Page History

...

                                                                                          On A Priori/A Posteriori Christology

What is the difference between a priori christology, on the one hand, and a posteriori christology, on the other?

A priori christology is purely formal in that it explicates the necessary conditions that would have to be satisfied in order for the assertion, "X is the Christ," to be true for any value of the variable X. Unless a, b, c, etc. could be truly affirmed of X, the assertion, "X is the Christ," could not be a true assertion. Thus, if it belongs to the concept, "Christ," for example, that any X of which it is affirmed truly must be the explicit, primal, ontic source of all that is divinely authorized, then to say of any possible value of X that it is the Christ is to claim for it this unique function or role in the system of divine authorization. A posteriori christology, on the other hand, is not thus purely formal, but material -- and material—and that in two respects: in respect of asserting of the particular historical person, Jesus, say, that he satisfies all the necessary conditions that would have to be satisfied in order for the assertion that he is the Christ to be true -- for true—for example, that he is the explicit, primal, ontic source of all that is divinely authorized; and in respect of asserting of the meaning of ultimate reality for us what, because just this particular, historical person, Jesus, is the Christ, also has to be true of it.

...