background image
18
various dramatic roles in prophetic Scripture (including those of the Father and Son) as he speaks in the
first person for the Father, Son, and even human respondents (1 Apol. 36.2; 38.1).
With regard to his relationship to the Son, the Spirit was in some sense active in the miracle of the
incarnation (Dial. 78.3), and Christ is said to have already had the fullness of the Spirit during his
earthly life and had no need of any subsequent filling or empowerment by the Spirit (Dial. 87.3; 88.1,
4). After his ascension, Christ sent the Spirit from heaven to his disciples (1 Apol. 50.12; cf. Dial. 116.1)
and it is Christ who mediates the dispensing of the gifts of the Spirit (Dial. 87.5).
Finally, amidst his sometimes startling descriptions of diversity and his groping for language and
images to communicate unity, Justin presented his readers with some important Trinitarian references.
Father, Son, and Spirit are together the object of worship (1 Apol. 6.2) and, of course, they play an
important role in the Christian rite of initiation as converts are baptized in the name of the Father, Son,
and Holy Spirit (1 Apol. 61.3, 10-13). The bishop of the church likewise offers "praise and glory to the
Father of the Universe through the name of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" (1 Apol. 65.3, cf. 67.2).
Yet amidst all these considerations, Barnard still writes, "Justin had no real doctrine of the Trinity.
He worshipped the Father as supreme in the Universe; he worshipped the logos or Son as divine but in
the second place; he worshipped the Holy Spirit in the third place. This is the language of Christian
experience rather than theological reflection."
129
Goodenough concludes, "Doctrine of the Trinity Justin
had none. Justin believed in One God the Father, and neither the Logos nor the Holy Spirit nor any other
power could be ranked with the Father. The Logos was divine, but in the second place; the Holy Spirit
was worthy of worship, but in the third place. Such words are entirely incompatible with a doctrine of
the Trinity."
130
But are they really? Does order and rank in the Godhead--at least as we see it unfold in the
economy of creation--contradict the doctrine of the Trinity as it would later be formulated?
131
It appears
from our survey of the intratrinitarian relationships in Justin that his struggle to adequately communicate
Christian truth to both Greek and Jewish audiences is in keeping with his predecessors and
contemporaries. Justin's Trinity of "second place and third rank" echoes the types of functional
relationships in both the apostolic fathers and other apologists, and, it seems, even the New Testament
itself. In short, one relegates Justin to heterodoxy or heresy by Nicene standards only if one first rejects
the notion of an economic functional subordination in the Godhead. To be sure, Justin's Trinitarian
theology was less precise and calculated that Nicene orthodoxy, but I do not believe it can be equated
with the Arian dogma that would develop in the following centuries.
*Summary: Justin presented the Son and Spirit as "second place" and "third rank" not only in the
incarnation, but in the entire economy of creation (1 Apol. 13.3; 60.5­7). However, Christ is repeatedly
referred to as "God" (1 Apol. 63:15; Dial. 34:2, passim), and the Spirit is also considered divine (1 Apol. 32.2;
32.8). Thus, Justin seems to present the Father, Son, and Spirit relationship in terms of economic functional
subordination and ontological equality.
Glory to God with the Son and Spirit: Martyrdom of Polycarp (c. 155-165)
Indicating some level of Trinitarian awareness, Polycarp prayed before his martyrdom, "I bless you
[God the Father] because you have considered me worthy of this day and hour, that I might receive a
place among the number of the martyrs in the cup of your Christ, to the resurrection to eternal life, both
of soul and of body, in the incorruptibility of the Holy Spirit" (Mart. Poly. 14:2). Besides this economic
association, Father and Son are said to be united in their work toward humankind (Mart. Poly. Pro) and
are also objects of worship (17:3; 19:2; 22:1). However, the Father alone is regarded as "almighty God"
(19:2) and divine actions toward creation are mediated through the Son (14:1; 20:2).
129
Barnard, Justin Martyr, 105.
130
Goodenough, Theology of Justin Martyr, 186.
131
Little responds emphatically in the negative: "But when Logos operates in the world as the Father's Agent, and is found in a
`place' upon the earth, then personally, economically, and officially, He is less than the Supreme God, and subordinate to Him. It is
necessary, then, to distinguish between these two aspects of Deity, that is, between essential Divinity on the one hand, and Divinity
in a functional, official sense on the other. . . . Logos as to Essence is Divine absolutely like the Father, but secondary to Him as to
personality and functions" (V. A. Spence Little, The Christology of the Apologists [London: Duckworth, 1934], 166-67).