This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 70.56.59.51 (talk) at 17:01, 3 October 2007. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 17:01, 3 October 2007 by 70.56.59.51 (talk)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Subordinationism is a doctrine which holds that Jesus is eternally subordinate to God the Father, implying a hierarchical view of the Trinity.
Subordinationism is sometimes mistakenly confused with Arianism. While Arius and his followers were certainly also subordinationist, they also went further in asserting that Christ's subordination also implied a lesser state ofdivinity.
"The First general Council -Nicea 325- knew Arius's teaching leaned toward Subordinationism, but they were not unduly upset about that. Subordinationism had been implicit in 'Logos' Christology from the outset and didn't mean a denial of the Word's divinity - Arius was not denying the existence and exalted status of the 'Word': he was simply saying, so it seemed that the Father is greater than the "Word." By maintaining this, he claimed, he was countering the Sabellianism of Bishop Alexander.... At the Council at Sirmium in 375 the Arians nearly went too far. The Creedal Statement issued there forbade the use of the word ousia at all when speaking of the Father & Son. It cited scriptural passages that seemed to support a subordinationist view and laid the groundwork for the Arians to state their basic conviction - 'That the "Son" is Unlike the "Father".' Hilary of Poitiers in Gaul, a firm defender of Nicea, call the the Creed 'THE BLASPHEMY OF SIRMIUM'"
- FROM HERESIIES, SCHIMSMS & OTHER CONTROVERSAL STANCES
From Fiona on 22nd July 2007 - Wester Australia Quoted from Education for Ministry - Anglican Church of Australia
Subordinationism eventually fell out of favor in the wake of the rejection of Arius. Athanasius, in particular, categorically rejected subordinationism in all its forms, possibly as a reaction against Arianism. In the Athanasian Creed, all three divine persons are almighty and Lord; no divine person is before or after another, none is greater or less than another … all three are co-equal. Athanasius' influence ensured that subordinationism as a doctrine continued to be a non-issue in the Western Church until modern times.
Traditionally, subordinationists have asserted that the Son is eternally and therefore ontologically subordinate to the Father. Recently, subordinationism has regained currency in evangelical circles by the suggestion of George W. Knight III, in his landmark 1977 book, "The New Testament Teaching on Role Relationship with Men and women." In this book, Knight suggests that the Son is functionally but not ontologically subordinate to the Father. The assertion of eternal subordination in function, combined with the denial of ontological subordination, is Knight's unique contribution to the teaching of subordination. Knight's publication has led to an unprecedented popularity of this new, modified subordinationist Christology in conservative, evangelical, and fundamentalist circles.