La Cugna and T. F. Torrance both center perichoresis, but they deploy it differently: she pushes it outward into one economy of divine–human communion and social ethics, while he keeps it primarily as an intra‑trinitarian, ontological and epistemic category safeguarding homoousios and equal, non‑hierarchical relations.[1][2][3][4][5][6]
## LaCugna on perichoresis
– She highlights perichoresis as locating divine unity in a **communion of persons** rather than in an abstract essence or a monarchical Father, and then extends the term to the economy: “one perichoresis includes God and humanity” in the mystery of salvation.[6][7]
– For her, perichoresis is a symbol for “persons‑in‑communion” that is as much about ethics and ecclesial life (non‑dominating, mutual relationships) as it is about the inner life of God.[8][6]
## Torrance on perichoresis
– Torrance insists perichoresis must be understood “in a **wholly spiritual and intensely personal way as the eternal movement of Love or the Communion of Love which the Holy Trinity ever is within himself, and in his active relations toward us**.”[2][1]
– He uses it to assert that the three persons “mutually dwell in one another… while nevertheless remaining other” and that no person is knowable apart from the others; epistemically, “the Trinity can only be known as a whole because it is only as a whole that God makes himself known.”[3][1][2]
## Different doctrinal jobs
– LaCugna uses perichoresis to underwrite her **economic, relational ontology**: God’s being is communion, and that communion “overflows” to include redeemed humanity; the stress is on one shared perichoretic life of God‑with‑us, with strong social and feminist implications.[5][6][8]
– Torrance uses perichoresis primarily to clarify **divine monarchy and homoousios**: it “asserts the full equality of the divine persons,” rules out any hierarchy or “degrees of deity,” and resists grounding unity in a prior essence or in the Father alone.[4][9][1][2]
## Convergence and tension
– Both insist that perichoresis means inseparable, reciprocal communion of Father, Son, and Spirit, and both reject any ontological subordination within God.[1][2][6]
– Torrance, however, worries that some “social trinitarian” uses (LaCugna is often grouped here) blur the line between the intra‑trinitarian relations and divine–human relations; he keeps perichoresis properly trinitarian, then grounds our participation in that communion through Christ and the Spirit, rather than saying “one perichoresis” simply includes God and humanity.[3][5][1]
So you can say: LaCugna “socializes” perichoresis as a symbol of one divine–human communion and relational ontology; Torrance “dogmatizes” it as the key to God’s inner life, equality, and knowledge, from which human participation flows but with a clearer Creator–creature boundary.[2][4][5][6][1][3]
Sources
[1] The concept of perichoresis – The Surprising God https://thesurprisinggodblog.
[2] T. F. Torrance on Perichoresis (Mutual Indwelling of Persons within … https://krisispraxis.com/
[3] Torrance: Stratification of the Knowledge of God – Martin Davis’s Blog http://martinmdavis.blogspot.
[4] God as one, with reference to Barth and the perichoresis doctrine https://verbumetecclesia.org.
[5] [PDF] A Study of the Trinitarian Theology of Catherine Mowry LaCugna … https://repository.divinity.
[6] Christological Perichoresis – Scientific Research Publishing https://www.scirp.org/journal/
[7] [PDF] Christological Perichoresis – Scirp.org. https://www.scirp.org/pdf/
[8] [PDF] HOW CAN TRINITARIAN THEOLOGY TAKE US TOWARDS A … https://mowatch.com.au/wp-
[9] A Triune Monarchy: T.F. Torrance’s Correction of Karl Barth’s … https://theologiansinc.
[10] [PDF] The Purpose of Life and Its Origin in the Triune God A T https://digitalcommons.
[11] [PDF] spiritual formation: retrieving perichoresis as http://arl-jrl.org/wp-content/
[12] Divine Disclosure: Exploring T. F. Torrance’s Theology of Revelation … https://blink.new/p/divine-
[13] [PDF] Navigating the Trinity’s Practical Symphony with LaCugna and … https://digitalcommons.csbsju.
[14] Thomas Torrance and Thomas Aquinas, The Trinitarians in ‘relation’ https://growrag.wordpress.com/
[15] [PDF] The Trinity in Contemporary Theology: Questioning the Social Trinity https://ctsfw.net/media/pdfs/
[16] [PDF] The Christian Doctrine of God, One Being Three Persons [review … https://digitalcommons.
[17] [PDF] Understanding “Relationality” From A Trinitarian Perspective https://www.enochwan.com/
[18] [PDF] THE TRINITARIAN SOTERIOLOGY OF THOMAS F. TORRANCE A … https://pure.manchester.ac.uk/
