Link to post to which this response is offered.
Laudatur Iesus Christus.
Dear MH84:
Thanks for this discussion. It is interesting and opens provocative challenges, at least to one’s mode of expression.
You wrote: “But if someone is a director of a company, the other directors are not the directors of that director.” I don’t think this is a fair comment. If the company is run by the board, and the directors are employees, each director is directed by the action of the board. If one considers the human situation in the metaphor, a dissenting board member would be bound by the majority vote of the board and not free to act contrary to its decision, even if he voted against the measure. In this sense, the director must submit to the board, even though he is a member.
“Furthermore, where does the Holy Spirit fit into this?” In the metaphor, the Holy Spirit is one of three co-equal members of the “board.”
“Is the Holy Spirit the God of Jesus?” Yes the Holy Spirit is the God of Jesus, in the sense that the Holy Spirit is God and therefore in an absolute sense anyone who regards the Holy Spirit must regard Him as God.
“This sounds good but it doesnt mean that the Son is equal to God. Can we say that the Son is the God of the Father? I doubt it. No one would say this.” I am a little taken aback, since in fact I did say, “The Son is the Father’s God,” in my previous post. The Son is the Father’s God in the sense that the Son is the Person for whom the Father does everything and to whom He gives Himself and everything He has. Of course, the Son, the Father, and the Holy Spirit are uncreated; so, when one says the Son is the Father’s God he does not mean the Son is the Father’s creator. However, the Son is the one whom the Father adores and by Whom He judges. The Son is the Father’s “ultimate value.”
This relationship of mutual submission between the Father and the Son is the model St. Paul recommends for all Christians and for marriage. “Being subject one to another, in the fear of Christ.” (Ephesians 5:21.) It is also suggested in: “love one another with brotherly affection; outdo one another in showing honor.” (Romans 12:10.)
‘Ive heard this a few times. Its true, but it is used when someone doesnt know how to explain something.” I did not mean to duck the question. It is impossible for someone living in the flesh to imagine what it would mean to give oneself without holding anything back, so that one’s entire being is the act of giving. We can project our imaginations in this direction, but we cannot imagine it perfectly. We can describe the Trinity’s love in the abstract, but it is beyond our concrete imagination, because as physical creatures, we always hold something back. It is not that this reality cannot be explained, but only that the explanation is a sort of pointing rather than a complete comprehension. (But this is true of many basic concepts.)
“How can God have a God? Jesus is a divine Person, not a human Person (although he took on a human nature).” Jesus is wholly human. It is therefore incorrect to say that He is not a “human Person.”
“After Jesus ascended into His glory, Sts. Peter and Paul still say God is the God of Jesus. Paul even says that Jesus will be eternally subject to God in 1 Corinthians 15:27-28.” If these facts are considered through the metaphor of the “board of three,” sense can be made of them. God can have a God because each Person of the Trinity submits to and serves the others; this is part of love. Jesus will be subject to God, that God, the Most Holy Trinity, may be all in all – this includes Jesus as God and as one of the Trinity.
“How can Paul say this, but still think that Jesus was his Creator?” To over-simplify, one might say that Jesus was one of three “votes” on the board who created Paul. (There are never any “dissenting votes” since the Three share a single will and are in complete communion with one another. They are one God.) Therefore, Jesus’ responsibility for creation is inseparable from that of the other Persons. When three vote unanimously, which vote makes the difference? Each is responsible and properly given credited for the action of the whole. (See, CCC 257ff.)
Understanding God as the Trinity of mutually loving and self-effacing Persons is crucial to understanding the Faith. If one thinks of “god” as a single person, one is liable to mistake “god” for a self-serving tyrant, who made creation for his own glory and self-satisfaction. Anyone who tried to imitate such a “god” would be self-seeking and condescending.
In fact, God is the Holy Trinity. Love as God lives it is self-giving, the very opposite of self-serving. This is true of God both “before” creation and in time. To imitate the Father is to imitate Christ, to give oneself entirely to the love of God (the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit), and to turn all creation to this purpose. “[Jesus] and the Father are one.” (See John 10:30.)
I hope these comments are of some help.
Pax Christi nobiscum.
John Hiner
