Archives For Son

I’ve been working on writing a catechism, a distillation of the faith into concise questions and answers with brief supporting scriptures that could be the starting point for a conversation. The reason being I’m convinced its important for the Church to inoculate our young people with a healthy dose of catechesis before we ship them off to college, just enough so that when they first hear about Nietzsche or really study Darwin they won’t freak out and presume that what the Church taught them in 6th grade confirmation is the only wisdom the Church has to offer.

You can find all the previous posts here.

Finally, I’m now done with Part III. I hope to get all this to video format sometime in the coming year as well.

III. The Son

31. Is Trinity an Extra-Biblical Invention of the Church?

It’s true the doctrine of the Trinity is not delineated in scripture, but then, ironically, neither is the doctrine of sola scriptura so why choose the unimaginative option?

Trinity is not an invention of the Church imposed upon scripture. Rather, it is the only possible grammar by which the Church can speak of God given the witness of scripture and the testimony of the saints and apostles that Jesus is the Son; that is, Jesus is God.

For example, we’re told by John the man-who-had-been-blind worships Jesus. The man-who-had-been-blind is a good synagogue-going Jew. As such, he knows he can only worship God. But he worships Jesus who has healed him. If Jesus now can be worshipped as God, how is this revelation disclosed to the man-who-had-been-blind if not through the advocacy of the witness, the Holy Spirit, whom Jesus promised would proceed him as he has proceeded from the Father?

 Trinity is not a coy and arbitrary invention of the Church imposed upon scripture for if it were we would be the worst of all possible sinners, idolators.

Trinity is instead the only possible manner of speaking of God given what we, like he man-who-had-been-blind, have learned: Jesus is Lord. The man-who-had-been-blind learns this of Jesus and then worships Jesus. Very often we are blind only in other ways learn this of Jesus only by worshipping Jesus.

“Jesus heard that they had driven him out, and when he found him, he said, ‘Do you believe in the Son of Man?’ He answered, ‘And who is he, sir? Tell me, so that I may believe in him.’ Jesus said to him, ‘You have seen him, and the one speaking with you is he.’ He said, ‘Lord,* I believe.’ And he worshipped him.”

– John 9

I’ve been working on writing a catechism, a distillation of the faith into concise questions and answers with brief supporting scriptures that could be the starting point for a conversation. The reason being I’m convinced its important for the Church to inoculate our young people with a healthy dose of catechesis before we ship them off to college, just enough so that when they first hear about Nietzsche or really study Darwin they won’t freak out and presume that what the Church taught them in 6th grade confirmation is the only wisdom the Church has to offer.

You can find all the previous posts here.

III. The Son

29. Are the Spirit and the Son creatures of the Father? 

Recall the basic principle:

Everything that is in God is God.

The Spirit and the Son are not creatures of the Father but they are necessarily, as the creed confesses, of one being with the Father. Thus the Father and the Son do not differ in any way. What they are is God and they are nothing else except that they are God.

The Father has no attributes or properties which the Son has not. The attributes and properties possessed by the Son are inherent to the Father. What we say of the Father, then, we can and must say of the Son and whatever we deny about the Son we must deny about the Father.

Everything that is in God is God. The Spirit and the Son are not distinguished from the Father by creature-hood. The only feature which distinguishes the Father from the Son is that they are at opposite ends of a relationship. What it means for the Father to be the Father is to be in relationship to the Son; what it means for the Son to be the Son is to be in relationship with the Father.

Therefore:

It is wrong to describe the Trinity with the language of creature-hood.

It is not that the Father has a relation with the Son.

The Father is a relation with the Son.

And the Son is the relation with the Father. 

‘A relation with…’ is always an accident with creatures; that is, a creature’s relations- though precious- are never constitutive of their very essence or being. I love my children, for example, and cannot imagine my life without them, but my essence is independent of my having these children. Unlike me, however, God can have no accidents, for everything that is in God is God.

Far from the Son and the Spirit being creatures of the Father, Trinity names the mystery that the Father does not have a relationship with the Son. The Father is that relationship, and the Son is that relationship generated from the Father. There is no truer God behind what we call Trinity.

In naming God Trinity, we not only profess that the Son is not a creature of the Father, we also profess that neither are we creatures of the Father- not merely so.

By our sharing in the Son, through the Spirit, we are incorporated into the Son’s relationship with the Father. Just as the Son does not have a relation with the Father but is that relationship with the Father, so too through the Spirit will we one day be brought into that relationship such that we become that relationship.

Or, God the Son became like us so that we might become like God.

“Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so.” – John 17.21