Advertisement

Stepped characterisation: a metaphysical defence of qua-propositions in Christology

  • G. H. Labooy
Article
  • 12 Downloads

Abstract

Given Conciliar Christology and a compositionalist metaphysics of the incarnation, I explore whether ‘qua-propositions’ are capable of solving the coherence problem in Christology. I do this by probing the metaphysical aspect of qua-propositions, since ‘semantics presupposes metaphysics’ (McCord Adams). My proposal focuses on the fact that the Word accidentally owns an individual human nature. Due to that individuality, the human properties first characterise the individual human nature and, in a ‘next step’, this individual human nature characterises the Word. I call this ‘stepped characterisation’. Subsequently, I show that stepped characterisation validates the use of qua-propositions in Conciliar Christology. Hence, qua-propositions are not merely ‘muddling the waters of logic’ (Morris).

Keywords

Scotism Conciliar Christology Qua-propositions Stepped characterisation Metaphysical defence 

Notes

References

  1. Bäck, A. (1998). Scotus on the consistency of the incarnation and the trinity. Vivarium, 36(1), 83–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Crisp, O. D. (2016). The word enfleshed. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic. Ch. 5 and 6.Google Scholar
  3. Cross, R. (2002). The metaphysics of the incarnation: Thomas Aquinas to Duns Scotus. Oxford: OUP.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cross, R. (2009). The incarnation. In T. P. Flint & M. C. Rea (Eds.), Oxford handbook of philosophical theology (pp. 455–457). Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
  5. Bok, den, N., Bac, M., Beck, A. J., Bom, K., Dekker, E., Labooy, G., et al. (2008). More than just an individual: Scotus’s Concept of Person from the Christological Context of Lectura III 1. Franciscan Studies, 66, 169–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Geach, P. T. (1972). Logic matters (pp. 289–301). Los Angeles: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  7. Gorman, M. (2014). Christological consistency and the reduplicative Qua. Journal of Analytic Theology, 2, 86–100.Google Scholar
  8. Hick, J. (1977). “Jesus and the World Religions”, chapter 9 in the myth of God incarnate. London: CSM Press.Google Scholar
  9. Hill, J. (2011). Introduction. In A. Marmodoro & J. Hill (Eds.), The metaphysics of the incarnation. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
  10. McCord Adams, M. (2006). Christ and horrors: The coherence of Christology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Morris, T. V. (1986). The logic of God incarnate. Ithaca/London: Cornell UP.Google Scholar
  12. Pawl, T. (2014). A solution to the fundamental philosophical problem of christology. Journal of Analytic Theology.  https://doi.org/10.12978/jat.2014-1.190824150011a.Google Scholar
  13. Pawl, T. (2016). In defense of Conciliar Christology, a philosophical essay. Oxford: OUP.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Plantinga, A. (1974). The nature of necessity. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  15. Scotus, ‘Ordinatio 3’. Ioannis Duns Scoti Opera Omnia. Polyglot Press: Rome, 2016: vol. IX.Google Scholar
  16. Stump, E. (2002). Aquinas’ metaphysics of the incarnation. In S. T. Davis, D. Kendall & G. O’Collins (Eds.), The incarnation (pp. 197–218). Oxford: OUP.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Sturch, R. L. (1980). God, christ and possibilities. Religious Studies, 16, 81–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Swinburne, R. (1994). The Christian God (p. 197). Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The Protestant Theological University (PThU) (Amsterdam)IJsselmuidenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations