Abstract
AbstractI begin this article by suggesting that the current phase of trinitarian theology is characterized by an impetus to evaluate and correct work done in earlier phases. One evaluative‐corrective voice is that of Stephen Holmes, who critiques recent trinitarian ressourcement and advocates a return to more traditional conceptions. I suggest that Richard of St Victor can serve as an excellent model of traditional trinitarian theologizing. To do so, however, some recent mischaracterizations of Richard must first be corrected. Toward this end, I identify several points of disagreement with Holmes’ reading of Richard. I explicate those points of disagreement and argue for what I take to be the correct understanding. I conclude by briefly reflecting on how Richard’s project can serve the current phase of trinitarian theology.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
