The 3 Notions for My Model of the Trinity
I call this piece “Relation, Act, Being: A Notional Exploration of Trinitarian Revelation”
Introduction
Contemplating the Trinity here, we see it as the revelation of the ultimate reality, and expressed best in terms of “Persons”. Revealed in Christ, God meets our deepest conventional understandings and surpasses them, guiding us to a deeper realization of the divine. This reflection delves through the revelation of the Father, in the face of the Son, by the light of the Spirit, whose Gospel reveals the deepest notions the mind can be disclosed of about their mutually indwelled life.
Reflecting on the ultimate conventionally is not too surprising a dialectic. On one hand we’re lead by Christ to the ultimate or transcendent. And on the other hand, the most fundamental or all immanent one. Where these conventions meet the actuality of Father’s multiplied relation through the Son, and by the Spirit is truly a novel revelation. The relation beyond and before all, and all in all, is always and already the full interval of whatever God means with a unity in Trinity and Trinity in unity.
As we embark on this exploration into the notions behind the Trinity and say something about this transcendence and immanence mindful of revelation, we will hopefully be lead to the heart of Christian faith and mystery.
Anticipating Revelation: Getting Relation, Notion 1
As we noted in the Intro ‘God’ is a term of transcendence in the abstract, but this abstraction says something in anticipation, albeit a but equivocal, but it’s leading, specifically beyond our usual scope. In this realm, the Persons of the Trinity meet and complete this anticipation and concretize what is relative. They embody the full actuality of God, a unique and incomparable reality.
This encounter with the divine invites us to renew human reason with a deeper logos. The Trinity, as a communion of Persons, reveals a divine relationship that is the essence of all existence. This understanding of God as relational challenges and enriches our abstraction to make transcendence merely the beyond but to say that whatever is the precondition for anything at all there’s still an apprehensible bit on the sense there’s nothing stopping the human mind from understanding Relation is always already there, even if it’s greater than all that is conceivable or possibly conceivable.
Divine Simplicity and Relational Unity
This actuality of relation, in terms the terms the divine Persons draws us to acknowledge implies a unity in Trinity and Trinity in unity as the creed says. These Persons are intrinsically relational, and divine simplicity is understood as relational unity. God, therefore, transcends our ordinary understanding but there is a simplicity, a uniqueness to this relation beyond.
As we reflect on this relational nature of the Trinity, we see it mirrored in the interconnectedness of all creation. This understanding of the Trinity as a model for relational unity invites us to view all relationships as reflections of the divine, transforming our interactions with others and the world.
I’m reminded of Karl Rahner. By emphasizing the unity of the economic and immanent Trinity, suggesting a deep interconnectedness between God’s actions in the world and His inner life. Rahner’s perspective enhances our grasp of the Trinity’s relational dynamics, bridging the divine and human experiences of God. One may say this is a model for mind at the heart of it all, but again the notion we can’t seem to escape from is NOT awareness, or even an awareness of an awareness of the beyond, but that the beyond is always allready in a relation full stop. Self awareness is not a necessity or component of this notion. In fact this paper is slyly presenting the doctrine of the trinity in a relational ontology through and through, unlike Aquinas’ constituent or mixed Aristotelian/Platonic ontology (for example). Perhaps some sense of origin, as the origin of the relation to its own multiplication for the relation’s sake may entail some kind of preliminary reflection of a secondary notion of origin or something like that. But, that’s not awareness or mindedness proper; and, as the title of this paper insinuates, I’m inclined to define this next step in our thought process in terms of action and not origin. I think Aquinas was right here.
Building upon Boethius, Thomas Aquinas in his “Summa Theologica” offers a deeper explication of relational ontology. Aquinas asserts that it is exclusively through “Relation” that the Trinity of divine persons is multiplied, encapsulating the idea that the distinct Persons of the Trinity are discernible not through their essence but through their relations. Each Person, while identical in substance, is distinguishable through their relational origins according to Aquinas. The point is origin is novel because it’s part of a relational ontology not itself a notion in its own right. For Aquinas it’s that the simplicity of this condition is the act of all acts that he finds something truly its own concept to marvel and then explain with.
The concept of the Trinity as a relational unity finds echoes in Scripture. In John 17:21-22, Jesus prays for his disciples ‘that they may all be one; even as You, Father, are in me, and I in You, that they also may be in Us.’ This prayer reflects the relational unity of the Trinity and invites believers into this divine communion. The relational aspect of the Trinity challenges us to redefine our understanding of existence, not as isolated individuals but as participants in a divine communion. But, communion is an action, and so as we go into the notion of act out of reflecting on relation we have to ask what this act is in the context of simplicity since origin doesn’t seem to provide enough to do the work.
In the next section, we delve deeper into the mystery of ‘Nothing,’ an enigmatic but profound aspect of our understanding of God in Trinitarian terms.
‘Nothing’ in Christian Theology
‘Nothing’ in Christian theology refers to God’s simplicity in Trinitarian terms, denoting the unity of divine Persons. This concept, echoing theological traditions like Eriugena’s thoughts on ‘Nothing’ as the ‘Super-essentiality’ of Divine Goodness, expresses the ineffable nature of God’s existence.
This ‘Nothingness’ is not an absence but a profound presence. It invites us to a contemplative silence where words fail, and only the heart can perceive. In this silent knowing, we encounter God not as an object to be understood, but as a mystery to be lived and experienced. That is out of anticipation for what is beyond in the reflection of relation we get a sense that it is a supernatural act, something so great it’s just essential that this relation act, if for anything on its own behalf since it’s uniqueness is to great to be static, tether it’s super.
The journey into the mystery of ‘Nothing’ leads us naturally to consider the dynamic aspect of the divine, and this should not be surprising that it’s almost inexplicable but the notion of the act of all acts (thank you Aquinas) saves us to not get stuck in the purely inexplicable but to at least marvel at the status of this act; and it’s prob no conscience (if we bring in Rhaner here again) that the incarnation is in a sense nearly inexplicable, both God and man, dead on Golgotha but alive to the glory of resurrection. What is revealed through the Incarnation is also truly an action that is super, and essential if for no other reason for the sake of our own act of existence situated to death.
The supernatural, anticipated in the existential condition longing for the unconditioned, is fully realized in Christ. This revelation, brought forth by the salvation of the divine Persons, transforms our understanding of relation and existence. The revelation of Christ is a pivotal moment in this relational dynamic, marking the intersection of divine and human, and offering a new way of understanding existence, rooted in relationship and self-giving love.
The incarnation, life, death, and resurrection of Christ as portrayed in the Gospels exemplify the act of divine relationality. In Philippians 2:6-8, Paul speaks of Christ, who, ‘though He was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a servant.’ This kenotic act of Christ symbolizes the ultimate self-giving love of the Trinity, inviting humanity into a new understanding of existence that transcends mere being and enters into a relational, self-giving dynamic.
This understanding of the act of divine relation, specifically the primordial act of existence the relations of origin are, which is exemplified in Christ, sets the stage for our next contemplation: the conditions for being.
The Conditions for Being
Contemplating the Gospel’s revelations, we see our satisfaction in these notions (relation and act) as the precondition for existence to be rather than not (the “super” entails something rather than merely nothing, or because the act of the theolgical nothing is in fact something). This, our very existence is a gift, rooted in the relational nature of the Trinity, calling us to live in a way that reflects this profound truth.
Our understanding of being, than, is a call of transformation: by the revelation of relational nature of the Trinity we are lead organically to the realm of Christian metaphysics, where the notional becomes rational precisely because relation and act doesn’t imply nothing but everything. Or as I heard David Bentley Hart once say, every thing that’s possible in God is actual. And this actuality is a reality that being is conditioned to be, even if almost on the verve of being inexplicable in some senses.
Notional to the Profundity of the Logos
We have all ready mentioned Rhaner, and before him Aquinas, and weve leaned heavily on the entailments of the revelation of the trinity as persons. But it would be remiss if we didn’t mention it was that the insight of the persons that gave us metaphysics proper, it gives us perhaps some helpful and possibly explanatory notions. But even before Rhaner and Aquinas Boethius prob made a Giant leap from the relational insight and gave us the claim this revelation of realation means there’s always a personal touch to God even in his simplicity.
Boethius, understanding the ontology of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit through the lens of relational dynamics, provides a coherent and profound insight into the divine Persons. Boethius, in his groundbreaking “De Trinitate,” introduces a pivotal concept: the differentiation of the Trinity’s Persons through relational properties. He posits that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, while sharing the same divine essence, are distinguished by their relational characteristics: the Father as begetter, the Son as begotten, and the Holy Spirit as proceeding from both.
The reason we bring Boethius here now rather than in the flow of reflecting on these pivotal notions is because in the context of Christian metaphysics, we begin with a commitment to participate in God’s reality which is dynamic. Boethius understood well God is always already a personal touch. The style is inexplicable but undeniable in the disclosure of the Triune. This means we’re immediately drawn up to the summit of grace.
Metaphysics bares fruit on understanding God’s self revelation and this in some sense bears open God’s means and not merely the Trinity’s ways. That is, if I may be quick to connect the dots where they lead, the Eucharist embodies this participation, renewing all things in the relationship, action, and being of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. This sacrament invites us into a deeper mystery of being, transforming us into the very life of God. This transformation from notion to rational understanding of the Trinity culminates in a personal and communal call to live this reality in our daily lives.
“This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me.”
The Trinity, a dynamic communion of three Persons, each fully embodying the divine essence, deepens our theological insight and invites us to a personal connection with the divine. However our connect is God’s own connection, which is a personal touch on his own relations which are 3, act which is one (a unique and perfect unity), and being which is both immanent and transcendent. The full interval of the Trinity than is the range and rule of the Actus Purus and Immanentia Omnis.
The Catechism states, ‘The mystery of the Most Holy Trinity is the central mystery of Christian faith and life. It is the mystery of God in Himself. It is therefore the source of all the other mysteries of faith, the light that enlightens them’ (CCC 234). This mystery invites us to a deeper understanding and participation in the divine life, a journey that is not just theological but profoundly personal, transforming our daily existence and our view of the world. We see the sense where God is a deeply interconnected unity, that unity is an incomparable and incomprehensible act of all acts, and as such echoes a being from which all thing find their form in relations, actions, and participation as beings always in and through another. Amen!
Review
This paper is quite dense on purpose, and it might not be apparent how I connect the dots for the uninitiated. However, in principle there’s really 3 main concepts this paper covers and can be review quite simply:
1. God as Relationship: It talks about how God is best understood not just as a single entity but as a relationship between the three Persons of the Trinity. This relationship is key to understanding who God is.
2. Beyond Human Understanding: The text explains that God is both beyond everything we know (transcendent) and involved in everything (immanent). This means God is greater than anything we can think of but is also present in every part of our lives.
3. God in Action: The manuscript discusses how the Trinity is not just about beings but also about actions. It suggests that the relationships within the Trinity are dynamic and active, shaping the essence of God.
In summary, these three notions – relation, act, and being – are not abstract entities but are fundamental and original elements of reality. They form the essence of Trinitarian theology, allowing us to form some powerful metaphysical foundations that can extrapolate the contents of specific theological tasks.
Glossary of Terms
For those without a theological vocabulary sufficient for the task of making these 3 concepts make sense through the 3 notions I utilize to riff off of to make the paper happen I have include a glossary of terms here too.
Actus Purus: Latin for “Pure Act,” referring to God as fully actualized, without any potentiality, indicating perfection and completion.
Circumincession:
– Definition: Circumincession is the Latin counterpart to the Greek term Perichoresis, used in Christian Trinitarian theology. Derived from the Latin “circum” (around) and “incedere” (to go or step), it conveys a similar meaning of mutual interpenetration and co-inherence of the Trinity’s Persons. It articulates the profound interconnectedness and relational dynamics within the Trinity.
– Significance: Circumincession stresses the inseparable and intimate relationship among the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. It is a key concept for understanding the unity of the Trinity, not as a merging of identities but as a harmonious and dynamic interrelationship, maintaining both individuality and unity within the Godhead.
Divine Simplicity: The concept that God is not composed of parts or elements, reflecting a unity and indivisibility of in essence or in and of himself.
The concept of Divine Simplicity, which asserts that God is not composed of parts or elements, raises intriguing questions when considering the Incarnation of Jesus Christ, who, according to Christian belief, assumed a fully human nature with all its physical and psychological complexities.
To reconcile Divine Simplicity with the Incarnation, theologians have approached it through a few key ideas. Let’s cover 5;
1. Two Natures of Christ: The doctrine of the Hypostatic Union, affirmed at the Council of Chalcedon (451 AD), states that Jesus Christ is both fully divine and fully human. These two natures are united in one person (hypostasis) without mixing, changing, dividing, or separating. This means that the divine nature (simple and without parts) coexists with the human nature (complex and with parts) in the one person of Jesus Christ.
2. Divine Nature Remains Simple: In the Incarnation, the divine nature of the Son does not change or compromise its simplicity. The divine nature remains wholly and completely simple even as the Son assumes a human nature.
3. Communicatio Idiomatum (Communication of Properties): This principle allows for the attributes of both the divine and human natures to be ascribed to the person of Jesus Christ. For example, Jesus can be said to be omnipotent (a divine attribute) and hungry (a human attribute). This communication of properties does not imply that the divine nature becomes complex or that the human nature becomes divine.
4. Purpose of Incarnation: In theological reflections, the Incarnation is often understood as God’s action to redeem humanity. The assumption of human nature by Jesus, including its physicality, is seen as a necessary part of this redemptive act, allowing him to fully identify with human beings.
This purpose is in act which the paper covers the notion, but my system also has a divine action theory here: https://robertdryer.com/divine-action-theory-revisited/
Key to this theory is the Intrinsic Intentionality Principle (IIP)
Here we start with something like Psalm 138:8 which affirms God’s commitment to fulfilling His purpose in our lives: “The Lord will fulfill his purpose for me; your steadfast love, O Lord, endures forever. Do not forsake the work of your hands.” This verse underscores the inherent intentionality of God’s actions and His unwavering dedication to the work He has begun in us.
Incorporating the IIP into action theory allows us to gain a deeper appreciation for the profound depth and immediacy of intentionality in basic action. It underscores the inseparable connection between an agent’s intrinsic nature, power to act, and its intentional expression. This principle becomes a unifying force, enveloping and integrating the other principles, illuminating the transformative power of divine action and its profound implications for our understanding of God’s engagement with the world.
The IIP serves as a foundational pillar. It embraces the intrinsic intentionality within the intricate tapestry of Divine Action and deepens our comprehension of the divine-human relationship. We acknowledge the inseparable bond between our own intentionality and the divine intentionality that underlies all of creation.
Furthermore, in the realm of basic action, intentionality is not a result of an antecedent act. It is rather an intrinsic expression of the agent’s nature, power, and capacity to act. Metaphysically, intentionality in basic action is a direct and intrinsic aspect of the agent’s being and nature, reflecting the inherent design and purpose imbued within the agent. It signifies the agent’s inherent ability to direct its actions towards a particular goal or purpose, thereby encompassing the depth and immediacy of intentionality within the fabric of Divine Action.
5. Mystery and Paradox: Christian theology often embraces the notion that certain truths, such as the Incarnation, are mysterious and paradoxical. The coexistence of Divine Simplicity and Christ’s human nature is one of these mysteries, a point where human reason encounters its limits in the face of divine revelation.
In summary, Divine Simplicity and the Incarnation of Jesus Christ are reconciled in Christian theology by affirming that while Jesus assumed a human nature with all its attributes, the divine nature remains simple and unchanged. This is part of the profound mystery of the Christian faith, where the infinite and simple God enters into the finite and complex realm of human existence.
Eternal Generation: The doctrine that the Son is eternally begotten of the Father, emphasizing a unique relational dynamic within the Trinity.
Hypostasis: In Trinitarian theology, this term refers to the individual reality or personal existence of each of the three Persons of the Trinity.
Immanentia Omnis is controversial but is a term signifying the all-encompassing immanence of God, emphasizing God’s intimate presence within creation while also transcending it.
The reason Immanentia Omnis is controversial is because it’s a proposed Latin term (“All Immanence”) representing the scope of divine immanence, referring to the three Persons of the Trinity, is to counterpart what Actus Purus does for expressing transcendence but in immanent terms. As an interval, it is the conceptual device that can be characterized as the full scope of Immanence. The state in which, In God, all presence is proximate and all proximity pervades. This represents the constant interaction with creation, with God operating within the bounds of the universe while simultaneously transcending them.
Kenosis: The concept of Christ’s self-emptying in the Incarnation, where He took on human nature and form.
Missio Dei: Latin for “mission of God”, this term emphasizes God’s self-revelation and active presence in the world through the Trinity.
Perichoresis:
– Definition: Perichoresis is a term in Christian theology, particularly in the doctrine of the Trinity. It originates from the Greek word “περιχώρησις,” which means “rotation” or “indwelling.” In Trinitarian context, it refers to the mutual indwelling and interpenetration of the three Persons of the Trinity – the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. It underscores the idea that while each Person is distinct, they are inseparably connected in their essence and operations.
– Significance: This concept is vital in emphasizing the unity and co-equality of the Trinity, illustrating how each Person is fully involved in the life and work of the others. It counters views of the Trinity as merely a functional arrangement and highlights a deep, relational understanding of the divine nature.
Relational Ontology: A view that the fundamental nature of existence is relational, particularly within the context of the Trinity where each Person is defined in relation to the others.
Central to my own relational ontology is the idea of the Divine Existential Unity (or DEU for short)
At its core, DEU underscores that the foundational act of being is at the heart of all existence. This act, in its purest essence, is manifested in the Trinitarian relations, reflecting the range and rule of divine power (the divine monarchy). This ultimate reality, God, transcends mere existence as a being among beings, embodying “Being Itself.” The Trinity, far from being static, is a dynamic reality that emphasizes not only the act of existence but also the interconnectedness of all things in Trinity and Trinity actively engaging the world. This non-dual relational monism accentuates the unity and interconnectedness of all existence, harmonizing with the Trinitarian understanding.
DEU and the Full Interval Trinity Theory (FITT)
The Full Interval Trinity Theory posits that the three persons of the Trinity exist within their own full intervals of divine being, comprising the entirety of the divine nature. DEU complements this by emphasizing that these intervals are manifestations of the foundational act of being, allowing each Person to “present, represent, and manifest” the immanent reality of the transcendent qualities they embody. The interconnectedness emphasized in DEU mirrors the relational nature of the Persons within the Trinity, each existing in a complex relational network.
DEU and Divine Action Theory
Divine Action Theory underscores God’s active role in the world. DEU enhances this by emphasizing that God’s actions are rooted in His very nature as “Being Itself.” Every divine action is an expression of God’s foundational act of existence, ensuring that God’s actions are always consistent with His nature. DEU aligns with action theories that understand the agency of God to be an immediate and intrinsic expression of inherent power and capacity. (See the IIP above.)
DEU and Divine Confluent Identity Theory (DCIT)
DCIT proposes that the three persons of the Trinity share a single divine essence or nature while maintaining their distinct personal existence. DEU provides the existential grounding for this. The shared essence is the foundational act of being, while the distinct personal existences are manifestations of this foundational act in relation.
Ethical Implications of DEU
DEU’s emphasis on interconnectedness and the foundational act of being has implications for ethical thinking and behavior. Understanding DEU influences ethical considerations within the church and broader society.
Practical Applications and Theological Dialogue
DEU’s influence extends to the church, pastoral care, and spiritual formation. This section explores the practical applications of DEU and engages with critiques or alternative viewpoints, providing a more rounded view of DEU’s place within broader theological discourse.
DEU and the Insight of the Trinity
The revelation of the Trinity as unity in trinity and trinity in unity is a profound insight into the nature of the God of Christ. DEU supports and deepens this insight by offering principled and profound metaphysical understanding. It emphasizes the unity and relationality of the divine, allowing for a more comprehensive grasp of the Trinitarian mystery.
The Divine Existential Unity (DEU) offers a profound understanding of the nature of existence, bridging foundational metaphysical insights with contemporary theological understandings. By emphasizing both the foundational act of being and the dynamic, relational nature of God, DEU provides a robust framework that complements and enhances theological systems like FITT, Divine Action Theory, and DCIT, including a deeper understanding of the Trinitarian Persons. Its broader implications for theology, the church, and individual believers make DEU a compelling and significant contribution to theological discourse.
For the underlying philosophy and argument underlying the DEU see https://robertdryer.com/the-relational-ontology-of-deu/
These terms are integral to understanding the complex theological concepts explored in your paper and would be valuable additions to a glossary for readers. See here for help: https://robertdryer.com/god-is-immanentia-omnis-a-glossary/
