Showing a limited preview of this publication:
Abstract
Sarah Coakley raises three critical points for Bruce McCormack’s kenotic Christology in this short article: 1. She questions whether McCormack has rightly construed the Definition of Chalcedon and the problems it bequeathed to the later tradition; 2. She enquires whether McCormack’s ‘repair’ of Chalcdeon is itself coherent or whether it introduces more metaphysical problems than it solves; and 3. Drawing on the sophisticated Christology of Thomas Aquinas she probes the tradition of the communicatio idiomatum which Thomas inherited from John Damascene, and sees in this approach a more viable solution to the issues Mc- Cormack rightly raises than his own, post-Barthian, ‘kenotic’, alternative.
