Relational Ontology & Dynamic Interaction

Question #30: How does a “relational ontology” approach (e.g., self-standing givenness theory) harmonize God’s dynamic interaction with creation, as upheld in Catholic spirituality and magisterial teaching, with the classical principle of simplicity affirmed by the Church.

A “relational ontology” approach–such as the self-standing givenness theory (SSGO)–aims to emphasize that God’s essence is intrinsically relational, reflecting the divine Persons’ eternal self-givenness while still upholding divine simplicity. From a Catholic standpoint, God’s interaction with creation is often described in richly relational terms, as seen in Scripture (e.g., God’s covenant with Israel, or Christ’s Incarnation) and in magisterial teachings (CCC 2567 speaks of a God who “thirsts” for human response). The question is how to affirm these dynamic relational engagements without implying God is composed of parts or subject to change.

First, self-standing givenness posits that God’s very being is expressed in the mutual, eternal relations of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Each Person is a distinct, irreducible mode of the one divine essence, yet they do not fragment that essence. This keeps with classical simplicity, which insists God is not partitioned into separate constituents. According to SSGO, these eternal relations do not introduce composition but rather illuminate how the one essence is “lived” in an ongoing, self-giving manner.

Second, the “dynamic interaction” with creation–so essential in Catholic spirituality and practice–derives from the same principle of self-giving. God’s relation to the world is understood as an overflow of His internal, Triune life. Thus, God’s creative and salvific actions can be described in relational terms (e.g., “God is love,” 1 John 4:8) without implying He develops or modifies His essence when engaging creatures. Rather, it is creation that experiences changing phases of grace, covenant, and redemption, while God’s eternal, simple act of love is the very source of those experiences.

Third, by rooting God’s relationality in the Triune Persons themselves, a relational ontology can affirm a truly dynamic image of God for Catholic spirituality: Christ’s Incarnation, the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, and the sacramental life of the Church all become real participations in the dynamic self-givenness of the Trinity. Yet no new “part” appears in God–He remains perfectly simple, yet freely bestows Himself to creatures in time.

Finally, because the Church upholds both divine simplicity (Lateran IV, DS 800) and God’s intimate communion with creation (CCC 221, 2567), a relational ontology framework clarifies that God’s simplicity is not “static.” Rather, it is an eternal plenitude of self-giving that never needs augmentation. The contingency and multiplicity belong to creation, while God remains the “I AM” (Exod 3:14)–unchanging in essence, yet the inexhaustible source of all relational richness. Thus, SSGO or similar relational ontologies harmonize well with classical simplicity by portraying the divine essence as an eternal, non-composite act of relational self-giving, from which all created relations flow without modifying God’s simple being.


(see #27)