Persons of trinity

[porthos11]

SO each person has two parts: essence and distinction, because essence is not their distinction. But god does not have two parts. So how each person is God?

Here is the problematic premise of this entire thread, which needs to be addressed before any meaningful discussion can even take place.

Essence and distinction are NOT “parts” of a person. Heck, this statement does not even make any sense. Every person (e.g. human being), HAS an essence (his human-ness, or his “javid-ness” and distinction (“javid” is not “porthos”). But javid is not “more human, less javid”. He is fully human, fully javid.

Drop this argument, and this Trinitarian objection falls apart.

 

[porthos11]

There is only one essence in God. The three Persons of God (the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit) all share that same essence. The essence of God is like a type of ‘spiritual energy’ that makes up each of their beings, and holds them all together in the Trinity. It is exclusive to God, and cannot be divided.

There is no perfect way to describe God in human terms. But, some theologians have often used the egg to visually show the basic understanding of the Holy Trinity; God in three Persons. The egg, itself, can be used to represent the Holy Trinity of God, composed of and held together by His spiritual ‘essence’. The egg has 3 parts; the yolk, the albumen (egg-white), and the shell. They are all separate and distinct parts of the egg, but they are all contained within the essence, which makes up the egg, itself. They are indivisible, because without all 3 components being combined, they would no longer be an egg (Trinity). This is basically a very simplified representation of the Holy Trinity of God. It’s not perfect, but it helps us to better understand the concept, visually, with our very limited intellect. I hope that helps you to better understand it, as well.

This analogy as always falls short because it violates some part of the Athanasian Creed, specifically, the article that affirms that we do not divide the essence. While the Creed tells us that “the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God”, both science and reason tell us that “the shell is not the egg, the yolk is not the egg, and the white is not the egg, but only parts thereof, that when put together they form the egg.”

So again, this is the so-called “partialist” heresy, much like the “shamrock” analogy.

 

[jochoa]

I’m not exactly sure where you’re getting some of your information, but a lot of things you say are very confusing and do not sound anything like Catholic teaching on the Trinity. If you’re promoting these ideas from conjecture or your own opinions, you should make that clear, so people don’t get the wrong impression. Or, if you could please provide links to where you’re getting these ideas, that would also be helpful.

Thanks.

My understandings come from the Mass, the Church Fathers, and logic. For more detailed explanation, please share a few of the statements or phrases you perceive as either confusing or non-Catholic. Now if it is all confusing or seemingly non-Catholic, I will gladly do my best to provide links for it all, however, I would prefer to discuss a few segments at a time.

Thank you very much for taking the time to help me clarify my understandings!

 

[jochoa]

I can almost guarantee you: use an analogy for the Trinity, and you will fall into heresy (usually unwittingly of course).

Would you please consider one of my understandings of the Trinity, and let me know if you perceive any heresy?

The Eucharist is God (The Body, Blood, Soul, & Divinity of Jesus Christ).
The High Priest is God made Man (Jesus Christ in human flesh).
Holy Communion is Man made God (Man becoming Jesus Christ).

Three distinct persons that are each fully God.

Thanks for your time and consideration! I look forward to hearing your thoughts!

 

[porthos11]

Would you please consider one of my understandings of the Trinity, and let me know if you perceive any heresy?

The Eucharist is God (The Body, Blood, Soul, & Divinity of Jesus Christ).
The High Priest is God made Man (Jesus Christ in human flesh).
Holy Communion is Man made God (Man becoming Jesus Christ).

Three distinct persons that are each fully God.

Thanks for your time and consideration! I look forward to hearing your thoughts!

Each of these statements individually are orthodox, but are not analogous to the Trinity. These deal with another core mystery, the Incarnation (to which the Eucharist is a related mystery). So for me, despite these being correct, cannot be used to explain the Trinity.

 

[porthos11]

My understandings come from the Mass, the Church Fathers, and logic. For more detailed explanation, please share a few of the statements or phrases you perceive as either confusing or non-Catholic. Now if it is all confusing or seemingly non-Catholic, I will gladly do my best to provide links for it all, however, I would prefer to discuss a few segments at a time.

Thank you very much for taking the time to help me clarify my understandings!

Two of the three statements have troublesome components:

1. The Son, the person who is almighty, yet is assumed not to be almighty, primarily because He generates/begets/is born/is cloned from the Father.

The Son is begotten of the Father (not cloned, not generates or begets; it is the Father who generates/begets. He is not cloned. He does not, on account of being begotten, lose is being Almighty. The Son is always Almighty.

1. The Holy Spirit, the person who is almighty, by completely sacrificing all-might and becoming almighty, primarily because He proceeds from the Father and the Son.

Absolutely not. The Spirit sacrifices nothing. The Spirit is always Almighty, by virtue of his being God. There is never a moment when he is not Almighty.

The Athanasian Creed is clear: “The Father Almighty, the Son Almighty, the Holy Spirit Almighty. Yet, they are not three Almighties but one Almighty.”

 

[JonathonofOhio]

Hi. We believe in three persons in one God and each person is God.

They have some thing in common: essence

On the other hand, they have real distinction.

SO each person has two parts: essence and distinction, because essence is not their distinction. But god does not have two parts. So how each person is God?

No, not real distinctions…they are not contrasting. They are one essence having different aspects…because of our limited perception, they have real aspects, so that we may get to know and understand our God.

 

[Telstar]

This analogy as always falls short because it violates some part of the Athanasian Creed, specifically, the article that affirms that we do not divide the essence. While the Creed tells us that “the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God”, both science and reason tell us that “the shell is not the egg, the yolk is not the egg, and the white is not the egg, but only parts thereof, that when put together they form the egg.”

So again, this is the so-called “partialist” heresy, much like the “shamrock” analogy.

I certainly did not intend to promote the idea that there are 3 Gods, or anything like that. I was just looking at the egg as representing the essence of the Godhead, with the parts of the egg representing the 3 Persons of God. That’s why I specified that they were ‘inseparable’. It was only meant to be a ‘visual aid’. If that analogy is considered to be heretical, then I apologize and would hope that the Mod could edit it out of my post. I would never knowingly promote any kind of heresy. That’s why I stressed the fact that there is no really good way to describe the Trinity, but the egg was a very simplified way to look at it. I’m not a theologian. I was just trying to help.

Mea culpa.

 

[Telstar]

Yes, precisely, the power of each person, who is God, never depletes.

In consideration of God is almighty: Therefore, God is the person who is almighty.

1. The Father, the person who is almighty.
2. The Son, the person who is almighty, yet is assumed not to be almighty, primarily because He generates/begets/is born/is cloned from the Father.
3. The Holy Spirit, the person who is almighty, by completely sacrificing all-might and becoming almighty, primarily because He proceeds from the Father and the Son.

The essence is in red, and the distinction is in blue.

I did find another method of demonstrating this concept, I would like to revisit your initial question: God became man, and shared His Godly being with us through the Last Supper.
Therefore, the Eucharist is the person who is God, the High Priest is the person who is God by becoming man, and those who fully consume the Eucharist become the person who is God by Holy Communion.

Thank you very much for the extended discussion! I am really enjoying pondering these questions!

Two of the three statements have troublesome components:

The Son is begotten of the Father (not cloned, not generates or begets; it is the Father who generates/begets. He is not cloned. He does not, on account of being begotten, lose is being Almighty. The Son is always Almighty.

Absolutely not. The Spirit sacrifices nothing. The Spirit is always Almighty, by virtue of his being God. There is never a moment when he is not Almighty.

The Athanasian Creed is clear: “The Father Almighty, the Son Almighty, the Holy Spirit Almighty. Yet, they are not three Almighties but one Almighty.”

This is one example of what I was referring to in some of jochoa’s posts, as well. Thank you, very much for your perspective, porthos.

I’m beginning to think there is something fishy afoot, here.

 

[porthos11]

I certainly did not intend to promote the idea that there are 3 Gods, or anything like that. I was just looking at the egg as representing the essence of the Godhead, with the parts of the egg representing the 3 Persons of God. That’s why I specified that they were ‘inseparable’. It was only meant to be a ‘visual aid’. If that analogy is considered to be heretical, then I apologize and would hope that the Mod could edit it out of my post. I would never knowingly promote any kind of heresy. That’s why I stressed the fact that there is no really good way to describe the Trinity, but the egg was a very simplified way to look at it. I’m not a theologian. I was just trying to help.

Mea culpa.

Don’t get me wrong; I’m not accusing anyone of heresy and there is no need to apologize. It just illustrates what our FSSP priests also commented on: that the Trinity is so difficult that it’s easy to fall into (material) heresy. Analogies, which are by nature imperfect, are prone to do what where the Trinity is concerned.

 

[jochoa]

Each of these statements individually are orthodox, but are not analogous to the Trinity. These deal with another core mystery, the Incarnation (to which the Eucharist is a related mystery). So for me, despite these being correct, cannot be used to explain the Trinity.

Thanks for considering them, and sharing that you find the statements to be orthodox! I was definitely careful not to use the word analogous because I find them to be more than analogous to the Trinity. I also understand that they are relatively mysterious just as the Incarnation and Eucharist, however, I wonder what you perceive is mysterious about the logic within the context of the Way of the Mass. In the Mass, the Blessed Sacrament is Jesus, the High Priest declaring “This is my Body and Blood” is Jesus, and Holy Communion makes men Jesus, all while Jesus is known to be God.

Two of the three statements have troublesome components:
The Son is begotten of the Father (not cloned, not generates or begets; it is the Father who generates/begets. He is not cloned. He does not, on account of being begotten, lose is being Almighty. The Son is always Almighty.

I am sorry my wording was confusing. perhaps I should have stated: The Son, the person who is always almighty, by being begotten/generated/born with the same exact image from the Father.

Absolutely not. The Spirit sacrifices nothing. The Spirit is always Almighty, by virtue of his being God. There is never a moment when he is not Almighty.

Although I can easily agree with your grace, I would encourage you to recognize that our Church knows that God sacrifices while remaining Almighty. Here are a couple teachings to consider:
John 3:16 “God so loved the world, he gave his only-begotten Son.”
Baltimore Catechism: What is the Mass? “The sacrifice…in which Christ…offers Himself to God…”

This is one example of what I was referring to in some of jochoa’s posts, as well. Thank you, very much for your perspective, porthos.

Once again, I am sorry for the wording I used. I can see that “The Son begets from the Father” sounds more confusing than “the Son is begotten from the Father.”

Thanks for further discussion! You are helping me grow in understanding!

 

[porthos11]

Thanks for considering them, and sharing that you find the statements to be orthodox! I was definitely careful not to use the word analogous because I find them to be more than analogous to the Trinity. I also understand that they are relatively mysterious just as the Incarnation and Eucharist, however, I wonder what you perceive is mysterious about the logic within the context of the Way of the Mass. In the Mass, the Blessed Sacrament is Jesus, the High Priest declaring “This is my Body and Blood” is Jesus, and Holy Communion makes men Jesus, all while Jesus is known to be God.

I am sorry my wording was confusing. perhaps I should have stated: The Son, the person who is always almighty, by being begotten/generated/born with the same exact image from the Father.

Although I can easily agree with your grace, I would encourage you to recognize that our Church knows that God sacrifices while remaining Almighty. Here are a couple teachings to consider:
John 3:16 “God so loved the world, he gave his only-begotten Son.”
Baltimore Catechism: What is the Mass? “The sacrifice…in which Christ…offers Himself to God…”

Once again, I am sorry for the wording I used. I can see that “The Son begets from the Father” sounds more confusing than “the Son is begotten from the Father.”

Thanks for further discussion! You are helping me grow in understanding!

The Holy Spirit does not sacrifice. The role of sacrifice belongs to the Son, and specifically, the Son Incarnate. The statement where you say the Holy Spirit sacrificed his being Almighty because he proceeds has absolutely no basis in Christian teaching. There was never a time when the Holy Spirit was not Almighty.

As for the “the Son begets” vs. “the Son is begotten”, it’s not just a matter of sounding confusing. The former is absolutely wrong, the second is orthodox. Only the Father begets, the Son is the begotten.

 

[jochoa]

The Holy Spirit does not sacrifice. The role of sacrifice belongs to the Son, and specifically, the Son Incarnate. The statement where you say the Holy Spirit sacrificed his being Almighty because he proceeds has absolutely no basis in Christian teaching. There was never a time when the Holy Spirit was not Almighty.

Although I can agree with your grace, in that there was never a time when the Holy Spirit was not Almighty, I find more detailed explanation of the logic within Catholicism indicates the Holy Spirit makes sacrifices. Here are a couple of logical conclusion to consider, Catholicism knows…
-the Holy Spirit continues the course of action as set by (proceeds from) the Father and the Son,
-the Son and the Holy Spirit are distinct yet inseparable,
-the Mass is the sacrifice…
Therefore, if the Son sacrifices, then the Holy Spirit distinctly makes the same sacrifice.
Also, regarding the Mass is the sacrifice: who is making the sacrifice? The Father…the Son…the Holy Spirit…or unholy spirits? I cannot find a particular teaching to this question, but currently I find the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit make the Sacrifice of Jesus. Do you know of a particular Catholic teaching?

And here is one other related belief, which I believe is Catholic, but I do not have any specific teaching to back it up:
I believe we are acting in oneness with the Holy Spirit within us, rather than an unholy spirit, when making sacrifices for the good of our community for God. Would you agree?

As for the “the Son begets” vs. “the Son is begotten”, it’s not just a matter of sounding confusing. The former is absolutely wrong, the second is orthodox. Only the Father begets, the Son is the begotten.

Once again, thank you very much for the good redirection! I really enjoy refining my understandings and from now on, I will only say “is begotten” and not “begets from.”

Thank you for your time, consideration, and sharing your wisdom! I look forward to learning more from you!

 

[javid]

No, not real distinctions…they are not contrasting. They are one essence having different aspects…because of our limited perception, they have real aspects, so that we may get to know and understand our God.

Dear sir,

According to the CCC:254, their distinction us real.

 

[javid]

Hi Javid,

The distinction is The Father is unbegotten, ungenerated, uncaused, unoriginated, he is the source of the whole divinity. Beyond understanding except through his Son.

Hi

Dear Daniel are being unbegotten, ungenerated, uncaused, unoriginated, existing things? If no, so distinction is not real, And if yes, other persons must be so, because each person is God and self-exist.

 

[javid]

There is only one essence in God. The three Persons of God (the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit) all share that same essence. The essence of God is like a type of ‘spiritual energy’ that makes up each of their beings, and holds them all together in the Trinity. It is exclusive to God, and cannot be divided.

There is no perfect way to describe God in human terms. But, some theologians have often used the egg to visually show the basic understanding of the Holy Trinity; God in three Persons. The egg, itself, can be used to represent the Holy Trinity of God, composed of and held together by His spiritual ‘essence’. The egg has 3 parts; the yolk, the albumen (egg-white), and the shell. They are all separate and distinct parts of the egg, but they are all contained within the essence, which makes up the egg, itself. They are indivisible, because without all 3 components being combined, they would no longer be an egg (Trinity). This is basically a very simplified representation of the Holy Trinity of God. It’s not perfect, but it helps us to better understand the concept, visually,with our very limited intellect. I hope that helps you to better understand it, as well.

Hi
It is not teinity.

Persons are not parts of god.

According to your model:

God= father+son+holy spirit

Such god is not self-exist because he needs his parts to exist.

 

[porthos11]

Hi
It is not teinity.

Persons are not parts of god.

According to your model:

God= father+son+holy spirit

Such god is not self-exist because he needs his parts to exist.

We already pointed that out. So what’s your point?

And please be respectful and capitalize God when referring to the Almighty.

 

[porthos11]

Although I can agree with your grace, in that there was never a time when the Holy Spirit was not Almighty, I find more detailed explanation of the logic within Catholicism indicates the Holy Spirit makes sacrifices. Here are a couple of logical conclusion to consider, Catholicism knows…
-the Holy Spirit continues the course of action as set by (proceeds from) the Father and the Son,
-the Son and the Holy Spirit are distinct yet inseparable,
-the Mass is the sacrifice…
Therefore, if the Son sacrifices, then the Holy Spirit distinctly makes the same sacrifice.
Also, regarding the Mass is the sacrifice: who is making the sacrifice? The Father…the Son…the Holy Spirit…or unholy spirits? I cannot find a particular teaching to this question, but currently I find the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit make the Sacrifice of Jesus. Do you know of a particular Catholic teaching?

Yes, and it is a very basic formula on prayer. We worship the Father, through the Son, in the Holy Spirit.

At the Mass, it is the Son who is offering the Sacrifice to the Father, and the Holy Spirit is the one who makes the Sacrifice possible by transforming the Eucharistic elements and binding the Church in one (ref. CCC 1106, 1360, 1367).

So no: the Father does not sacrifice. He is offered the Sacrifice. It is the Son who offers the Sacrifice, and the victim is himself. The Holy Spirit effects the change the elements into the Body and Blood of Christ. Of course being God, the three Persons can be said to be working all these in harmony, but the “tasks” are “assigned” so to speak to each of the Persons (and I say this very cautiously as I feel this closely skirts the line with heresy).

But we definitely believe that there is a distinction of Persons in that one Person did what the others are not deemed to do. For example, we believe that only the Son became Man. The Father and the Holy Spirit did not. It is the Spirit who descended on the Apostles, not the Son.

 

[jochoa]

So no: the Father does not sacrifice. He is offered the Sacrifice. It is the Son who offers the Sacrifice, and the victim is himself. The Holy Spirit effects the change the elements into the Body and Blood of Christ.

Ok. I still perceive the parallel between this understanding of the Holy Trinity and my understanding. I am sharing that: The Father, the Almighty, is the Almighty. The Son, the Almighty, serves the Almighty with all his “might.” The Holy Spirit, the Almighty, follows the Servant of the Almighty with all his “might.”

But we definitely believe that there is a distinction of Persons in that one Person did what the others are not deemed to do. For example, we believe that only the Son became Man. The Father and the Holy Spirit did not. It is the Spirit who descended on the Apostles, not the Son.

Thank you very much for all your time, consideration, patience, and sharing your knowledge with me. I appreciate you helping me grow in our Faith. I believe we are facing the challenge of discussing the sequence of eternal events.

 

[javid]

Dear all

Hi

Please answer the original Question.

But about formulation of trinity, it is not so. God knows and loves himself; so we have a pedson who loves and knows the God And a person who loved And a person who known. Each person is a God, but they are all one God. So persons are not parts, forms or acts pf God.

Now, please answer the Original Question in first post.