Thesis advisor: Roberto Goizueta / This dissertation presents a study in the Christian systematic theology of Robert W. Jenson on the doctrine of the Holy Spirit. In doing so, this work seeks to contribute descriptively to Jenson scholarship in the theological academy, to understanding, clarifying and interpreting his role in the contemporary theological scene, while, as itself operating in the discipline of systematic theology, this work also seeks to constructively augment our understanding of the experience of the Holy Spirit in the Church, reckoning with the significance of this theological locus for a number of prominent movements in the current thought and practice of world Christianity. Part I and Part II of this work engage in an exegesis of the content of Jenson’s pneumatology. Here I advance the interpretation that Jenson’s pneumatology can be meaningfully and beneficially coalesced under—without being merely reduced to—the theme of “freedom” or “liberation.” This integrating motif becomes evident as Jenson’s pneumatology is unfolded across a number of other traditional doctrinal loci and interweaved with a number of other ecumenical concerns, examining both the “work” of the Spirit in the world (first part) and the divine “person” of the Spirit (second part). Part III, then, ventures a constructive evaluation and reception of Jenson’s distinctive pneumatological proposals by way of dialectical encounter with three horizons: those of (1) early Christian pneumatology, (2) twentieth century trinitarian theology and (3) liberation theological discourse and praxis. Through this dialectical engagement, I interrogate a number of aspects of Jenson’s divine ontology and theological infrastructure, insofar as they relate to the uniqueness of his pneumatological proposals. With a re-calibration of some of those theological judgments, I argue that certain insights of Jenson’s notion of the Spirit as eternal, personal Freedom in God, as the Unsurpassed One and as the movement of divine self-constitution from the End of Divine Life merit retrieval. This characterization of the person of the Spirit as one of “freedom” or “liberation,” for the believer, for creation, and for God, forges a pneumatological reconstruction of divine transcendence, similarly to what classical theology had done for the persons of the Father and the Son. Such an achievement, I suggest, offers one viable interpretation of the unique role of the Spirit that mediates between traditional-classical trinitarian ontology and the lived experience of the Spirit currently being exhibited, perceived and theorized in various aspects of global theology and leading areas of theological research. / Thesis (PhD) — Boston College, 2016. / Submitted to: Boston College. Graduate School of Arts and Sciences. / Discipline: Theology.

This thesis provides a critical examination of Robert Jenson's doctrine of the Trinity, and the ways in which Jenson's development of this doctrine corrects central aspects of contemporary metaphysics. Jenson's doctrine of the Trinity develops from his belief in the significance of the narrative form of Scripture, and the way in which the Christian Gospel addresses human religiosity. In order to explain this development, the thesis addresses some topics not addressed in scholarship on Jenson, especially his understanding of theological language and his approach to religious epistemology. It also describes the ways in which Jenson's theological project coheres with the task and method of contemporary metaphysics. After describing Jenson's doctrine of the Trinity, the thesis moves on to address substantial critiques from George Hunsinger, David Bentley Hart, and Oliver Crisp. Hunsinger critiques Jenson on the ground of orthodoxy. He claims that Jenson's views commit him to a number of heresies, both ancient and modern. David Bentley Hart also critiques Jenson for his perceived unorthodoxy, arguing that Jenson makes the world necessary for God, and makes God responsible for evil in a way which is at odds with the Christian faith. Oliver Crisp critiques Jenson's metaphysics on the grounds of coherence. The thesis provides responses to all of these critiques. Following these critiques, the thesis describes the ways in which Jenson's Trinitarianism reconstitutes certain central aspects of contemporary metaphysics, especially in the philosophy of time and fundamental metaphysics. Jenson argues on Trinitarian grounds that Christians ought to hold something akin to a moving spotlight view of time. He also argues that Christians ought to deny the category of substance and hold 'event' to be the primary category of metaphysics. The thesis also highlights several weaknesses in Jenson's thought: he has no clear epistemology, his response to the problem of evil is inconsistent, and his work on 'being' is misdirected. None of these weaknesses are found to be fatal to Jenson's project, and the thesis offers suggestions for how each in turn could be corrected.

This thesis examines three students of Karl Barth’s work, all of whom articulate Christian theologies of Israel and Judaism under the influence of his thought and thus the wording of the title, after him. The three theologians are Paul M. van Buren (1924-1998), John Howard Yoder (1927-1997), and Robert Jenson (1930-2017). All three studied with or were supervised by Barth during the 1950s. Later, each of them would make significant contributions to post-Holocaust theologies of Israel and Judaism. In this thesis, I seek to elucidate the conceptual relationship between these two elements—each theologian’s early engagement with Barth and their later contributions to post-Holocaust theology—and argue that by examining the former, one can better understand the theological bases for the latter. I begin with an analysis of Barth’s doctrine of Israel. Barth claims that Israel and rabbinic Judaism are eternally determined to be witnesses to God’s own self-determination in Jesus Christ to be the God whose mercy rules in God’s judgment. A close comparative reading of van Buren, Yoder, and Jenson then follows. I begin by outlining the ways these three theologians appropriate and depart from Barth during or shortly after their time studying with him. I then trace the way each theologian’s early appropriation of and departure from Barth relates fundamentally to the development of their theologies of Israel and Judaism. My analysis reveals that each of the three critique Barth’s doctrine of God’s self-determination as the pre-determination of the identity of Israel and Judaism to be witnesses of Jesus Christ. This common critique enables each of the three to articulate a more positive account of Israel’s and rabbinic Judaism’s witness. / Dissertation / Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) / This thesis examines three students of Karl Barth’s work, all of whom articulate Christian theologies of Israel and Judaism under the influence of his thought and thus the wording of the title, after him. Paul M. van Buren, John Howard Yoder, and Robert Jenson studied with or were supervised by Barth in the 1950s. Each of them would later make significant contributions to post-Holocaust theologies of Israel and Judaism. In this thesis, I seek to elucidate the conceptual relationship between these two elements—each theologian’s early engagement with Barth and their later contributions to post-Holocaust theology. My analysis reveals that these three theologians all critique Barth’s doctrine of God’s self-determination as the pre-determination of the identity of Israel and Judaism to be witnesses of God’s judgment. This critique enables each of the three to articulate a more positive account of Israel’s and rabbinic Judaism’s witness.