Posted on 05/24/2016 6:49:46 AM PDT by Salvation
Many of you know that I write the Question and Answer column for Our Sunday Visitor. Given the celebration of Trinity Sunday this past Sunday, I thought I might reproduce here on the blog a question/answer regarding the Trinity. It is a fairly common question; perhaps you have it, too. Remember that my answers in the column are required to be brief.
We read in a recent Sunday Gospel (May 1, 2016) that Jesus says that the Father is greater than He (Jn 14:28). Since we are all taught that each Divine Person of the Blessed Trinity fully possesses the nature of God, equally to be adored and glorified, what did Jesus mean by such a statement?” – Dick Smith, Carrolton, TX.
Theologically, Jesus means that the Father is the eternal source in the Trinity. All three persons of the Trinity are co-eternal, co-equal, and equally divine. But the Father is the Principium Deitatis (the Source in the Deity).
Hence, Jesus proceeds from the Father from all eternity. He is eternally begotten of the Father. In effect, Jesus is saying, “I delight that the Father is the eternal principle or source of my being, even though I have no origin in time.”
Devotionally, Jesus is saying that He always does what pleases His Father. Jesus loves His Father; He’s crazy about Him. He is always talking about Him and pointing to Him. By calling the Father greater, He says (in effect), “I look to my Father for everything. I do what I see Him doing (Jn 5:19) and what I know pleases Him (Jn 5:30). His will and mine are one. What I will to do proceeds from Him. I do what I know accords with His will.”
So although the members of the Trinity are all equal in dignity, there are processions in the Trinity, such that the Father is the source, the Son eternally proceeds from Him (Jn 8:42), and the Holy Spirit eternally proceeds from the Father and the Son as from one principal (Jn 15:26).
St Thomas speaks poetically of the Trinity as follows:
Genitori, Genitoque … Procedenti ab utroque … compar sit laudautio
(To the One Who Begets, and to the Begotton One, and to the One who proceeds from them both, be equal praise.)
The Athanasian Creed says the following regarding these processions:
The Father is made by none, neither created nor begotten.
The Son is of the Father alone, neither made nor created, but begotten.
The Holy Spirit is of the Father and of the Son, not made, nor created, nor begotten, but he proceeds from them.
So although equal, processions do have an order. The Father is “greater” (as source), but is equal in dignity to Son and Holy Spirit.
Please consider subscribing to Our Sunday Visitor. I also write for the National Catholic Register. These are two great publications that deserve your support.
And while I am pointing out my “extra-blogical” activities, I also ask you to consider coming to the Holy Land in March of 2017 with me and Patrick Coffin of Catholic Answers.
No...you posted and linked the First Council of Constantinople (381) creed which you claim is the Nicene Creed.
The First Council of Nicea (325) creed was considerably modified in in 381 at the First Council of Constantinople.
As noted before....I do not believe in creeds as a general rule. And if it's been modified by the RCC I really take a hard look at it as the RCC has modified a lot of basic theology in error.
What is interesting though in both of these creeds is the absence of any reference to Mary regarding her "assumption", "immaculate conception", "perpetual virginity"...all dogmas of the RCC.
The Constantinople Creed of 381 notes the need of baptism for the remission of sins.
Baptism does not remove sins. Faith in Christ removes sins.
This still leaves us with verga's #160 post which you fail to address as correct or incorrect. I also notice verga is not retracting that post either. Very telling. s
I'm not sure about eternity; But I am sure about Time.
It's Nature's way of making sure that everything does not happen at once.
The saying is “I believe in God; God does not exist.” The point is that God created “existence”. He is the “Being which created being.
Your posts don't reflect any understanding of it.
I can clearly state God has always existed without beginning and will always exist without end unlike some catholics on this thread who claim God came into existence.
Sorry if that's not clear enough for you.
Perhaps you and your fellow catholics should discuss verga's post #160 and help him understand God did not come into existence.
What you all are avoiding, as Western Christians, is the concept of the Monarchy of the Father. Here is what Met. John Ziziouls, one of the greatest living Orthodox theologians and a clwrittenose friend of +BXVI has written:
Among the Greek Fathers the unity of God, the one God, and the ontological “principle” or “cause” of the being and life of God does not consist in the one substance of God, but in the hypostasis, that is, the person of the Father. The one God is not the one substance but the Father, who is the “cause” both of the generation of the Son and of the procession of the Spirit. Consequently, the ontological “principle” of God is traced back, once again, to the person. Thus when we say that God “is,” we do not bind the personal freedom of God—the being of God is not an ontological “necessity” or a simple “reality” for God—but we ascribe the being of God to His personal freedom. In a more analytical way this means that God, as Father and not as substance, perpetually confirms through “being” His free will to exist. And it is precisely His trinitarian existence that constitutes this confirmation: the Father out of love—that is, freely—begets the Son and brings forth the Spirit. If God exists, He exists because the Father exists, that is, He who out of love freely begets the Son and brings forth the Spirit. Thus God as person—as the hypostasis of the Father—makes the one divine substance to be that which it is: the one God. This point is absolutely crucial. For it is precisely with this point that the new philosophical position of the Cappadocian Fathers, and of St Basil in particular, is directly connected. … The being of God is identifed with the person (Being as Communion [BC], pp. 40-41)
I looked them up. I believe the Bible over any creeds. Why believe what man says over the Bible? If the first one were true, why mess with it? Trust what God’s Word says.
Words, words, words . . . you can recite that formulaically but apparently have no awareness of the implications.
The Nicene Creed was amended at the First Council of Constantinople. Although one could use Ncene-Constantinoplean Creed to refer to it, it is commonly called the Nicene Creed. The salient point is that the Nicene Creed explains the historical, classical, Orthodox view of Christians to the Holy Trinity. It explains the contention, debate, or heresy on the topic of this thread, the relationship of God the Father and God the Son.
Do you affirm God the Son ?
Words, words, words . . . you can recite that formulaically but apparently have no awareness of the implications.
When Jesus equated Himself with I AM all present understood what He was saying. It's not that complicated.
Perhaps you should explain to us the implications of God's eternity.
One implication is the nature of the Mass (or Divine Liturgy) as allowing us to participate in the sacrifice of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.
Ah yes....the catholic re-sacrifice of Christ over and over again.
Another false teaching by catholicism.
I really am trying to recall that formulation you cited some time back that "God does not exist -- " and I don't remember the rest.
See? You don't have the faintest glimmer of what eternity means.
Take a look at post 323.
I read it — it doesn’t include the brief epigram (I think that’s the appropriate word) I was looking for.
See? You don't have the faintest glimmer of what eternity means.
I understand John 1:1. It's pretty easy if you read it.
You have no idea what the one time sacrifice of the Cross was about. The roman catholic resacrifice of Christ over and over again goes against the Word.
However, we are still waiting for the catholic, any catholic, to either correct or accept verga's post #160 which says:
When God came into existence there was nothing else all was void. His first thought must have been self awareness.
As noted before....you need to be talking with him. Not me.
If you understand eternity, it’s not a “resacrifice” — it’s participation in the eternal sacrifice of the Lamb slain from before the foundation of the world.
A. The Mass is the same sacrifice as that of the Cross because the offering and the priest are the same -- Christ our Blessed Lord; and the ends for which the sacrifice of the Mass is offered are the same as those of the sacrifice of the Cross.
http://www.baltimore-catechism.com/lesson24.htm
It is blasphemy writ large, so large that the duped cannot see they are willingly participating in the blasphemy. The Bible, The Word of God, says ‘once, for all, forever’, not to be continued or repeated.
It is you catholics who have so little depth of understanding Who God IS and what He HAS DONE for your deliverance.
If you believed Jesus, believe that He is God with us, then you would know in your heart by the presence of His Holy Spirit that as an eternal being He need make the sacrifice only once and it spans all of time and space inside of this Universe and outside of this Universe. The catholic Mass is a pagan rite meant to herd the lost along their way to the father of lies ... because it is a great lie to say the Mass continues the Cross of Christ.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.