Robert Moses Dryer on the Coherence of Divine Simplicity

Q. Finale: Robert Moses Dryer on the Coherence of Divine Simplicity:

The Principle of Relationality as Problem Solver

In my theological work, I propose a robust reinterpretation of divine simplicity through the Principle of Relationality (formerly known as Self-Standing Givenness Ontology, or SSGO). My goal is to preserve the absolute simplicity of God while fully affirming genuine distinctions among the divine Persons—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. This reconciliation rests upon five central points, which together harmonize these seemingly paradoxical truths:

1. Relational Modes Are Not Parts

How can the Trinity’s distinct Persons genuinely differ without introducing composition into God’s essence?

Drawing on Thomas Aquinas’s doctrine of subsistent relations I affirm that the Father as unbegotten, the Son as begotten, and the Holy Spirit as proceeding each fully and equally possess the one identical divine essence. Each Person is a distinct relational mode¹, not a transient manifestation, in which the one simple divine essence wholly subsists (A relational mode² is a self-subsisting manner of existing modus subsistendi in which the one simple divine essence is wholly present; it is neither a transient manifestation nor a part). These real relational distinctions manifest and preserve divine simplicity; they display that no division ever arises within God.

The Persons are neither separable parts nor divisible components. Each Person is a distinct subsistent relation, not a transient manifestation, in which the one simple divine essence wholly subsists (robertdryer.com, robertdryer.com, robertdryer.com). I have repeatedly noted that these relations are really identical with that essence while remaining conceptually distinct through their mutual opposition as unbegotten, begotten, and proceeding (robertdryer.com, robertdryer.com). In this way the Principle of Relationality reframes classical metaphysics by treating relation as the primitive explanatory category, using Thomistic terms only as a bridge while grounding the logic in a relational ontology systematically outlined throughout my website (robertdryer.com, robertdryer.com, robertdryer.com).

2. Each Person Fully Expresses the Divine Essence

How can each Person fully embody the divine essence without fragmenting it?

Again following Aquinas, I maintain that each divine Person fully expresses the single, undivided divine essence from His distinct relational standpoint. The Father eternally begets the Son, and the Holy Spirit eternally proceeds from both Father and Son—yet these relational distinctions do not subdivide or diminish God’s unity. The distinctions among Persons remain purely relational, not substantial or essential divisions. Thus, the Principle of Relationality preserves genuine differentiation without jeopardizing simplicity.

3. Avoiding Infinite Regress via Self-Givenness

How can relational distinctions within the Trinity avoid infinite regress?

Drawing on Jean-Luc Marion’s notion of self-givenness, I hold that the distinctions among Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are eternally intrinsic and self-sufficient. The Persons do not depend on any external cause or temporal sequence; instead, each eternally gives himself to the others in mutual relational self-expression. Because this relational fullness is already complete and coextensive with the simple essence, it precludes any regress and shows, rather than overcomes, God’s absolute simplicity and unity.

4. The Fundamental Primacy of Relationality

Is relationality foundational to God’s essence, or merely secondary?

Drawing on insights from Jiri Benovsky’s metaphysical notion of primitives (as fundamental problem solvers), Jean-Luc Marion’s emphasis on self-givenness, and Aquinas’s realism regarding subsistent relations, I affirm that relationality is not merely a secondary attribute added to God’s nature—it is God’s essence. The divine Persons do not first possess an underlying essence and subsequently engage in relationships. Instead, each Person is intrinsically relational: the Father as the unbegotten source, the Son as eternally begotten, and the Holy Spirit as eternally proceeding. Thus, relationality itself is foundational, fully identical with the divine essence. This relational reality confers identity itself; identity does not precede relationality or merely allow its possibility.

5. Positive Simplicity as God’s Full Actualization

How can divine simplicity be positively understood as the full actualization of God’s being rather than simply the absence of parts?

Utilizing Aquinas’s understanding of God as pure actuality (actus purus) I reconceive divine simplicity positively, as the complete and unbounded realization of God’s being. Simplicity is not a passive state of being devoid of composition; it is actively realized as an eternal act of self-giving love and relational fullness. In the infinite relational communion of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit God’s essence is fully actualized without unrealized potential. Simplicity thus represents God’s dynamic tri-personal life fully and eternally expressed in mutual love.

Summary and Conclusion

How is divine simplicity ultimately realized?

My Principle of Relationality provides a coherent and powerful reframing of divine simplicity through five key affirmations: (1) each Person is a unique relational mode, not a divisible part; (2) all three Persons fully embody the one divine essence without division; (3) relational distinctions are eternally self-given, eliminating infinite regress; (4) relationality is fundamental and identical to God’s very essence; and (5) simplicity is positively understood as God’s total actualization and eternal relational fullness.

By grounding divine unity in the dynamic relational life of the triune God, I present divine simplicity not as a mere negation of complexity but as a profoundly positive affirmation of God’s nature. Divine simplicity is therefore realized precisely through the eternal mutual self-expression and self-giving love among Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. God’s essence remains indivisibly one, yet fully relational and eternally vibrant, perfectly actualized through the relational unity of the divine Persons.

Without a doubt the initiated will continue to have questions, and I get that. But, I gotchu: Further Questions

(One Final Note just in case Biblicists who think they are their own pope want to bring in their abuse of the bible in: My view is considered biblical because it reads Scripture in its full context—grounded in apostolic faith, the Church’s unbroken reception of that faith through history, and an unbroken interpretive tradition guided by the Spirit (see John 16:13, Why the Bible is Trinitarian – RobertDryer, and Dei Verbum). In this perspective, Scripture reveals a God whose nature is singular and indivisible, yet fully self-expressive through relational self-givenness. For example, biblical passages like Romans 11:36, which declares that “from him and through him and to him are all things,” affirm that every attribute—whether expressed as Father, Son, or Holy Spirit—is not a separate component but a distinct facet of the same, all-encompassing divine essence, a theme consistently developed throughout both the Old and New Testaments.)

1. A relational mode is a self-subsisting manner of existing (modus subsistendi) in which the one simple divine essence is wholly present; it is neither a transient manifestation nor a part. ↩︎
2. The same thing, in clarifying other words: again, following Aquinas I maintain that each divine Person fully expresses the single undivided divine essence from His distinct relational standpoint. The Father eternally begets the Son, and the Holy Spirit eternally proceeds from both Father and Son, yet these relational distinctions do not subdivide or diminish God’s unity. The distinctions among Persons remain purely relational, not substantial or essential divisions. Thus the Principle of Relationality preserves genuine differentiation without jeopardizing simplicity. ↩︎