Jordan D Wood | Belmont University (original) (raw)

Publications by Jordan D Wood

Pro Ecclesia, 2021

Russell Friedman identifies two “rival accounts” in medieval trinitarian theology. The “emanation... more Russell Friedman identifies two “rival accounts” in medieval trinitarian theology. The “emanation account,” which Bonaventure represents, prefers to emphasize the constitutive role of “act” or “operation” among the intra-trinitarian persons. The “relation account,” that of Thomas Aquinas, prefers rather to say that relations alone constitute divine persons. A specific question illustrates their difference: Does the Father generate the Son because the Father is Father, or is He Father because He generates the Son? Aquinas thinks the former, Bonaventure the latter. Bonaventure’s position attracts criticism from contemporary Thomists. And even Franciscan sympathizers have conceded ambiguity around this point of his trinitarian theology. To wit: If the Father’s act of begetting the Son makes him Father, doesn’t this presume a “Proto-Father,” as Friedman has it, who begets? I argue that this criticism ignores the uniquely Christian-Neoplatonic premises Bonaventure’s view presumes. Perceiving them manifests Bonaventure’s deep coherence on this point and beyond.

Review of Ecumenical Studies, 2019

Comparing the union of Christ's two natures to the body-soul union in a human being was a typical... more Comparing the union of Christ's two natures to the body-soul union in a human being was a typical way among patristic authors to conceive the Incarnation. I argue that a novel use of the comparison emerged among Neochalcedonian theologians, esp. Leontius of Byzantium and Maximus Confessor. Their novelty lay in the concurrent refinement of the nature-hypostasis distinction required by Chalcedon. That refinement-particularly the shift from conceiving natures as self-subsistent to subsistent only in hypostases-opened unprecedented ways to make the anthropological comparison. Now there was a new, univocal tertium comparationis between Christ and the human being: in each case it's a hypostasis alone that makes two distinct natures really one. Neochalcedonian novelty supports the broader thesis that post-Chalcedonian Christology had profound impact on philosophy (cf. Johannes Zachhuber). In this case, Neochalcedonian Christology granted far greater insight into the fundamental mystery of the human person.

Maximus the Confessor as a European Philosopher, 2017

Here I bring Maximus's technical Christology to bear on how, exactly, he creatively receives Dion... more Here I bring Maximus's technical Christology to bear on how, exactly, he creatively receives Dionysian negative theology. I argue implicitly that those who wish to retrieve Dionysius in response to Heidegger's onto-theo-logical critique (e.g. Marion) would do better if they did so in an explicitly Maximian way.

Dionysius, 2019

For some time now there's been a trend to study the relations between Maximus's metaphysics and v... more For some time now there's been a trend to study the relations between Maximus's metaphysics and various kinds of Neoplatonism. This has been salutary and useful. But far less attention has been given to the distinctly Stoic shape of Maximus's cosmology. That's surprising, since among the more obviously Stoic motifs in Maximus is his most idiosyncratic and central thesis--that the Logos is the logoi of the cosmos. This brief essay identifies and surveys just three Stoic motifs Maximus indulges (there are more): [1] the creative procession of the Logos as logoi; [2] the continuous creation of universals; [3] the Logos as the immanent and personal unity of the world.

I affix here only the introduction to this article, which provides the argument's outline. Follow... more I affix here only the introduction to this article, which provides the argument's outline. Follow the link to the full article.

The relation between Books 1-3 and Book 4 of Origen’s Peri Archon has largely been left unspecif... more The relation between Books 1-3 and Book 4 of Origen’s Peri Archon has largely been left
unspecified or denied. This is due to the apparent incongruence between the metaphysical
discussions of the former section and the hermeneutical remarks of the latter.
I argue that Origen’s threefold distinction of Scripture in Princ 4.2.4 draws upon key
metaphysical conclusions of the earlier sections to depict the metaphysical structure
of inspired Scripture as analogous to the Incarnation, and that this insight constitutes
Origen’s fundamental polemic against scriptural literalism, the common error of the
two primary adversaries of the work (the “simple” of the Church and the Marcionites).
Peri Archon is thus unified around the polemical purpose of defending Origen’s allegorical
exegesis.

Book Reviews by Jordan D Wood

A discussion with author responses of the 2016 monograph René Girard, Unlikely Apologist: Mimetic... more A discussion with author responses of the 2016 monograph René Girard, Unlikely Apologist: Mimetic Theory and Fundamental Theology. Contributions from Professors Chelsea King, Mark Heim, Neil Ormerod, and Brian Robinette.

Talks by Jordan D Wood

This talk claims that the most fundamental question raised by non-Constantinian theologies such a... more This talk claims that the most fundamental question raised by non-Constantinian theologies such as John Howard Yoder's is the precise relation between Christian ontology and Christian ethics. Yoder's critique is not essentially an historical, but a theological one: Christ has revealed that God is nonviolent, and so the use of violence is a failure to participate in divine being, to be like God. Some trends in Radical Orthodoxy are also briefly observed, as they serve to exacerbate the question here identified and commended as worthy of theological attention.

Platonism and Christian Thought in Late Antiquity by Jordan D Wood

by Panagiotis G Pavlos, Jordan D Wood, Christina Hoenig, Jonathan Bieler, Enrico Moro, Sebastian Mateiescu, Sébastien Morlet, Alexander Petkas, Adrian C . Pirtea, E. Brown Dewhurst, Joshua Robinson, and Lars Fredrik Janby

The list of participants in the International Workshop in Oslo.

Ephemera by Jordan D Wood

Pro Ecclesia, 2021

Russell Friedman identifies two “rival accounts” in medieval trinitarian theology. The “emanation... more Russell Friedman identifies two “rival accounts” in medieval trinitarian theology. The “emanation account,” which Bonaventure represents, prefers to emphasize the constitutive role of “act” or “operation” among the intra-trinitarian persons. The “relation account,” that of Thomas Aquinas, prefers rather to say that relations alone constitute divine persons. A specific question illustrates their difference: Does the Father generate the Son because the Father is Father, or is He Father because He generates the Son? Aquinas thinks the former, Bonaventure the latter. Bonaventure’s position attracts criticism from contemporary Thomists. And even Franciscan sympathizers have conceded ambiguity around this point of his trinitarian theology. To wit: If the Father’s act of begetting the Son makes him Father, doesn’t this presume a “Proto-Father,” as Friedman has it, who begets? I argue that this criticism ignores the uniquely Christian-Neoplatonic premises Bonaventure’s view presumes. Perceiving them manifests Bonaventure’s deep coherence on this point and beyond.

Review of Ecumenical Studies, 2019

Comparing the union of Christ's two natures to the body-soul union in a human being was a typical... more Comparing the union of Christ's two natures to the body-soul union in a human being was a typical way among patristic authors to conceive the Incarnation. I argue that a novel use of the comparison emerged among Neochalcedonian theologians, esp. Leontius of Byzantium and Maximus Confessor. Their novelty lay in the concurrent refinement of the nature-hypostasis distinction required by Chalcedon. That refinement-particularly the shift from conceiving natures as self-subsistent to subsistent only in hypostases-opened unprecedented ways to make the anthropological comparison. Now there was a new, univocal tertium comparationis between Christ and the human being: in each case it's a hypostasis alone that makes two distinct natures really one. Neochalcedonian novelty supports the broader thesis that post-Chalcedonian Christology had profound impact on philosophy (cf. Johannes Zachhuber). In this case, Neochalcedonian Christology granted far greater insight into the fundamental mystery of the human person.

Maximus the Confessor as a European Philosopher, 2017

Here I bring Maximus's technical Christology to bear on how, exactly, he creatively receives Dion... more Here I bring Maximus's technical Christology to bear on how, exactly, he creatively receives Dionysian negative theology. I argue implicitly that those who wish to retrieve Dionysius in response to Heidegger's onto-theo-logical critique (e.g. Marion) would do better if they did so in an explicitly Maximian way.

Dionysius, 2019

For some time now there's been a trend to study the relations between Maximus's metaphysics and v... more For some time now there's been a trend to study the relations between Maximus's metaphysics and various kinds of Neoplatonism. This has been salutary and useful. But far less attention has been given to the distinctly Stoic shape of Maximus's cosmology. That's surprising, since among the more obviously Stoic motifs in Maximus is his most idiosyncratic and central thesis--that the Logos is the logoi of the cosmos. This brief essay identifies and surveys just three Stoic motifs Maximus indulges (there are more): [1] the creative procession of the Logos as logoi; [2] the continuous creation of universals; [3] the Logos as the immanent and personal unity of the world.

I affix here only the introduction to this article, which provides the argument's outline. Follow... more I affix here only the introduction to this article, which provides the argument's outline. Follow the link to the full article.

The relation between Books 1-3 and Book 4 of Origen’s Peri Archon has largely been left unspecif... more The relation between Books 1-3 and Book 4 of Origen’s Peri Archon has largely been left
unspecified or denied. This is due to the apparent incongruence between the metaphysical
discussions of the former section and the hermeneutical remarks of the latter.
I argue that Origen’s threefold distinction of Scripture in Princ 4.2.4 draws upon key
metaphysical conclusions of the earlier sections to depict the metaphysical structure
of inspired Scripture as analogous to the Incarnation, and that this insight constitutes
Origen’s fundamental polemic against scriptural literalism, the common error of the
two primary adversaries of the work (the “simple” of the Church and the Marcionites).
Peri Archon is thus unified around the polemical purpose of defending Origen’s allegorical
exegesis.

This talk claims that the most fundamental question raised by non-Constantinian theologies such a... more This talk claims that the most fundamental question raised by non-Constantinian theologies such as John Howard Yoder's is the precise relation between Christian ontology and Christian ethics. Yoder's critique is not essentially an historical, but a theological one: Christ has revealed that God is nonviolent, and so the use of violence is a failure to participate in divine being, to be like God. Some trends in Radical Orthodoxy are also briefly observed, as they serve to exacerbate the question here identified and commended as worthy of theological attention.