Maybe I shouldn't say anything. Whenever there's a discussion on the Trinity, I feel I should be on my knees (or on my face).
Only thing I can kinda sorta make out, is that St. Maximilian is struggling to make a distinction between the way the Second Person (Word) and the Third Person (Spirit) flow from the Father. The Word is begotten of the Father. Period. The Spirit, "Who proceeds from the Father and the Son" proceeds from them both: therefore he calls it "Conception" (to distinguish it from "being Begotten"?)
There I leave the discussion, because it's inevitable I would fall into some error of human analogy. Enough. I'm so out of my depth.
Oops. Meant to ping you to #13.
I agree. I kind of see the point, in a vaguely comprehended way, but I sure don’t GET it :-).
This is how it was taught to me:
God is love.
Love’s own way is to completely pour Himself out to total expense, and in so doing Love begets His own Image who in turn is also completely and totally Love.
As Love poured Himself out into His Son, His Son who is Love pours Himself out entirely until He is completely spent, and act of love that is entirely directed to the Father who is the Origin of Love.
This action/word in Hebrew ‘dabar’ or ‘davar’ of Love pouring Himself out and then the Perfect Image pouring Himself back out toward Love the Father spirates the ‘divine conception’ of the Holy Spirit who likewise is completely Love.
All of this takes place in the eternal Now of God’s time and is a spontaneous act of love by Love Himself that then continues calling into existence all that is and all that ever shall be.