This paper critiques Friedrich Schleiermacher’s rejection of the dogmatic significance of the eternal processions of the Triune persons by analyzing its negative affects on his doctrine of adoption.
Within the current Schleiermacher renaissance, scholars seek to recover the importance of Freidrich Schleiermacher for the development of Christian theology and to argue for his place among orthodox Christianity. Discussions of Schleiermacher’s Trinitarian doctrine have been crucial to this renaissance; however, many of those discussions are limited either to explicating Schleiermacher’s formulation of the doctrine or tracing its place within orthodoxy. While these projects are needed, I intend to take the discussion a step further by analyzing the effects Schleiermacher’s rejection of the dogmatic significance of the eternal processions on his dogmatics, particularly his doctrine of adoption.
Schleiermacher makes two claims in The Christian Faith that create an interesting relationship between his understanding of the Trinity and his doctrine of adoption. First, Schleiermacher describes adoption as the believer’s participation in Christ’s relationship of Son to Father (Christian Faith, 109.2). Second, Schleiermacher claims that the eternal processions of the Son and Spirit have no effect on “our faith in Christ and our living communion with him” (Christian Faith, 170.3). Is Schleiermacher correct that he can account for the believer’s “living communion” with Christ by adoption without any reference to Christ’s eternal generation or the Spirit’s procession?
This paper argues that Schleiermacher’s doctrine of adoption is inadequate without reference to the eternal processions because his alienation of the two doctrines leads to an erroneous affirmation that the believer possesses the exact same sonship as Christ, thereby eroding the distinction of Christ’s sonship by nature and the believer’s sonship by grace. Schleiermacher claims that Christ’s sonship is in reference to his prototypical and perfect humanity only, rejecting any dogmatic significance of Christ’s pre-existence. Since Christ’s sonship is in reference to his humanity, it is a natural sonship. Further, he claims that the believer’s adoption results from the mediation of Christ’s perfect humanity to the believer. As the mediation occurs, the believer receives the same sonship by nature. In short, the same union of God and man in Jesus is reproduced in the believer.
I critique Schleiermacher through an application of the distinction between the grace of union and habitual grace for Christ’s person, which are effects of the missions of the Son and Spirit respectively. Further, I argue that habitual grace results from the grace of union. Believers are adopted when Christ mediates his sonship by giving the “Spirit of Adoption” (Rom. 8), who conforms the believer into the image of the son through habitual grace. However, just as habitual grace results from the grace of union in Christ’s person, so too do the benefits of the believer’s adoption result from Christ’s eternal sonship. The eternal processions are the ontological foundation of the believer’s adoption. Through the believer’s adoption by grace, he participates in Christ’s sonship and communes with the Father in the Spirit while the essential difference between Christ’s and the believer’s sonship remains.