Answering Potential Contradictions in the Doctrine of the Trinity: A Vocabulary First Approach

There are roughly 3 main problems with the doctrine of the Trinity that come up when presenting my own work on the doctrine here on RobertDryer.com. They are numbered here:

1.         One God, Three Persons: The most apparent potential contradiction is the claim that there is one God in three Persons (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit). This seems to challenge the law of non-contradiction, which states that something cannot be both ‘A’ and ‘not-A’ at the same time in the same sense. In this case, God is presented as both one (in essence) and three (in personhood), which could be interpreted as a contradiction.

2.         Divine Simplicity and Personal Distinctions: Divine Simplicity suggests that God has no parts, divisions, or complexity. However, the Trinity speaks of three distinct Persons, which could imply some form of division or multiplicity within the divine essence, seemingly contradicting the notion of simplicity.

3.         Eternal Generation and Procession: The concepts of the Son being eternally begotten by the Father and the Spirit proceeding from the Father and the Son might imply temporal processes or changes within the Godhead, which contradicts the immutability and timelessness attributed to God.

In addressing these 3 challenges, my general approach is to approach the subject from a systematic philosophical and theological approach, but such systems are a bit too extensively complex for these issues, albeit that is the best context to address the above. For this piece, however, we can take a more direct approach and address them nearly head on with a less primary approach. 

My secondary approach to these issues favors a robust language first approach, and a bias to supplementing with a robust philosophy of language that aims to develop the theology of the doctrine of the Trinity in an open-ended manner. However, a full philosophy of language would be much too so we’ll do a language first approach creatively today while acknowledging the task is never over. That is, in my opinion, the task of theology never ends; this is an ongoing discussion aimed at one’s theological, spiritual, and ethical formation, assisting in the enrichment of life as a whole. However, given that our task at hand is encapsulated in text, we are limited to what text and words can achieve in this medium. So, a text-first context gives an existential opening for language prioritization and ordering power for the task at hand.

So, what does a creative adoption of a language-first approach entail? For me, it begins with a thorough presentation and examination of vocabulary in assistance to these issues. So, in this piece, we will define 13 terms relevant from the list above as a foundational step. This language first approach, via vocabulary, is central to addressing the three objections outlined earlier, but it should be noted there are other approaches (which is why I mentioned just some of them earlier). 

Definitions

1. Revelation: The divine act of making known the truth about God’s nature and will, particularly through the disclosure of God’s triune nature in the Christian faith. It encompasses both the historical revelation in Scripture and the ongoing personal revelation experienced in spiritual life.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) defines “Revelation” as God’s self-disclosure to humanity. In Christian theology, Divine Revelation refers to the way God chooses to reveal Himself and His will to us. This Revelation is understood to be both a gift and an act of divine love, where God communicates Himself and the eternal truths necessary for humanity’s salvation.

The necessity of Revelation is based on the understanding that the truths necessary for salvation are not fully accessible through human reason alone. While human reason is capable of knowing many truths about God and moral law, there are certain mysteries – the most profound truths about God, His plan for salvation, and His inner life – that exceed human understanding and can only be known if God chooses to reveal them.

The CCC emphasizes that Divine Revelation is completed and perfected in Jesus Christ. He is the ultimate Revelation of God; in Christ, the fullness of God’s truth is revealed. The Revelation given in Jesus is both definitive and complete. However, the understanding and interpretation of this Revelation continue to develop in the Church through the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

Thus, the necessity of Revelation in the Catholic faith is tied to the understanding that God’s self-disclosure is essential for knowing the fullness of truth about God’s nature, the path to salvation, and the mysteries of the Christian faith. This Revelation is not just information about God but an invitation to a relationship with Him, culminating in the person and mission of Jesus Christ.

2. One God: A core tenet of monotheistic belief, especially within Christian theology, which posits that there is only one divine essence or being, supreme and singular, despite the existence of three distinct Persons in the Trinity.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church defines “One God” as the core Christian belief in a single, all-powerful, and loving deity, who exists as three distinct yet consubstantial Persons – the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. This monotheistic belief, rooted in the mystery of the Trinity, affirms that while God is one in essence, He is also a communion of three co-eternal and co-equal Persons.

3. Divine Persons: Refers to the three distinct manifestations or hypostases within the Godhead – Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Each Person, while unique in relative identity and relational origin, fully embodies and enacts the divine essence.

The Divine Persons of the Trinity – the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit – are distinct yet consubstantial personal manifestations of God, each fully embodying and expressing the divine essence through their unique relational origins and interrelations.  This conception, deeply aligned with the teachings of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, underscores that each Person, in a shared divine life, equally presents, represents, and manifests the fullness of divine nature, embodying the essence of God in a dynamic communion that transcends individuality and exemplifies the profound unity and Trinity within the Godhead.

4. Personal Distinctions: The theological concept that differentiates the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit within the Trinity, not based on essence or nature but on their relational and eternal distinctions such as begotten and proceeding. 

The Divine Persons are distinct, consubstantial, co-equal, and co-eternal, fully sharing the one divine essence. In the Trinitarian framework, existence is comprehended through the dynamic and interconnected relationships of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, who, in their distinct yet unified roles, continuously actualize and manifest the divine essence towards and for the cosmos. This divine engagement reflects a singular, ongoing act of God that imparts a coherent and primary order, underscoring the unity and diversity within the Godhead and its foundational role towards the entirety of creation. 

5. Essence: In Trinitarian theology, essence refers to the divine substance or nature that is fully and equally present in the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. It is the fundamental reality that makes God what God is, indivisible and shared completely among the three Persons.

6. Divine Simplicity: In my system Simplicity is characterized as one of 3 primary infinities of God, in the sense of the Trinity’s defining transcendent characteristics entail being universal logically. In this case God as one in utter uniqueness and unity, “I AM”. This is also a doctrine asserting that God’s nature is without parts, divisions, or complexity, implying that God’s attributes are identical to God’s essence. This simplicity is infinite, transcending human comprehension and avoiding any form of composite understanding of the divine.

7. Actus Purus Doctrine: In my system Actus Purus is characterized as the second most primary of 3 primary infinities of God, in the sense of the Trinity’s defining transcendent characteristics entail being universal logically. In this case God as pure act. This doctrine is the belief that God is entirely actualized without any potentiality, denoting God’s perfection, and completion. This doctrine is viewed as an infinite characteristic, reflecting God’s eternal and dynamic actuality.

8. Unity: In the context of the Trinity, unity refers to the oneness of God’s essence despite the existence of three distinct Persons. It highlights the inseparable, indivisible nature of God’s being and is the Pivot point to my 3rd infinity defining the Trinity’s transcendence. 

9. Infinite Relationality: God’s infinite relationality embodies the concept that there are no limits to the depth, scope, and dynamics of divine relations within the Trinity. It encapsulates the eternal, boundless interplay and communion of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, each fully actualized and infinitely open in their relational essence. 

A related term to this in my own theological glossary you can find here (https://robertdryer.com/god-is-immanentia-omnis-a-glossary/ ) is Openness (or Infinite Openness): Within the Full Interval Trinity Theory, this term signifies the perfect balance between God’s transcendence (wholly independent of creation) and immanence (actively present within creation). It reflects the dynamic and relational nature of God’s being, capturing the continuous interplay among the divine Persons in perfect unity-in-diversity. In a sense, DivIO is the oneness of the Persons’ openness to each other infinitely, or the state of all oneness in perfect unity. All relations are realized, all actuality is unified, and all in all the divine Persons are greater than otherwise.

Significance:

• Transcendence and Immanence: Openness emphasizes the divine Person’s inherent capacity to be both beyond and within the created world, offering a fresh perspective on the classical theistic attributes of transcendence and immanence.
• Divine Simplicity: The concept of divine simplicity is enriched by openness, reflecting the perfect unity-in-diversity within the divine life without implying composition or multiplicity. Each divine Person fully embodies the divine essence in an infinitely open way, harmonizing with the doctrine of divine simplicity.
• Theological Discourse and Classical Theism: Openness serves as a conceptual framework that integrates classical theism with a relational ontology. It enhances theological discourse by accommodating diverse perspectives and fostering a holistic understanding of God’s nature. By embracing openness, the Full Interval Trinity Theory deepens our appreciation of the divine reality, emphasizing the unity-in-diversity within the Trinity and the harmonious interplay among the divine Persons.

10. Eternal Generation and Procession: Theological terms describing the relationships within the Trinity, where the Son is eternally begotten of the Father, and the Holy Spirit eternally proceeds from the Father and the Son. These terms imply eternal relational origins without temporal beginnings.

Understood within the framework of Divine Simplicity and Actus Purus, eternal generation and procession affirm that these relational dynamics are not additions to the divine essence but are fully actualized and inherent aspects of God’s singular, simple nature. In light of Infinite Relationality, these concepts emphasize the limitless, ever-active, and dynamic communion within the Trinity, where each Person exists in a state of perfect and infinite relational unity with the others, fully embodying and expressing the divine essence in an eternal act of relational giving and receiving. 

11. Immutability: The attribute of God denoting unchangeability. In Trinitarian theology, it affirms that God’s nature, including God’s triune existence, does not change over time or due to external forces. 

12. Timelessness: This attribute of God denotes existence beyond and independent of time. Within the Trinity, it suggests that divine relations and processes are eternal and not bound by temporal constraints. 

Time is perceived as an extrinsic and non-universal foundation, relevant primarily to substance-based domains that rely on it for their ontology, such as mid-energy states in the universe like our earthly context in relation to the sun. Conversely, in higher-energy states and more complex ontologies, including spiritual realms, time is not a fundamental aspect of relation, act, and being for a realism. 

Metaphysically speaking, God exemplifies the ultimate precondition of time. For example, human consciousness participates with God’s nature through conscious moments, time being a mediating domain for this participation, and as such our consciousness typically spans around three seconds. Metaphysically and speculatively speaking, if God experiences any moments like these, they’re not necessary in and of themselves, and such a state would probably encompass all of time’s moments in their actuality, transcending our linear perception of time. As we saw earlier, God is an infinity of infinities and as such is not bound by the increments that make time time as we know it. 

13. Relational Ontology: This is where my system gets deep and nuanced as I have a pretty in depth ontological framework I’ve developed through the years. So bare with me because there’s a lot to my own presentation of such a context. 

Relational ontology is a philosophical concept that emphasizes relationships as the primary constituent of reality. It asserts that the fundamental nature of existence is based on interrelations among entities, rather than solely on the individual entities themselves. In this framework, the essence, identity, and existence of beings are understood primarily in terms of their relationships with other beings.

In the context of Trinitarian theology, my system’s model of relational ontology interprets the divine essence of God as fundamentally relational, characterized by the dynamic interrelations among the three Persons of the Trinity – the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

The divine essence is conceptualized as a communion of the Trinity’s Persons, where each Person fully actualized and manifests in the same divine essence in a unity that transcends individuality.

The distinctiveness of each Person in the Trinity – the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit – is defined through their unique relational standing and interaction within the Godhead. ….Dynamic Interactions: Emphasizes the living, dynamic nature of the interactions within the Trinity, marked by continuous relational exchange.

Mutual Indwelling: Invokes the concept of perichoresis, indicating a mutual indwelling where each Person is fully present in the others without losing their distinct identities.

Creation’s Reflection of the Trinity: This relational nature of the Trinity is seen as the template for all relationships in creation, indicating a universal relational structure.

Revelatory Foundation: Grounded in Christian revelation, this model understands the Trinitarian nature of God as a divine mystery that human reason can approach but not exhaust.

Divine Existential Unity (DEU) Principle: The DEU principle in my system enhances the relational ontology model by articulating the interconnectedness and unity of all existence from a Trinitarian perspective.

All-Encompassing Unity: DEU posits a non-dualistic vision of existence where all reality is intrinsically unified, reflecting a deep relational congruence with Trinitarian theology.

Relationality as Existential Fabric: This principle asserts that relationality is an essential aspect of all existence, suggesting that to exist is to be in relation, both within the divine nature and in creation.

Reflective of the Divine Essence: The DEU principle emphasizes that the unity seen in all of creation is a reflection of the unity within the Godhead, where the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit exist in a state of perfect relational harmony.

Implications for Understanding Reality: DEU suggests that understanding any part of creation fully requires acknowledging its relational connection to the whole, mirroring the relational dynamics within the Trinity.

Foundation for Theology and Philosophy: This principle provides a basis for a theological-philosophical synthesis, offering insights into the interconnectedness of the divine and the created order. In summary, the model of relational ontology in my system, enriched by the DEU principle, presents a comprehensive vision of reality where relational dynamics within the Trinity are mirrored in the existential unity of all creation. This perspective not only deepens the understanding of the divine nature but also offers a holistic view of the interconnectedness of all beings.

With a vocabulary in place we can address the 3 supposed problems at hand. 

The first step in applying a language-first approach involves reframing the traditional understanding of the terms and concepts associated with the Trinity. This begins with a reexamination of ‘One God, Three Persons.’ Instead of viewing this as a contradiction, we consider the linguistic frameworks that allow for a unity of essence with a plurality of relations. The key is to understand ‘personhood’ in the divine context as fundamentally different from the human concept of individuality. In the Trinity, personhood is not about individual essence but relational identity, where each Person reflects a unique aspect of the divine nature while remaining fully united in essence.

The nuanced vocabulary developed above provides a foundational framework for addressing the apparent contradictions within the Doctrine of the Trinity. By defining  key terms such as ‘Divine Persons,’ ‘Essence,’ and ‘Infinite Relationality,’ in context to a task’s needs, we gain a deeper understanding of how the Trinity can simultaneously be One God and Three Persons. This language-first approach elucidates that the divine ‘Persons’ are unique relational expressions rather than separate entities, embodying a single, indivisible ‘Essence’ which is God. The concept of ‘Infinite Relationality’ particularly sheds light on how these Persons exist in an eternal, dynamic communion, transcending traditional constraints of individuality and allowing for a harmonious coexistence within the Godhead. These distinctions also mean that the Trinity is not a case of something being ‘A’ and ‘not-A’ in the same respect, but rather ‘A’ in one respect (essence) and ‘B’ in another (personhood). This full linguistic reframing moves us beyond the literal interpretations that lead to perceived contradictions, instead inviting us into a contemplative space where the mystery of the Trinity can be appreciated as a profound expression of divine unity and relational depth.

Finally, a strong relational ontology can connect us with the tradition. This understanding of the Trinity, while drawing on contemporary philosophical insights, is deeply rooted in the rich theological tradition of the Church. St. Augustine, for instance, in his profound work “De Trinitate,” grappled with the mystery of the Trinity using psychological analogies, contemplating the human mind as a reflection of the divine. St. Thomas Aquinas, in the “Summa Theologica,” employed a metaphysical approach, discussing the Trinity in terms of ‘relations of origin’ – the Father as unbegotten, the Son as begotten by the Father, and the Holy Spirit as proceeding from the Father and the Son. The Cappadocian Fathers, pivotal in the early Church’s articulation of Trinitarian doctrine, distinguished between ‘ousia’ (essence) and ‘hypostases’ (Persons), laying a foundation for understanding the unity and diversity within the Godhead.

Revelation: A Key to Trinitarian Mystery

Crucially, the doctrine of the Trinity is not a product of human reasoning alone but is grounded in divine revelation. The mystery of the Trinity is unveiled in Christ, taught to his disciples, w lived by the Spirit through his Church. Furthermore, we have the narrative of Scripture and the lived experience of the Church through time. The revelation of the whole Mystery of the Trinity, and the subclass whole mystery of Christ are bodies of truths revealed by this God specially, pointing to a reality that transcends human natural capacities and understanding. The CCC, drawing from this rich scriptural and theological heritage, presents the Trinity not as a logical puzzle to be solved but as a mystery to be lived and experienced. This reality of revelation applies to all challenges to the doctrine. 

Trinitarian Doctrine: A Harmony of Unity and Distinction

The resolution to this apparent paradox lies in understanding the distinctions made within Trinitarian doctrine between ‘essence’ and ‘personhood.’ The CCC, a comprehensive summary of Catholic doctrine, provides crucial insights here. Paragraph 253 of the CCC clearly states, “The Trinity is One… not three Gods, but one God in three Persons…” Here, ‘essence’ refers to the divine nature or substance, which is singular and indivisible. In contrast, ‘personhood’ refers to the relational identities within the Godhead – the manner in which the three Persons relate to each other and to the world. Thus, when speaking of God’s oneness, we refer to the divine essence, and when speaking of God’s threeness, we refer to the distinct persons.

The Role of Relational Ontology

Relational ontology offers a fresh perspective by emphasizing the intrinsic relationality within the divine essence. Rather than viewing God’s essence as a static, monolithic substance, this approach sees it as a dynamic, living communion of Persons. Each Person of the Trinity fully embodies the divine essence but in a relationally distinct way. This relational understanding aligns with the insights of the CCC, which, in paragraph 267, speaks of the divine persons as “inseparable in what they are and what they do,” yet each manifests “what is proper to him in the Trinity.” my own take on these concepts has led to me, saying this in an existential key. That is, the divine persons fully present, represent, and manifest all that it means to be God. That’s the relation, act, and being in their unity, trinity, and infinity are not only the ultimate reality, but also reveal the ultimate reality are fundamentally a personal touch.

Problem 2

For the second challenge, Divine Simplicity and Personal Distinctions, my approach requires a nuanced understanding of ‘simplicity.’ Rather than negating the distinctions within the Trinity, simplicity in this context refers to a non-compounded nature of God’s essence. The distinct Persons of the Trinity are not separate parts but relational expressions of a single, undivided divine essence. This perspective aligns with the language-first approach by emphasizing relational terms and their theological implications, rather than strictly ontological or metaphysical ones.

The comprehensive vocabulary established above serves as a pivotal tool in addressing the complexities inherent in the Doctrine of the Trinity, particularly regarding the seeming contradictions it presents. For instance, the term ‘Divine Persons,’ as defined, underscores the unique relational identity inherent in the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, which is not akin to human individuality but speaks to a profound interconnectedness within a singular divine essence. This understanding of personhood within the Godhead mitigates the perceived contradiction of ‘One God, Three Persons’ by framing it within the context of relational identity rather than individual essence. Similarly, the concept of ‘Divine Simplicity,’ as articulated in our system, complements this understanding by emphasizing God’s unified and non-compounded nature, thus addressing the apparent conflict between simplicity and personal distinctions within the Trinity. Furthermore, ‘Infinite Relationality’ elucidates the eternal and boundless communion of the Trinitarian Persons, lending depth to the notions of ‘Eternal Generation and Procession’ and aligning them with God’s immutable and timeless nature. By reinterpreting these key terms, the language-first approach facilitates a more profound grasp of the Trinity, transforming perceived contradictions into a cohesive and deeply relational portrayal of the divine mystery.

Problem 3

Regarding the third challenge, Eternal Generation and Procession, the language-first approach emphasizes the metaphorical and relational language used in these concepts. ‘Eternal Generation’ and ‘Procession’ are not descriptions of temporal events or changes within God but expressions of eternal relationships and origins within the divine nature. This perspective steers clear of temporal connotations, aligning with the timelessness attribute of God, and instead focuses on the relational dynamics that these terms signify within the Trinity.

Addressing the third challenge of Eternal Generation and Procession, the defined vocabulary significantly assists in clarifying these concepts. ‘Eternal Generation’ and ‘Procession,’ within the framework of our language-first approach, are understood not as temporal sequences but as eternal truths revealing the relational dynamics within the Trinity. These terms are recontextualized from temporal processes to expressions of the infinite, relational nature of the Godhead. This redefinition, especially in light of ‘Infinite Relationality,’ aligns with the attributes of ‘Immutability’ and ‘Timelessness,’ reinforcing the understanding that these processes are eternal aspects of God’s nature, not subject to change or temporal constraints. Thus, through this linguistic reframing, what might initially appear as a contradiction becomes a profound expression of the eternal, relational essence of the Trinity, emphasizing the continuous and dynamic communion of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit in an infinite, timeless, and unchangeable divine dance.

A language-first approach, through a deep and rich introductory vocabulary, offers a decent lens through which to view the Doctrine of the Trinity so as to address the most prominent “apparent contradictions” to the doctrine. That is, such an approach allows us to navigate apparent contradictions by making sure our key terms and concepts illustrate the nuance we mean ,when we uses such terms, in a way that honors both the complexity and the mystery of the divine and gets at answers. This approach does not seek to fully resolve or diminish the mystery but to enrich our understanding and experience of it, highlighting the deep relationality and dynamic nature of the triune God. By focusing on the language and its implications around this doctrine, we can gain a deeper appreciation for the theological richness and spiritual significance of the Trinity, which remains at the heart of Christian faith and practice.

In future posts we can get into a philosophy of language proper, so as to further bolster the case. For today this vocabulary will do the trick for what it is. ✌🏽