Where to start? I always like to start with some accepted definitions.
First, from Van Harvey:
Trinity: The doctrine of the
T. states that in the BEING of the one eternal deity there are three eternal
and essential distinctions, traditionally named Father, Son and Holy
Spirit. In Western Christendom, the
classical formula has been “three PERSONS in ONE SUBSTANCE” (una substantia et
tres personae); in Eastern Christendom, “three HYPOSTASES in one being” (treis
hypostaseis, mia ousia). [1]
From Charles Fillmore:
Trinity: The
religious terms for the trinity are Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The
metaphysical terms are mind, idea, and expression.
Father
is the source, origin, essence, root, creator of all. Son is that which
proceeds from, is begotten of the Father, like Him in nature, and essentially
all that the Father is. Holy Spirit is God's word in movement: the working,
moving, breathing, brooding of Spirit, made known to men through revelation,
inspiration, and guidance. The Holy Spirit is the Comforter who will bring all
things to their remembrance.
The
doctrine of the trinity is often a stumbling block, because we find it
difficult to understand how three persons can be one. Three persons cannot be
one, and theology will always be a mystery until theologians become metaphysicians.
God is
the name of the all-encompassing Mind. Christ is the name of the all-loving
Mind. Holy Spirit is the all-active manifestation. These three are one
fundamental Mind in its three creative aspects. [2]
Another from Van Harvey:
“Hypostasis is a Greek term that played an important role in the
controversies out of which the doctrine of the Trinity emerged. Before its meaning became fixed, it seems to
have been capable of three interpretations: (1) that which defines something as
belonging to a class, hence, essential being (ousia); (2) that which stands
under a given set of properties; (3) a particular embodiment of certain
qualities, hence, “individual being.””[3]
and
“Gradually, its meaning became fixed as “individual
being” and so roughly equivalent to the Latin persona. The term ousia was rendered as SUBSTANCE (substantia). This enabled Latin and
Greek theologians to agree on the formula “three hypostases in one ousia”
or “three persons in one substance.” [3]
Lastly, from Charles Fillmore:
Substance:
“The
divine idea of the underlying reality of all things. Substance is everywhere
present, pervades all things, and inspires to action. It underlies all
manifestation and
is the spiritual essence, the living energy out of which everything is made.
Through substance all the attributes of Being are expressed. It sustains and
enriches any idea that is projected into it.
Divine substance is man's supply. Out of
it he forms whatever he will according to his faith and understanding. By
entering into the silence, acknowledging divine substance, affirming his faith
in and oneness with it, man becomes conscious of substance.
Spiritual realization of divine
substance enriches the soil or thought-stuff of the mind. Jesus considered
divine substance the treasure field in which He could find the fulfillment of
His every need. Every demonstration over mortal limitations is followed by a
realization of infinite reality. When man puts away the belief in the reality
of matter, there follows a realization of the presence of true substance, of
which matter is a mortal concept. Hence this thought-stuff may be made active
by holding an affirmation. The rich substance of the kingdom of God is pouring
its plenty perpetually into my mind and affairs, and I am in all ways
prospered.” [4]
Pulling some key phrases from the definitions renders this list:
- · three eternal and essential distinctions
- · Father, Son and Holy Spirit
- · “three PERSONS in ONE SUBSTANCE”
- · “three HYPOSTASES in one being”
- · mind idea expression
- · all-encompassing, all-loving, all-active
- · one fundamental Mind in its three creative aspects
- · divine idea of the underlying reality of all things
- · everywhere present, pervades all things, and inspires to action
Not so long ago, the religious idea of ”the Trinity” did not “make sense” to me. It was described to me as a “mystery of our
faith” and to be taken on faith alone, not to be understood. As the literal/figurative explanations seemed
nonsense, the best I could do to understand the concept was to use the “water/ice/steam”
analogy (which actually worked quite well for me for many years). You know, H2O – that stuff. It’s all the same at its core formulation, but
expressing differently as needed for different functions.
There are many efforts to explain the Trinity concept- here’s
a list of 10 ideas: http://twofriarsandafool.blogspot.com/2010/06/10-explanations-of-trinity.html As is pointed out in the article, each fall
short in one way or another.
Fillmore’s statement “Three persons cannot be one, and
theology will always be a mystery until theologians become metaphysicians.” [2]
gave me a key. I finally understood Substance
(the One) as underlying all and expressing activity in, as, and through all
things. I began to get a glimmer of the
concept of the Trinity that I could translate to the language as used in
religious circles.
Do I think about the Trinity? Not much, as a
collective. Do I think about the various
individual manifestations and activities of each expression (person) of the
Trinity? You bet. Do I think about each in equal portion and abstract
format? Sometimes – but most often I
relate to Spirit, as it is easier for me to conceptualize, and has less “baggage”
attached than either of the other two aspects.
Does it matter to God? Probably
not. God is still God, no matter which
aspect I use/relate to/understand/pray with/etc.
It’s still a mystery, and it’s still active in my life, and
it’s still useful to me – no matter how it is languaged.
