Patripassianism
 |
 | This article needs additional citations for verification. (January 2011) |
In Christian theology, patripassianism is the view that God the Father suffers (from Latin patri- "father" and passio "suffering"). Its adherents believe that God the Father was incarnate and suffered on the cross and that whatever happened to the Son happened to the Father and so the Father co-suffered with the human Jesus on the cross. This view is opposed to the classical theological doctrine of divine apathy. According to classical theology it is possible for Christ to suffer only in virtue of his human nature. The divine nature is incapable of suffering. Classical theology is heavily influenced by Greek metaphysics and especially Neo-Platonic and Stoic conceptions of God. As a result, there is considerable debate among Christian theologians as to how much of classical theology is actually required for Christian orthodoxy. The early church considered patripassianism to be heresy.
Trinitarian Perspective
From the standpoint of the doctrine of the Trinity--one Divine Being existing in three Persons--patripassianism is considered heretical because it denies the distinct personhood of the Members of the Trinity. In this vein patripassianism asserts that God the Father--rather than God the Son--became incarnate and suffered on the Cross for humanity's redemption. This not only denies the personhood of God-the-Son (Jesus Christ), but also distorts the spiritual transaction that was taking place at the Cross, which the Apostle Paul described as follows: "God [the Father] was reconciling the world to himself in Christ [the Son], not counting people’s sins against them. . . . God [the Father] made him who had no sin [God-the-Son] to be sin for us, so that in him [the Son] we might become the righteousness of God [the Father]." (2 Corinthians 5:19, 21)
It is possible, however, to modify patripassianism so as to acknowledge the Divine Being as having feelings toward, and sharing in the experiences of, both God-Incarnate (Jesus) and other human beings. Full-orbed patripassianism denies Trinitarian distinctions, yet it is not heretical to say that God "feels" or "experiences" things, including nonphysical forms of suffering. With regard to the crucifixion of Jesus, it is consistent with Scriptural teaching to say that God the Father "suffered"--that is, felt emotional/spiritual pain--along with His Son. This was due to the temporary breach of their relationship when the Son took upon himself the wrath of the Father toward sin. Jesus expressed this temporal divine rift when he cried out, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46)
(NOTE: This is not to suggest that God-the-Son Himself bears no wrath toward sin; we see from the book of Revelation, for instance, Christ himself executing divine wrath on the enemies of God. But in the economy of salvation, as taught in the Bible, a spiritual transaction was required, between a Judge and a Redeemer--so that sinners need not be punished. Since the Father has functional authority over the Son (though They are equal in Being), it is logical in the transaction of salvation that the "greater" should take the role of Judge, and the "lesser" take the role of Redeemer. Hence, at the Cross it was the Father who condemned and punished sin, and the Son who bore that punishment in our stead.)
History
Patripassionism began in the third century AD. Patripassianism was referred to as a belief ascribed to those following Sabellianism, after its founder Sabellius, especially by the chief opponent Tertullian. Sabellius, considered a founder of an early movement, was a priest who was excommunicated from the Church by Pope Callixtus I in 220 and lived in Rome. Sabellius advanced the doctrine of one God sometimes referred to as “economic Trinity” and he opposed the Orthodox doctrine of the “essential Trinity”. Praxeus and Noetus were some major followers. Tertullian may have authored the term Patripassianism but was certainly a chief opponent of Modalism or the belief in one God with different modes. Therefore, opponents such as Tertullian advanced the idea that the Father co-suffers with the human Jesus.
Because the writings of Sabellius were destroyed it is hard to know if he did actually believe in Patripassianism but one early version of the Apostles' Creed, recorded by Rufinus, explicitly states that the Father is 'impassible.' This reading dates to about 390 AD. This addition was made in response to patripassianism, which Rufinus evidently regarded as a heresy.[1]
Cyprian and Tertullian famously accused the Modalistic Monarchians of patripassianism.[2] The Monarchians taught the unity of the Godhead in Christ and that as the Son suffered the Father also experienced the sufferings. They did not teach that the Father died on the cross, though they were sometimes accused of this.
This term has been used by others such as F.L. Cross and E.A. Livingstone, eds., The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church (Oxford: Oxford University Press). Accessed via Oxford Reference Online August 21, 2009.</ref> to describe other Oneness religions.
Association of Patripassianism
Oneness Pentecostalism has been associated with patripassianism. According to Dr. Gary Reckart, Sr. an Apostolic historian and pastor. "If as Oneness believe, that God the Father was incarnate in Christ, which Jesus confessed ("it is the Father in me that doeth the work"), the Father was in Christ during all of the sufferings and being nailed to the cross. Thus the Father did suffer and experienced all that Jesus did up to his death.") Dr. Reckart emphasizes that Oneness do not believe as ancient patripassians were accused, that the Father died on the cross as the Son. Nor that the Father died to replace the death of the Son.
There are no known examples of any direct writings of Oneness Pentecostals ascribing to the belief of Patripassianism.[citation needed]
In order to show the difference between Oneness Pentecostalism and Patripassianism, it must be understood that the Oneness view sees the Person of Jesus as the incarnate Father and Holy Ghost as having suffered up to the death on the Cross. Only in the flesh of Jesus was the Godhead a part of the sufferings on the Cross. No where did any Patripassian or Modalist ever say the Father died on the Cross. No one can produce a writing saying this. The accusation comes from Catholic monks and priests and those who accept these accusations. Only the humanity of Jesus Christ experienced death. Since the manifestation of Father in Jesus is a fact, it cannot be said that the Father died. The Father, Son and Holy Ghost are one God according to Oneness theology.
The explanation is rather simple. Oneness adherents suggest the question of what Jesus did as a man as opposed to what he was as God. As a man He suffered on the cross, but the incarnate God in him could not die. This establishes the dual nature of Christ.
Whatever can occur with human beings is what Jesus suffered as God and man. So, it cannot be said that Oneness theology proposes Patripassianism means the Father died. Trinitarians have tried to pervert the beliefs of Patripassians for centuries.
What causes the confusion is when trinitarians accuse Oneness adherents of Patripassianism and saying this means the Father died as the Son. Patripassians teach no such thing. Although Oneness proponents claim "Jesus" is the name of the Father (in that he by inheritance obtained a more excellent name), Oneness people are speaking in terms of the humanity of God as different from the trinitarian claim Jesus was the second God of rank in the trinity who became human.
Trinitarianism equates the concept of Person with office. If there are three manifestations or offices, there must be three persons (since each are distinct they are three Gods). Oneness theology founded upon ancient Jewish doctrine of one God does not accept such a concept. If one equates Jesus as the human incarnation of God the Father, it will be clear Oneness proposes that the manifestation of Father suffered when Jesus suffered. But since the Father is Spirit and eternal and the Son is human and subject to death, only the Son can die. Any other statement by trinitarians about Oneness belief and Patripassianism is false.
In summary, the Oneness position applies the name of Jesus to His Person. Trinitarianism applies it to His human manifestation of Son alone. Since the Oneness position claims that the Name of "Jesus" and the concept of "Person" are common to all three manifestations of Father, Son and Holy Ghost, and yet the manifestations of Father, Son and Holy Ghost are distinct from each other, Oneness theology proposes that Jesus suffered on the cross as Son, but not as Father. Oneness Modalism and Patripassianism is considered Biblical but a heresy by Trinitarians. Acts0412 (talk) 02:03, 14 August 2012 (UTC)