Can a Latin Trinity Be Social? A Response to Scott M. Williams

  title={Can a Latin Trinity Be Social? A Response to Scott M. Williams},
  author={William Hasker},
  journal={Faith and Philosophy},
  • W. Hasker
  • Published 14 June 2018
  • Philosophy
  • Faith and Philosophy
Scott Williams’s Latin Social model of the Trinity has a number of impressive features.1 It is presented against a broad background of historical trinitarian thought, yet it employs some distinctively modern concepts in arriving at its own account of the Trinity. Williams criticizes standard social models of the Trinity and puts his own view forward as a Latin model, yet he also claims to fulfill the requirements for a social model. He recognizes the central difficulty for models of the Trinity… 
2 Citations

In Defense of a Latin Social Trinity: A Response to William Hasker

In “Unity of Action in a Latin Social Model of the Trinity,” I objected to William Hasker’s Social Model of the Trinity (among others) on the grounds that it does not secure the necessary agreement

Conciliar Trinitarianism, Divine Identity Claims, and Subordination

In this article, I present the trinitarian teaching of the first seven ecumenical councils, what we might call Conciliar Trinitarianism. I then consider two questions. First, what is the relationship



Unity of Action in a Latin Social Model of the Trinity

I develop a Latin Social model of the Trinity that is an extension of my previous work on indexicals and the Trinity. I focus on the theological desideratum of the necessity of the divine persons’

Material Constitution and the Trinity

(Forthcoming in Faith and Philosophy) Abstract. The Christian doctrine of the Trinity poses a serious philosophical problem. On the one hand, it seems to imply that there is exactly one divine being;