Digging Deeper into Reformed Theology: Bavinck and the Trinity related to the Son
Understanding the Trinity is a crucial element in Christianity, when it comes to the Son, it is important to know His role as humanity's saviour but also how that coincides with the Godhead of the Trinity. In addition, it is best to obtain this information from an extremely knowledgeable and trustworthy theologian like Herman Bavinck whom I have chosen for this paper. My specific research question is how does Bavinck understand the unity and diversity of the Trinity as it relates to the Son?
I will begin by investigating what Bavinck scholars have found him saying about Christ and the Trinity. I will then combine the specific information of Bavinck’s thoughts to answer my research question. Lastly, I will end with Bavinck’s thoughts directly from his book Reformed Dogmatics, concerning Christ and the Trinity to reiterate any of his crucial comments. This paper will show Bavinck’s understanding of the unity and diversity of the Trinity in relation to the Son, by highlighting the Son’s eternal and external relationship to the Father (which I will further explain what eternal and external mean), yet still showing His independence.
Unity of the Son Within the Trinity
This section will highlight scholars covering Bavinck's thoughts on the unity of the Son within the Trinity. By unity I mean Ad Intra, which is the eternal relations of origin meaning how the Son works internally and is generated by the Father, uniting with Him. Gayle Doornbos discusses Bavinck’s ideas specifically touching on Christ’s relationship to all creation and how it radiates through the Father. “He [Bavinck] identifies the importance of attending to the unity of divine action in creation as essential for establishing the divinity of the Son and Spirit.”1 This shows explicitly how the Son is being used within creation through the Father and to highlight unity enclosed in the Trinity. Bavinck believes that shows His divine essence.
In addition, Bavinck emphasizes that the Father uses the Son through creation to use His full power among the Son. He is distinct from creation but is unified with the Father to be an intercessor in creation. The “Son’s relationship to creation insofar as it is in the Son that the Father ‘contemplates the idea of the world itself, not as though it were identical with the Son, but so that he envisions and meets it in the Son in whom his fullness dwells.’”2 The Father uses this to remain within the Son and creation finds its meaning inside the Son through the Father. Again, this shows how they are united.
Simply Trinity by Matthew Barrett does not mention Bavinck’s thoughts specifically but does talk about how the Son is united within the Trinity through being generated and how they are all from the same substance. Bavinck has also mentioned the Son being generated. Barrett expresses the unity between the two, it is “True God from true God.”3 Moreover, “the Son is equal to the Father in every way, from the same essence or substance as the Father, no less divine than the Father. But we can only affirm such coequality is the Son is begotten from the Father’s essence.”4 This further explains the integration between the two and Bavinck says the same about being begotten.
Through being generated, “There never was a time when the Son was not, nor ever a time when the Son was not from the Father.”5 Barrett mentions in his book when the Son would be generated but says there actually is no when. He references Augustine, “the Son is not generated after the Father, which would make him less than the Father, but the Son is generated from the Father and from all eternity.”6 The Father and Son are both equal. Even though that might not be explicitly shown in history, it is shown through the act of being generated by the Father, with no time attached. In addition, Barrett says how the Father and Son are not of two different divine essences and do not multiply, but they are of one divine substance.7
1 Gayle, Doornbos. “Trinity and Creation: Bavinck on the Vestigia Trinitatis.” Perichoresis 22, no. 1 (March 1, 2024): 52.
2 Doornbos, “Trinity and Creation: Bavinck on the Vestigia Trinitatis,” 53.
3 Matthew Barrett, Simply Trinity: The Unmanipulated Father, Son, and Spirit (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Books, A Division Of Baker Publishing Group, 2021), 162.
4 Barrett, Simply Trinity: The Unmanipulated Father, Son, and Spirit, 162.
5 Barrett, Simply Trinity: The Unmanipulated Father, Son, and Spirit, 163.
6 Barrett, Simply Trinity: The Unmanipulated Father, Son, and Spirit, 165.
7 Barrett, Simply Trinity: The Unmanipulated Father, Son, and Spirit, 167.
Diversity of the Son Within the Trinity
Since I covered the unity of the Son within the Trinity, I will now highlight Bavinck’s thoughts regarding the diversity of the Son and Trinity. What I mean by diversity is how the Son works independently from yet still within the Trinity. That is Ad Extra, external operations, ie. how the Son is sent from the Father and works. Trinity and Organism by James Eglinton mentions how Bavinck believes Christ is the middle of history and the organic centre.8 In addition, it states how the redemption of the world was accomplished through the Son, is being used through the Spirit and working through the universe for its final consummation.9 Christ is at the center of accomplishing redemption and did that separately in the flesh, as it needed to be something that was seen and shown. Since now He is with the Father, the Holy Spirit prepares everyone for what is to come with that accomplished redemption. In addition, Bavinck believes this is seen throughout all revelations, nature, and history.
Moreover, Eglinton shares the distinction in Bavinck's work between creator and creation. Bavinck shows the distinction “first, in the creation of humanity; and second, in the incarnation of Jesus Christ.”10 So Jesus is the mutual relation between God and creation and other humans. God was expressing His image to all through Christ to keep this strong relation. Again, the Son is working independently to connect with creation and humankind.
In an article written by Daniel Ragusa, he mentions how Bavinck locates this bridge in humanity and how the image of God is represented by Jesus. “As the image of God and the incarnation of the Son who is the eternal image of the invisible God (Col. 1:15). The name ‘image of God’ can be applied to humans ‘by way of analogy’…but in an absolute sense it belongs to Christ.”11 Yes, the image of God can appeal to everyone, however, the image of God is Christ Himself. Moreover, regarding the Son and His relationship to humans, Ragusa mentions how in humanity and the Son, there is both being and becoming. Through Bavinck’s ideas, “while ‘being’ is proper of God alone so that the Son possesses it absolutely, humanity as a whole displays a relative ‘being’ as it is able to transcend the moment.”12 God the Father just is and bes, there is no becoming if He already fully is. The Son, however, emulates both being and becoming and does that independently in the flesh as other humans also become.
As I mentioned Ad Extra before, Ragusa states Bavinck’s take on how that works for the Son. “The generation of the Son and procession of the Spirit ‘are essentially distinct from the work of creation: the former are immanent relations, while the latter is work ad extra.’”13 Though Christ is unified with the rest of the Trinity, He still has a distinct role outside and reveals His diversity through independent works.
Again from Gayle Doornbos, she mentions Bavinck’s ideas on how the Son works separately. That the Son and Spirit operate independently as personal agents, still connected to the Father but continue to be distinct.14 To further this Bavinck states “the Son and Spirit are not viewed as secondary forces but as independent agents or ‘principles’ (principia), as authors (auctores) who with the Father carry out the work of creation, as with him they also constitute the one true God.”15 They (the Father and Son) are Homoousious which is of the same divine essence, yet the Son is sent to work independently. Matthew Barrett states that there is a focus on how the Son is more dependent on the Father when he is carrying “out the work of creation,” but the Father could not have been a Father if it were not for the Son. He aims solely at the relationship between the Father and Son and how they are diverse. Barrett does not specifically say Bavinck’s thoughts, however, this puts into perspective what other people say in relation to Bavinck.
8 James, Eglinton. Trinity and Organism (Bloomsbury Publishing, 2012) 114.
9 Eglinton. Trinity and Organism, 118-119.
10 Eglinton, Trinity and Organism, 122.
11 Daniel, Ragusa. “The Trinity at the Center of Thought and Life: Herman Bavinck’s Organic Apologetic.” MAJT 28 (2017): 157.
12 Ragusa, “The Trinity at the Center of Thought and Life: Herman Bavinck’s Organic Apologetic,” 157.
13 Ragusa, “The Trinity at the Center of Thought and Life: Herman Bavinck’s Organic Apologetic,” 159.
14 Gayle, Trinity and Creation: Bavinck on the Vestigia Trinitatis, 52.
15 Gayle, Trinity and Creation: Bavinck on the Vestigia Trinitatis, 52.
Bavincks Thoughts on Christ and the Trinity
To end with Herman Bavinvk’s words from his own book Reformed Dogmatics, he speaks on the distinctions of the three persons of the Trinity, though I have been highlighting just the Son and His distinction. Bavinck talks about both His dependent nature by being generated and also independent nature through appearing in the flesh.
Bavinck starts by clarifying that the persons of the Trinity “differ individually only in that one is Father, the other Son, and the third Spirit.”16 So all of them are united outside of being individuals through their names. They are connected with each other through their interpersonal relationships says Bavinck. But the Son is only the Son and nothing else he states. Furthermore, Bavinck highlights that the Son “could be called… (begotten), not because he was brought forth in time, but because he was generated out of the being of the Father from eternity.”17 The Father is unbegotten because He is the generator and exits of Himself and has/will for all of time. Bavinck believes this shows how the Son is dependent on the Father and is unified through Him.
You see the eternal relations of origin because the Trinity is of the same essence and operates internally which is Ad Intra. However, Bavinck also mentions Ad Extra which states “The Father is ‘the initiating cause’; the Son ‘the operating cause’; the Spirit ‘the perfecting cause.’”18 This means as a reminder it is external operations, showing how the Trinity works outside of itself. The Father sends the Son and the Son works through the Spirit. This shows how they are all unified and dependent on each other but work externally with their distinct roles.
Moreover, Bavinck explicitly shares how the Son works through the Father because the Son does not reveal the Father through the Spirit, and the Spirit does not lead people to the Father through the Son. In addition, “The two are more or less independent of each other: they both open their own way to the Father.”19 So yes, they are independent of themselves Bavinck states because they show a path to get to the Father in their diversity. Overall within Reformed Dogmatics, Bavinck states the Son in the Trinity is independent and dependent, both unified and diverse. Everything is “accomplished by the Son,” and is dependent on the Father yet “the Son should appear in the flesh,” showing independence.20 Both through eternal and external operations.
16 Herman Bavinck. Reformed Dogmatics: Abridged in One Volume. Edited by John Bolt. (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic, 2011), 234.
17 Bavinck. Reformed Dogmatics: Abridged in One Volume, 235.
18 Bavinck. Reformed Dogmatics: Abridged in One Volume, 240.
19 Bavinck. Reformed Dogmatics: Abridged in One Volume, 239.
20 Bavinck. Reformed Dogmatics: Abridged in One Volume, 240.
Conclusion
Through this paper, I have shown how Bavinck understands the unity and diversity of the Trinity as it relates to the Son. I began with the unity of the Son within the Trinity and how Bavinck addressed the Son being used through creation. The Son is distinct from creation but is unified with the Father to be an intercessor as He dwells within creation. The Son is of the same divine essence as the Father, they are not separate. I then touched on Bavinck's thoughts on the diversity of the Son within the Trinity. Bavinck mentioned the Son accomplishing redemption through His independent work. In addition, the second person of the Trinity is both being and becoming and shows(ed) that independently in the flesh. The Son is not a secondary source but an independent agent. We see how the Son’s work in creation can be both unity and diversity within the Trinity.
In addition, the Son was/is God but was also with God in the beginning as stated previously, there is no time because they are eternal. “‘But Scripture, and therefore Christian theology,’ writes Bavinck, knows both emanation and creation, a twofold communication of God—one within and the other outside the divine being; one to the Son who was in the beginning with God and was himself God.” This gives a more specific distinction with the fact Jesus is God Himself. It also explains how Bavinck sees the unity and diversity between the Son in relation to the Godhead.
Ending with his words from his own book, Bavinck states how the Son is generated by the Father, yet appears individually in the flesh. They differ only because of their names because overall they are of the same divine essence and have interpersonal relationships with one another. We highlighted both Ad Intra and Ad Extra with regards to how the Son operates, eternally within the Trinity, being generated, and the external operations of working outside of itself. Overall, Bavinck does share that the Son within the Trinity is independent and dependent, both unified and diverse.
Bibliography
Barrett, Matthew. On Classical Trinitarianism. InterVarsity Press, 2024.
Barrett, Matthew. Simply Trinity: The Unmanipulated Father, Son, and Spirit. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Books, A Division Of Baker Publishing Group, 2021.
Doornbos, Gayle. “Trinity and Creation: Bavinck on the Vestigia Trinitatis.” Perichoresis 22, no. 1 (March 1, 2024): 42–55. https://doi.org/10.2478/perc-2024-0003.
Eglinton, James. Trinity and Organism. Bloomsbury Publishing, 2012. https://web-p-ebscohost-com.redeemer.idm.oclc.org/ehost/ebookviewer/ebook/bmxlYmtfXzQ1MDkwNF9fQU41?sid=20294caf-992f-4674-acc6-c4041bb5f16d@redis&vid=0&format=EB&rid=1.
Herman Bavinck. Reformed Dogmatics: Abridged in One Volume. Edited by John Bolt. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Academic, 2011.
Ragusa, Daniel. “THE TRINITY at the CENTER of THOUGHT and LIFE: HERMAN BAVINCK’S ORGANIC APOLOGETIC.” MAJT 28 (2017): 149–75. https://www.midamerica.edu/uploads/files/pdf/journal/07_ragusa_journal2017.pdf.
Originally submitted:
Eden Corner
REL 251: Reformed Theology
Dr. Jessica Joustra
December 4, 2024
Redeemer University
