Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-xm8r8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-06T03:20:59.306Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Cyrilian Solution: Cyril of Jerusalem and Saul Kripke on Naming God

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2024

Adam C. English
Adam C. English*
Affiliation:
Campbell University
*
englisha@campbell.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Cyril of Jerusalem's proposed theology of the Trinity has been labeled generic. That is, the term “God” identifies not so much a species of being or an individual being, but a unique, sui generis genus. Within the genus of God there are three species or ways of being God, though not three discrete individual beings. The article will attempt to defend and renew Cyril's theology by an appeal to the contemporary philosopher, Saul Kripke, and his notion of rigid designators. One way to contemporize and perhaps better understand Cyril's position is to interpret the term “God” as a Kripkean natural kind rigid designator with the properties of Fatherhood, Sonship, and Spiration.

Keywords

Cyril of JerusalemSaul KripkeTrinitydocta ignorantiagenus-speciesrigid designatornatural kind
Type
Original Article
Information
New Blackfriars , Volume 94 , Issue 1053 , September 2013 , pp. 569 - 582
Copyright
Copyright © 2012 The Author. New Blackfriars © 2012 The Dominican Council.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechesis (Cat.) 6.9. The Fathers of the Church, vols. 61 and 64, St. Cyril of Jerusalem, translated by McCauley, Leo and Stephenson, Anthony (Washington: Catholic University of America Press, 1969, 1970)Google Scholar.

2 Cyril, Cat. 6.7.

3 For a small selection of contemporary surveys of the matter, see Lubac, Henri de, The Discovery of God, translated by Dru, Alexander (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, W. B., 1965, 1996)Google Scholar; Pelikan, Jaroslav, The Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine, vols. 1 and 2 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1971, 1974)Google Scholar; Stead, Christopher, Divine Substance (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Louth, Andrew, The Origins of the Christian Mystical Tradition: From Plato to Denys (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1981)Google Scholar; Wilken, Robert L., The Spirit of Early Christian Thought (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2003)Google Scholar; McIntosh, Mark, Discernment and Truth: The Spirituality and Theology of Knowledge (New York: Crossroad, 2004)Google Scholar; Beeley, Christopher, Gregory of Nazianzus on the Trinity and the Knowledge of God (New York: Oxford University Press, 2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

4 Justin, 2 Apologia, 6. ANF 1, p. 190.

5 Gregory of Nyssa, Contra Eunomium, 12.1. NPNF 2.5, p. 241.

6 Pseudo-Dionysius, Divine Names, 1.1. Pseudo-Dionysius: The Complete Works, translated by Luibheid, Colm (Mahwah: Paulist Press, 1987), p. 50Google Scholar.

7 Cyril, Cat. 6.9.

8 Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses, 4.20.6, ANF 1, p. 489; Gregory of Nazianzus, Or. 28.4 in On God and Christ, translated by Williams, Frederick (Crestwood: St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 2002), p. 39Google Scholar; Thomas Aquinas, S. T., I.13.1–12.

9 Cyril, Cat. 6.10.

10 Augustine, Confessions 1.4., translated by Henry Chadwick (New York: Oxford University Press, 1998), p. 4. See Ps. 18:31.

11 On Cyril's life, see Drijvers, Jan Willem, Cyril of Jerusalem: Bishop and City (Leiden: Brill Academic, 2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar and Yarnell, Edward, Cyril of Jerusalem (London: Routledge, 2000)Google Scholar.

12 Jerome, Dialogue with Lucif. 19, quoted in Kelly, J. N. D., Early Christian Doctrines (New York: HarperCollins, 1960, 1978), p. 238Google Scholar.

13 Cyril, Cat. 11.17.

14 Anthony Stephenson, “General Introduction,” St. Cyril of Jerusalem, The Fathers of the Church, vol. 60, pp. 42–3.

15 Stephenson, “Introduction,” p. 43.

16 Thomas Aquinas, S.T. I.50.4.

17 Stephenson, “Introduction,” p. 43, capitalization his.

18 Cyril, Cat. 4.16.

19 Thomas Aquinas, S. T., I.3.5.

20 Ibid., I.3.4.

21 Jacobs, Nathan, “On ‘Not Three Gods’ – Again: Can a Primary-Secondary Substance Reading of Ousia and Hypostasis Avoid Tritheism?” Modern Theology 24.3 (July 2008), pp. 331–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

22 Basil, De Spiritu Sancto, 17.43. NPNF 2.8, pp. 26–7.

23 Stephenson, “General Introduction,” pp. 42–3.

24 “For we do not count by way of addition, gradually making increase from unity to multitude, and saying one, two, and three,—nor yet first, second, and third.” Basil, De Spiritu Sancto, 18.45. NPNF 2.8, p. 29.

25 Cyril, Cat. 6.7.

26 Canons I and II, Lateran IV 1215, Medieval Sourcebook, http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/lateran4.asp (accessed August 23, 2011).

27 Cyril, Mystagogiae 2.4.

28 Cyril, Cat. 11.16.

29 Ibid.

30 Ibid., 16.24.

31 Ibid.

32 Basil, De Spiritu Sancto, 18.44. NPNF 2.8, p. 29.

33 Ibid., 18.44

34 Cyril, Cat. 11.18.

35 Ibid., 17.2.

36 Kripke, Saul, Naming and Necessity (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1972), p. 48Google Scholar.

37 Jacquette, Dale, “Haecceity,” The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, 2nd ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999), pp. 359–60Google Scholar.

38 On this point, see Soames, Scott, Beyond Rigidity: The Unfinished Semantic Agenda of Naming and Necessity (New York: Oxford University Press, 2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

39 Kripke, Naming, p. 53.

40 Salmon, Nathan, “Are General Terms Rigid?” Linguistics and Philosophy 28.1 (2005), pp. 117–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar; LaPorte, Joseph, “Rigidity and Kind,” Philosophical Studies 97.3 (2000), pp. 293–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hong, Chang-Seong, “Natural Kinds and the Identity of Property,” Teorema 17.i (1998), pp. 89–98Google Scholar; Cook, Monte, “If ‘Cat’ is a Rigid Designator, What does it Designate?” Philosophical Studies 37 (1980), pp. 61–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

41 Kripke, Naming, p. 136.

42 Linsky, Bernard, “General Terms as Rigid Designators,” Philosophical Studies 128 (Spring 2006), pp. 655–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar, esp. 656.

43 Kirjavainen, Heikki, “How is God-Talk Logically Possible? A Sketch for an Argument on the Logic of ‘God’” International Journal of the Philosophy of Religion 64 (2008), p. 80CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

44 Kripke wonders if “God” is, in all actuality, a proper name or a description. He does not resolve the dilemma. Naming, pp. 26–7.

45 Ramsey, Ian, Religious Language (New York: MacMillan 1957, 1963), p. 202Google Scholar.

46 Ibid., pp. 202–3.

47 Ramsey, Ian, Christian Discourse (London: Oxford University Press, 1965), p. 83Google Scholar.

48 Wittgenstein, Ludwig, Culture and Value, translated by Winch, Peter (Oxford: Blackwell, 1980), p. 85Google Scholar.

49 Cyril, Cat. 4.8.

50 Ibid., 6.5.

51 Wittgenstein, Ludwig, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, translated by Ogden, C. K. (Mineola: Dover, 1922, 1999), p. 108Google Scholar.

52 Cyril, Cat. 16.23.