The Nicene Faith (review)

John Behr chooses his words carefully. The title of his series of studies (of which the first volume, The Way to Nicaea, was published in 2001) is "The Formation of Christian Theology." Theology, specifically as Christian, Behr writes, "developed first and foremost as faith in the lordship and divinity of the crucified and exalted Christ" (2). Hence, he insists that his book is not about "Trinitarian theology" because it is not primarily about the One and the Three considered almost as abstractions. Rather it is about "how the . . . Lord Jesus Christ reveals the one and only God as Father, in and through the Holy Spirit" (7–8). For the same reason Behr distances himself from the historical-critical methodologies of scriptural studies insofar as these studies open up an ever-wider gap between the authors of the New Testament books and the Fathers of the Church, i.e., between the earliest witnesses and the theology that evolved from their witness. In other words, Behr does not see development of doctrine as decline or even corruption as Adolf von Harnack and others did. Nor does he write a book that is naive or glibly pious. Writing as an eastern Orthodox scholar, he successfully blends personal conviction with rigorous historical scholarship and astute theological analysis. He is not engaged in social critique or deconstruction.

In the execution of his plan, Behr has chosen to be thorough rather than comprehensive. Unlike J. N. D. Kelly's much-used survey, the author centers his study on persons rather than on doctrines, i.e., on Athanasius of Alexandria and the three Cappadocian Fathers with subordinate sections on Methodius of Olympus, Lucian of Antioch, Alexander of Alexandria, Arius, Aetius and Eunomius, Apollinarius of Laodicea, and others.

The author follows a familiar but useful pattern. A few of his chapters are strictly historical narratives, particularly chapter 3, the inevitable treatment of "creeds, councils, and controversies." Behr's version of this complex history is accurate and highly detailed but easy to follow. The fourth chapter, on Alexander, Arius, and the Council of Nicaea, is written in the same vein, but the bulk of the book is devoted to the four great Fathers mentioned above. After an introduction to each Father, Behr's method is to analyze closely some of the writings of the author in question. In the case of Athanasius he gives pride of place to the double work Against the Pagans—On the Incarnation. His analysis is profound and helpful. Nonetheless, there remains a need for a modern, really thorough theological study of the three authentic Orations against the Arians; Behr's section on Athanasius's anti-Arian writings is only about as long as the section on the apologetic double work and organized mostly doctrinally.

In the case of Gregory of Nazianzus, the author concentrates on the five Theological Orations, and in the course of almost forty pages offers a running summary and paraphrase of the orations. In the case of Basil of Caesarea, however, he organizes his chapter thematically rather than around any one of Basil's writings, an approach which makes good sense. Behr's section on Gregory of Nyssa begins with the perceptive observation that Gregory "remains a largely enigmatic figure," who writes little of himself and is largely absent from contemporary historical accounts. Nonetheless, with Gregory as with Basil of Caesarea the author provides good theological analyses even though in the case of Gregory of Nyssa he risks slipping back into the familiar Trinity/ Christology pattern.

The fact that Behr treats only writers in Greek is not surprising. His strength is in analysis, especially the analysis of theological texts, but one could have hoped—or still hopes—for the synthetic moment that the author is surely capable of.

The strongest objection to Behr's book...