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.
And not yet recanted nor has any other Catholic spoken up to condemn the heresy.
Perhaps the run of the mill Catholic does not recognize the heretical nature of the assertion. Any Hew would see it immediately ...
Make that any JEW, not any Hew ... tired old fingers.
I think they probably would. I wonder if the reason there hasn't been any rebuttal or recanting of the words is because they were copied out of some Catholic church theologian's writings (though unsourced) and they sounded good so it was used. To come back and admit now that they should have been more discerning in their selection is perhaps something their pride prevents. I guess we won't know but it's something we should remember for the next time this topic comes up.
Or it is simply the truth and your educations are severely lacking. Since it has been accepted Christian truth for 1600 years that is the more likely scenario. Have a good day I will pray that God finally does reveal His truth to all of you.
Doubling down and calling others ignorant?
I sure would hate to me MRSverga and have to LIVE with a fella who acts this way in public.
I detect SAINTHOOD in her future!
That God *came into existence* and that He had a first thought is something that the church has believed for 1600 years?
Well, if that's an indicator that my education is severely lacking then Praise God for that.
I'm glad I haven't been *educated* in the wisdom of man out of believing the fundamental and basic truths about God and His nature.
For those who wonder where that heresy was stated, it was in post 160.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/3433430/posts?page=160#160
The silence from the other Catholics on this forum when it comes to denouncing that heresy is deafening.
Perhaps they don't disagree with it after all.
If that's the case, then and this is something the Catholic church has truly taught and believed for 1600 years, then it is proof positive that the Catholic church is not the church that Christ established and it is not the one, true, church. Rather it's a cult on par with Mormonism which also teaches much the same about God.
He also claimed the council of Nicea taught this. Still waiting on the evidence.
Sitting back and watching 'religious' people fight!!
Yeah nice try Verga gave an answer, You claim he is wrong, YOU give an answer, unless you admit you are in error, much like the Greek I have seen you try to explain.
So you don’t have an answer either?
1 Cor 2:14 seems written specifically for you and verga ...
Verga has given no answer where he got is information that "God came into existence" in his post #160.
He's given no evidence to support his claim regarding Nicea saying the same.
You've yet to show any error I may or may not have made in the Greek nor has verga. He and I have the pretty much the same sources.
Playground rules. Verga knows them. Do you?
The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit.
That does not address how the Son can be eternal and at the same time the Son of the Father.
So basically another non answer.
My question to you has no bearing on where Verga got his explanation. My question to is: Chronologically children are younger than their parents. How can the Son be eternal if he is younger than the Father? Are any of you the same age as any of your parents?
Excellent Post
John 1:1 answers your question and refutes verga’s post 160.
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Yes that says that the Son is God, BUT and this is a HUGE BUT, Chronologically children are younger than their parents. How can the Son be eternal if he is younger than the Father? Are any of you the same age as any of your parents?
Where does that verse address the chronology issue?
Listen is the seminary you are involved in, is it like one of those correspondence schools, or did you find it on the back of a matchbook?
You’re thinking in earthly terms. Perhaps you should draw upon the Greek you claim you know. That would help you understand this. Actually reading all of John would be of benefit to you.
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.