Colin Gunton

chapter 3 Colin Gunton

At the time of his sudden death in 2003 at the age of 62, Colin Gunton was a leading Protestant, British theologian within the larger scholarly community making connections between trinitarian theology and its practical implica- tions for life. To fully comprehend Gunton’s gradual embrace of the doctrine of the Trinity, we must consider the various contexts and influencing figures in his life and throughout his career. At the start of this chapter, Gunton’s his- torical embrace of trinitarian theology will be examined, and his lasting legacy in contemporary theological discussions will also be considered. A thorough exploration of Gunton’s trinitarian theology will follow. Colin Gunton was born on January 19, 1941, in Colchester, Essex. He was the eldest of three sons born to Herbert Ewart Gunton and his wife, Mabel Priscilla [Bradley].1 After attending Nottingham High School, he won a scholarship to Hertford College in 1960.2 On August 8, 1964, he married Jenny Osgathorpe, a Nottingham schoolteacher who had attended the same Reformed church.3 Gunton went on to Mansfield College, a constituent school of the University of Oxford, where he earned two degrees (Bachelor of Arts—Theology in 1966 and Master of Arts—Theology in 1967).4 Starting in 1967, Gunton began a six year project to complete a Ph.D. de- gree in theology at Mansfield. There, as a graduate student, he came under the

1 Michael Stringer, “The Lord and Giver of Life: The Person and Work of the Holy Spirit in the Trinitarian Theology of Colin E. Gunton” (Ph.D., University of Notre Dame Australia, 2008), 18. 2 Gunton studied Classics (Bachelor of Arts—Literae Humaniores) and graduated in 1964. Stringer, “The Lord and Giver of Life: The Person and Work of the Holy Spirit in the Trinitar- ian Theology of Colin E. Gunton,” 20. 3 They would later have two daughters, Sarah and Carolyn and two sons, Christopher and Jona- than. Gunton valued his family immensely. Though very busy as a professional academic throughout his career, Gunton rarely missed opportunities to enjoy valuable time with those closest to him by participating in various family-oriented activities. 4 It is presumed that during these formational, academic years, Gunton sharpened his ten- dencies as a non-conformist—one who was often persuaded to work against the norms of prominent thought in British theology. Robert Jenson described Gunton’s scholarly lifework as giving “serious attention to figures of English theological history often regarded as mar- ginal or even eccentric, such as Edward Irving or John Owen.” Robert W. Jenson, “Gunton, Colin E. 1941–2003,” Theology Today 61, no. 1 (April 1, 2004): 85.

Colin Gunton 47 tutelage of Robert Jenson, an American Lutheran and Barthian scholar who, though serving as Gunton’s supervisor and as Mansfield’s Dean of Lutheran Studies for only three years, significantly informed Gunton’s theological devel- opment.5 Under Jenson, Gunton’s doctoral thesis employed Barth’s incarna- tional theology and the process theology of Charles Hartshorne. Both scholars’ theologies were used as theological critiques against Thomistic, classical con- cepts of God.6 In a telling disclosure about Gunton’s choice of subject for his dissertation, Jenson wrote,

I do not remember exactly how Gunton came to me in the first place— the reason, anyway, was that he wanted to write on a systematic subject, with reference to modern theologians, and that devotees of either were not then numerous in the Oxford theological faculty. After a bit, I sug- gested he might compare the differently revisionist doctrines of God represented by Charles Hartshorne and Karl Barth. I knew little about Hartshorne, and like many a dissertation advisor thought Gunton could usefully read him for me, instead of me having to do it. I thought I could use my knowledge of Barth as a control on his scholarly accuracy. So Gun- ton went to work, with his usual obsessive diligence. [italics in original]7

Gunton’s ambitious academic project critically raised arguments against classical theistic notions of God as supernaturalistic (as opposed to a God with material parts), as timeless (as opposed to a God rooted in time), and as con- struing a hierarchy of being (as opposed to a non-hierarchical God).8 Drawing on notions of knowability and freedom within the Godhead, Gunton used a predominantly Barthian framework as a trinitarian instrument to assess what

5 Jenson, himself had emerged a decade before as a young, non-conforming theologian at Luther Theological Seminary. Jenson returned to the United States midway through Gunton’s doctoral studies. John Marsh and John Macquarrie supervised the last part of Gunton’s dissertation. Christoph Schwöbel, “The Shape of Colin Gunton’s Theology: On the Way to- wards a Fully Trinitarian Theology,” in The Theology of Colin Gunton (New York: T & T Clark, 2010), 183. 6 According to Jenson, “It was always hard to get a good word for Aquinas out of Gunton. It would be some time before Gunton’s theology would shift his critique, at times scathing, toward Augustine. For now, it was scholasticism that Gunton took primary aim.” Robert W. Jenson, “A Decision Tree of Colin Gunton’s Thinking,” in The Theology of Colin Gunton (New York: T & T Clark, 2010), 9. 7 Jenson, “A Decision Tree of Colin Gunton’s Thinking,” 8. 8 Colin E. Gunton, Becoming and Being: The Doctrine of God in Charles Hartshorne and Karl Barth, 2d ed. (London: scm Press, 2001), 1–7.