Persons of the Trinity

  • Thread starter Thread starter Augustine
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Augustine

Guest
What exactly does “person” mean when explaining the Triune God as one God and three persons?

TIA
 
Person is defined as “an individual substance of a rational nature.”

Frank Sheed simplifies it this way: it answers the question, “Who is it?” As others have explained, the Trinity is “Three Who’s in one What”.
 
“Person” here means: a real relation as subsistent in the divine nature.
 
40.png
Vincent:
Person is defined as “an individual substance of a rational nature.”

Frank Sheed simplifies it this way: it answers the question, “Who is it?” As others have explained, the Trinity is “Three Who’s in one What”.
This is the meaning of a human person not a divine person.
 
40.png
Chesster:
This is the meaning of a human person not a divine person.
This is incorrect… God is One in Three Divine Persons… They are all divine, Jesus was human and divine and the Holy Spirit is a spirit, not a Human person.
 
Sarah,

A human person is an individual substance of a rational nature.

A divine person is a real relation as subsistent in the divine nature.

Also, Jesus is a divine person (not a human person) with two natures; divine & human.
 
Wow, this all sounds pretty philosophical. I like the way that Vincent (and Frank Sheed) put it.

Person answers the question:* Who?*
Nature answers the question: What?

There can only be one divine nature, one God. There are three Persons (Father, Son, Spirit) who each totally possess the one divine Nature without subdividing it.

JimG
 
40.png
Chesster:
This is the meaning of a human person not a divine person.
St. Thomas clarified Boethius’s definition by replying that:
In God the individual–i.e. distinct and incommunicable substance–includes the idea of relation, as above explained.
(ST I.29.4)

and
The definition of “person” includes “substance,” not as meaning the essence, but the “suppositum” which is made clear by the addition of the term “individual.” To signify the substance thus understood, the Greeks use the name “hypostasis.” So, as we say, “Three persons,” they say “Three hypostases.” We are not, however, accustomed to say Three substances, lest we be understood to mean three essences or natures, by reason of the equivocal signification of the term.
(ST I.30.1)

So Boethius’s definition of “individual substance of a rational nature,” as amended by St. Thomas and applied to the Trinity might look like:

“[Distinct and incommunicable subsisting relation] of? the [divine] nature.”
 
40.png
Vincent:
“[Distinct and incommunicable subsisting relation] of? the [divine] nature.”
That says the same thing I’m saying.

I answer that, relations exist in God really; . . . Therefore as the divine processions are in the identity of the same nature, as above explained (27, 2, 4), these relations, according to the divine processions, are necessarily real relations. – newadvent.org/summa/102801.htm

Therefore a divine person signifies a relation as subsisting. And this is to signify relation by way of substance, and such a relation is a hypostasis subsisting in the divine nature, – http://www.newadvent.org/summa/102904.htm

Thus: a real relation as subsistent in the divine nature.
 
40.png
JimG:
Code:
*Person* answers the question:* Who?*
*Nature* answers the question:  *What?*
There can only be one divine nature, one God. There are three Persons (Father, Son, Spirit) who each totally possess the one divine Nature without subdividing it.
But then we share one nature, man, yet there are billions of us, persons. Doesn’t sound right…

I heard that St. Patrick used a clover as an example to illustrate the Tri-Une God: one clover, three leaves. Or St. Augustine: one family, several persons.

Or could one say that the Holy Spirit “animates” the Father, as a being, as well as the Son, the Incarnation of the Holy Spirit in human nature?
I'm sorry to pose such basic questions, but I'm trying to understand such mystery of our Faith a bit better.
 
40.png
Augustine:
But then we share one nature, man, yet there are billions of us, persons. Doesn’t sound right…
As humans, we are one person (me)(or you) possessing one human nature. Each of us has his own human nature, associated with only one person.

The Persons of the Trinity do not “share” the divine nature. Each person totally possesses the one divine nature.

Falling back on Frank Sheed once again, we could first consider all the attributes of God: eternal, infinite, omnipotent, omnipresent, all good, all perfect. Then consider that God is a Person just as we are. (the Father).

But God also has the faculties of intellect and will–He can know and love.

What does He know? Well, he knows himself first of all. You might as an analogy say that he generates an idea of Himself.

Now if I have an idea of myself, it is not perfect, it doesn’t contain everything, and is probably better looking and slimmer than the reality.

But God’s idea of Himself is perfect. There is nothing in God’s idea of himself that is not in the original, including Personhood. God’s idea of himself is so perfect that it is another Person, the Son–the Word–as related in the beginning of St. John’s Gospel.

We might say that the Son is generated from the Father from all eternity as the Father speaks his Word.

What does God love? First of all, the Father and the son love each other. Father and Son reach out to each other in an act of love which again, is so perfect, that it is itself another Person. (In an act of human conjugal love, the love is perfected by resulting in another person. Nine months later we can give it a name. In the case of the Trinity, this generation through love is instantaneous and eternal.)

So that’s the basics of the Frank Sheed explanation. It doesn’t exhaust the Trinity by any means, since we have no experience of more than one Person totally possessing a single nature. We can’t fully understand the Trinity, even in heaven, but we can go deeper into the mystery.

JimG
 
40.png
Chesster:
A divine person is a real relation as subsistent in the divine nature.
This is the Western definition, not the Eastern. In Eastern theology, the Divine Persons are not simply relations. Joe
 
40.png
jco2004:
This is the Western definition, not the Eastern. In Eastern theology, the Divine Persons are not simply relations. Joe
Thanks, I wasn’t aware of that. What’s the Eastern definition of a Divine Person?
 
Wow, Jim! Congratulations for your answer, for now I understand the Trinity.

God bless.
 
40.png
Chesster:
Thanks, I wasn’t aware of that. What’s the Eastern definition of a Divine Person?
Good question; I’ll do my best with it, given that I’m by no means an expert on Eastern theology. First, I doubt there is a hard-and-fast definition of a Divine Person in Eastern theology; Eastern theology puts much less stock in precise definitions than the western church, believing, rightly IMO, that at a certain level of precision such definitions become inherently misleading. The general approach, I believe, is to start from the datum of revelation that God is both One and Three. The Oneness is expressed in the term ousia, usually translated “substance” or “essence”, and the Threeness in the term hypostases, “persons”. There is real distinction between the terms, with ousia being somewhat analogous to the “what” of something, and hypostases with the “who”. Beyond that, I don’t know if things get much more defined, but Eastern theology is clear that the Divine Persons cannot be reduced to their respective relations. This is the most basic difference underlying the filioque controversy. If you want to delve into this, I would suggest Lossky, The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church. Joe
 
40.png
Augustine:
Wow, Jim! Congratulations for your answer, for now I understand the Trinity.
God bless.
Thanks, but as with all attempts at understanding God’s internal workings, I’m sure that if and when we reach the beatific vision we’ll find that the words were totally inadequate. (Of course, the eastern churches keep trying to tell us that, but we have to try to put our understandings into words.)

JimG
 
40.png
Augustine:
What exactly does “person” mean when explaining the Triune God as one God and three persons?

TIA
Not sure but when Saint Patrick was trying to explain the Trinity to the druids here in Ireland, he bent down and picked up a little 3 leafed Shamrock, and that’s as far as i’ll go with my understanding of Trinity.
😃
 
40.png
Chesster:
Also, Jesus is a divine person (not a human person) with two natures; divine & human.
I disagree, Jesus was human and divine… fully human and fully divine. What is a nature?
** To say that he wasn’t human is like saying that he didn’t go through all that pain, for us!**
 
SarahSmile said:
I disagree, Jesus was human and divine… fully human and fully divine. What is a nature?
** To say that he wasn’t human is like saying that he didn’t go through all that pain, for us!**

“Jesus is a human person.” True or false?

Answer.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top