Recent Dutch Pneuma-Christologies and Nicene Christology

A Pneuma-Christology is well able to give attention to the embodied
nature of spirituality, both in Jesus and in the believers who
share in him. But how do Pneuma-Christologies relate to the Logos-
Christology of Nicaea? Nicaea affirms the divinity of the Son,
because only a divine Son can save creatures. According to Nicaea
and the later tradition (exemplified in this article by the pneumatology
of John Owen), the divine nature of Christ is eternal and
immutable. This article makes a comparison between Nicaea and
two Dutch, Reformed proposals of Pneuma-Christologies inspired
by Charismatic renewal, one by Jan Veenhof and the other by
Cornelis van der Kooi. In Veenhof’s proposal, a Logos-Christology
perspective on Christ is an alternative to a Pneuma-Christology. Van
der Kooi presents a more thorough revision, but has become cautious
in formulating the ontological implications of his Christology
for the immanent Trinity. Both Veenhof and Van der Kooi affirm the
basic decision of Nicaea, but criticize divine immutability. Neither
reflects explicitly on Jesus as a divine-human actor and his saving
activity. The Christologies of Frank Macchia and Bruce McCormack
are used to formulate an alternative proposal, affirming the saving
activity of Son and Spirit.