.
33 Barth, Church Dogmatics, IV.1. Pages 157-210 are worth reading in full (the designation of IV as 3 is a typo in Giles, p. 89, fn. 12).
34 Giles, Trinity and Subordinationism, p. 91, fn. 26.
35 D. B. Knox, ‘The Everlasting God, Appendix A’, in Tony Payne (ed.), D. B. Knox Selected Works: The Doctrine of God, Vol 1, Matthias Media, Sydney, 2000, pp. 153-170; see also Kirsten Birkett (ed.), D. B. Knox Selected Works: Church and Ministry, Vol 2, Matthias Media, Sydney, 2003, pp. 59, 201-203.
36 Giles, Trinity and Subordinationism, p. 266.
37 Tony Payne (ed.), D. B. Knox Selected Works: The Doctrine of God, Vol 1, Matthias Media, Sydney, 2000; see also Kirsten Birkett (ed.), D. B. Knox Selected Works: Church and Ministry, Vol 2, Matthias Media, Sydney, 2003, pp. 59, 201-203.
38 The Briefing #129, Matthias Media, Sydney, 21 February 1994, pp. 1-5.
39 Giles, Trinity and Subordinationism, pp. 99-100.
40 Giles, Trinity and Subordinationism, p. 100.
41 Giles, Trinity and Subordinationism, p. 110, fn. 16.
42 Miroslav Volf, After our Likeness: the church as the image of the Trinity, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, 1998, p. 215. Volf is a leading evangelical writer in North America. Although I disagree with his ‘egalitarianism’ in intra-trinitarian relations and between men and women, I read his publications with much profit.
43 Giles leads into his citation with: “The following paragraph, taken from the agreement, could not be more explicit” (p. 100).
44 Cited from Thomas F. Torrance, Trinitarian Perspectives: toward doctrinal agreement, T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1994, p. 119.
45 Op. cit., p. 120.
46 Giles, Trinity and Subordinationism, p. 11 (emphasis original).
47 Giles, Trinity and Subordinationism, pp. 11, 232, 263f, 266.
48 Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, series 2, volume VIII, p. 13.
49 NPNF, series 2, VIII, p. 120.
50 NPNF, series 2, VIII, pp. 118-119, cf. p. 276.
51 Giles, Trinity and
Subordinationism, p. 116.
52 Giles, Trinity and Subordinationism, pp. 206, 254-256.
53 In his exchange with Moody, for his polemical purposes, Giles seeks to make much of creedal affirmations of the equality of the essence. See http://www.ajmd.com.au/trinity/.
54 Giles, Trinity and Subordinationism, pp. 79-80.
55 See http://www.anglicanmedia.com.au/old/doc/trinity.html, especially sections 5-28; or Giles’s Appendix B.
56 Giles, Trinity and
Subordinationism, pp. 81, 85.
57 Adapted from Tony Payne, ‘More on the meaning of “church”’.
