Wednesday, May 22, 2013

One God, Three Persons. Right.

The Church had arguments for centuries over the idea, which eventually became the doctrine we hold to be orthodox. We affirm it at every Eucharist and at every Office. The traditional blessing that ends the Eucharist reminds us again of the doctrine. Yet, of all the things we Christians say we believe, it is perhaps the most difficult to grasp or explain. You may have guessed by now I’m talking about the doctrine of the Trinity.

I bring all this up, because this coming Sunday, the first Sunday after Pentecost Sunday, is the traditional Trinity Sunday--the day we celebrate this mystery of ours.  By ‘this mystery of ours‘ I mean our belief in one God, in union with our Jewish heritage, but the idea that God is Three at the same time.  “God, in three persons, blessed Trinity,” we sing in the hymn “Holy, Holy, Holy.” Do we know what that means? Here’s my best shot at describing (not necessarily explaining) it. 

The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are not three gods and not three beings. Yet, they are distinct persons, who together are God, while each is also God. Each is self-aware, has a will of its own, can speak for itself, and can love, to name only a few characteristics of personhood. Though three, they are in perfectly in tune with each other and, as the Church Fathers asserted from very early, consist of only one substance. The Greek word which they finally agreed on is homoousian which means “essence or being.” The word that lost out, contains an additional letter “i” and is homoiousian which means “similar.”  So, orthodoxy asserts that Father, Son and Spirit are not similar in essence, but are exactly the same in their essence.

Clearer? Probably not. That’s why it’s called ‘this mystery of ours.’ We can say the words, but our finite little minds can’t wrap themselves around the “how” in this equation. How can this be accomplished? Usually analogies are helpful. In this case, not so much.  Since Father, Son, and Spirit exist simultaneously, consequently the analogy of water which can be liquid, solid, and vapor, while still H 2 O, doesn’t hold up because a “unit” of it can’t be all three of these at once. Human analogies break down pretty quickly, too. One of those analogies is the man or woman who is parent to children, spouse to spouse, and friend to others is a weak one as well. All analogies break down eventually--these just break down very quickly.

The Creeds were developed to propagate this doctrine, because various groups of Christians were coming up with ideas that just didn’t capture what seemed to be the experience of the wider Church. Theologians argued about it. Councils argued about it. Bishops and priests were exiled over it. Ordinary folk in the street argued about it. Really. They did. They took it very seriously. Finally, in 325, the “three person, one substance” party prevailed. Now we could all say the same thing even if we didn’t quite understand how it could be.

By the way, the Eastern Church didn’t like the idea and today have a slightly different understanding. They didn’t like the idea of the Holy Spirit “proceeding from the Father and the Son.” They say the Holy Spirit “proceeds from the Father,” leaving the Son out of the process. So, see, there is still room for confusion and disagreement.

Also, by the way, I firmly suspect most Christian are heretical on the matter. I think most think of three separate persons, Father, Son and HS, each of who is different in substance. To put it another way, I think most think something like this:

The Father is really God.
The Son is God’s son, and should be worshipped, but isn’t the same as the Father. He’s sort of subordinate, like any son to his father. Sort of.
The Holy Spirit is God’s spirit, the way God reaches us today.

Completely heretically, but I strongly doubt that God cares.


To threeness in oneness, Jerry

No comments:

Post a Comment