PART I: Testimony of Scripture, Ancient Writers and Fathers, and Councils
is thefruit of the Gospel, the very substance of the New Testament,
if it is not that we confess three distinctpersons in one God:
Father, Son, and Holy Ghost?
—TertuUian

1. Testimony from the Old Testament and pre-Christian writers.
1-1. What is specifically new in the New Testament?
• Deut 6:4 Hear 0 Israel, the Hord our God is one Ford.
o

o

o

In the New Testament, God has renewed this mystery by revealing a new unity through the Son and Holy Ghost.
■
Religion’s goal is to place an individual in right reality, placing man in right relation with the Ultimate
Reality, so that he adores and knows what tn adore.
■ The Holy Trinity is where existence subsists on its own as Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, and the revelation
of this in the New Testament serves to orient man towards this right relation.
Commentaries of Sts Hilary, John Chrysostom, and Gregory of Nyssa observe that the Jews adored God alone, but
not the Father because they ignored the Son; hence they did not know the power of spiritual worship because they
did not know what to adore.
Aquinas observes that only in the time of Christ was the mystery of the Faith revealed (cf. Ila Ilae q.174).

1-2. Important hints of the Triune nature of God throughout the Old Testament: Spirit, Wisdom, Word.
• Spirit.
o The term spirit was used early on in the Old Testament to indicate a kind of mediation; hence Gen 1:2, The Spirit of

o

o

o

o

•

Word.
o
o

o

•

God was upon the walers.
■ This Spirit of God in Genesis is understood as an extension of the power of God, not a primordial wind, and
this is supported by Ps 103:29-30.
■ The Spirit comes from God Himself and possesses a life-giving quality (vivificans) as shown also in Ezech
37:9-10 with the animation of the desert of dry bones.
Further evidence:
■
Gen 46:38 indicates that it was the Spirit who permits Joseph to interpret dreams.
■ Num 11:17 details the choosing of the elders by Moses and the transfer of the Spirit to diem.
■ Judges 14:6 shows that the Spirit permits Samson to kill an attacking lion.
■ The penitential Ps 50 as a whole begs not for the departure of the Spirit.
■ Ezech 2:2 indicates that by the reception of the Spirit is Ezechias able to prophesy.
Messianic prophecies always note the Spirit to be firmly resting upon our Lord, as evidenced in Isaiah 11:12, 42:1,
61:1; hence a special connection is drawn between the Spirit of the Lord and the Messiah, the Spirit of Wisdom and
Understanding.
Further prophecies indicate a Messianic outpouring of the Spirit:
■ Joel 3:1-2, I willpour out My Spirit on allflesh.
■
Isaias 32:15, The Spiritfrom on high willpour out on Israel.
■ Ezech 11:19, J willput into them a new heart and Spirit.
Thus the Spirit acts, illumines, and vivifies among the just, prophets, and Messiah; however, in no place is the Spirit ever
personified, unlike the Word.
An observation of human communication shows that word and spirit go together: speaking = words + breath.
Creation is a breath/spirit and a word from God:
■ The poetic picture Ps 32:6 draws of Gen 1 is a clear indication that the creative acts of Genesis are speech
acts: By the word of the Ford the heavens were established, and all the power of them by the spirit of His mouth.
■
Is 55:10-11, As the rain and snow descendfrom heaven and do not return there unless they are water.. .so My Wordfrom
Aly mouth will not return to Me void of effect.
These show that the Word of God is an effective agent of God, an ambassador of God, and with this there is a hint of
personification.

Wisdom.
o Greek notion of wisdom is similar to that in the Old Testament, and therefore Aristotle’s works on explications of
wisdom are useful.

Wisdom is a rare and precious quality which was once practical and theoretical, a meeting point between
knowledge of the first causes and how to live (that is, the knowledge of how to derive from first causes the
way to lix e).
Old Testament evidence:
■ Job 28:12 ff indicates that God’s wisdom is displayed through His creative acts.
■ Prov 8, 9 personify wisdom as a woman who calls to people to hear the truth; Prov 8:26 tells of the banquet
of instruction in Wisdom’s house, as contrasted to the folly of the hoar.
■ Prov 8:22 represents Wisdom not only as something personal, an accomplice of God, but as transcendent
and above all things.
■ Wis 7: 22, 25-26 portrays Wisdom as a spiritual, almighty, and immaculate entity; Heb 1:2 is a correlation to
this, The Son is the brightness of I lis glory and express image of His substance.

■

o

1-3. The figure of the Messiah throughout the Old Testament
• The Jewish understanding was that God possesses a most special paternal relationship with the Messiah, although the mode of

•

•

•

this relationship is never clearly drawn out.
o In the Old Testament, God is declared as Father only in a general sense (unlike our Lord’s testimonies).
■
Is 63:16, .. .father ofpeople, father ofjust.
■ Ps 26:10, Tike afather... the Tord haspity.
■ Ps 102:13-14, The Hordpities the righteous as afather does.
■ Wis 2:16, ... andglories that he has God as hisfather.
o Ps 2 is actually a Messianic address in pre-Christian Judaism which draws references to the Father of the Messiah;
originally it may have been held to be a king’s coronation anthem, but when monarchy failed, the psalm was applied
to the Messiah.
Testimony of the Messiah’s supernatural nature.
o Is 9:5, ... called mighty God, wonderful Counselor...
o Micas 5:1, .. .originyea to age of eternity...
o Dan 7:13-14, ... on the clouds of Heaven, one like the Son ofman... an eternalpower...
o Ps 109, Dixit Dominus Domino meo...
The non-canonical books of late inter-testamental Judaism bear further testimony, to the degree they have merit.
o Enoch 46:1-5, The Son ofman will break bonds of mighty. ..overturn kings.. for not exaltingHim.
o ibid., 48:2 ff., ... before the heavens came to be, His name was named.
All the texts clearly show that the Messiah was named and known before all time, higher than the angels, and above all.

1-4. The writings of Philo of Alexandria (ca. 20 BC)
• Philo of Alexandria was a member of a Jewish community that had cultural contact with the Hellenists; the sect had much
interest in Greek philosophy, literature, and culture to the point of wanting to abandon Jewish tradition.
• Philo wanted to maintain Jewish heritage; he is famous for his philosophical conception of the Logos that bears some
resemblance to the prologue of St.John and some of the Pauline epistles.
o According to Philo, God, as presented in the Old Testament, is unique, the Being of beings, incomprehensible to the
created intellect, save for the understanding that He exists; God is apoios (quality-less) and cannot be characterized as
having this rather than that, and is thus indescribable and ineffable (we can see the Platonism here).
o God therefore has an effect upon the world through intermediaries:

GOD

o

ROYAL POWER

PUNITIVE POWER

CREATHT. POWER

BENEFICIENT POWER

LOGOS

The Logos has a privilege between Creator and creature, falling in between being agenetos (without beginning) and
genetos (with beginning); thus he gives assurance to God on behalf of creatures and brings hope to the creatures on
behalf of God’s mercy (we can see where this is problematic...).
■
From The Took on the Cherubim. Creation requires a Creator, cause, matter and an instrument through which
it is made, which is the Logos; the Logos is the eldest son of God, and the world the younger son
(analogically).
■
From The Book on the Flight ojfacob: Allegorical commentary on the vestments of the high priest depict the
high priest to be the Logos and the vestments to be the universe; the high priest, possessing God as Father
and wisdom as mother prevents all from dissolving and breaking up.

From The Book on the Implantation ofNoah: No material element is strong enough to bear the world; the Logos
is the support, binding strongly all the parts, the unbreakable bond of the universe.
■
From The Book ofDreams’. Logos may be called God improperly, but not properly.
Philo comprises an elaborate philosophical schema on Genesis.
■
God creates by speaking, so thus the Logos is the instrument as in a relationship between speech and
speaker; Logos however is not a person as an assistant of creation.
■
Universe possesses intelligibilities, forms, and laws that prevent chaos because of God’s word; the Logos
therefore guarantees the cohesion of things.
Deviations between Philo and mealed Scripture (especial!)· the Prologue of St. John).
■ There is neither mention of the Incarnation in any degree nor hint of the Logos assuming flesh.
■ There is no proper designation of the Logos as God.

■

o

o

2. The Trinity in the Synoptic Gospels
2-1. Regarding the divine Persons individually.
•
The Father.
o Christ places a distinctive personal emphasis on the title Father throughout His preaching.
■
God possesses a fatherly character over everybody, but God is most especially Father in relation to our Lord

o

Himself.
• Lk 2:49, Didyou not know that I must be about My Father’s business?
• Mt 12:50, . ..whosoever does the will ofMy Father is My brother...
• Lk 24:49, .. .promise ofMy Father...
• Mt 20:23, .. .places reserved by My Father...
• Mt 25:34, ... come ye blessed ofMy Father...
Our Lord stresses His personal relationship with the Father, but throughout the Synoptic Gospels, He is recorded as
referring to Himself more as Son of man than Son of God.
■
Christ used the vision in Dan 7:13, One like the Son ofman came, to teach His disciples who He is and what He
conceives Messiahship to be.
• Mt 26:64, ...Son of man sitting at the right hand of the Father.
• Lk 24:7/Mt 20:18, . ..Son ofman. ..to be crucified.
■ Son of man invokes a glorious heavenly figure as described in Dan 7:13, and there is obviously more to the
person of the Messiah than just being Son of man.
• Mt 9:6, .. .Son of man has power on earth toforgive sins; the miracle worked in this passage is used to
indicate Christ’s claim on divine power: the Son of man possesses this divine power.

The Son.
o Christ is called the Son of God however by demons and eventually the Apostles.
■ Mt 3:6, Ifyou are the Son of God... (our Lord’s temptation)
■ Mk 1:24, We know who You are, 0 Holy One of God.
■ Mk 5:7, .. Jesus, the Son of the Most High God.
■ Mt 16:13-18, Who do men say the Son of man is?. ..You are Christ, the Son of the living God.
o Christ is called Son of David in Mk 12:35-37, but He hints at His divinity with His response referencing Ps 109, If
David cads him Hord, how is He His Son?
■ Son of God is not a conventual doctrine on the coming of the Messiah, but is a conventual doctrine
concerning our Lord.
o The uniqueness of the relation between the Father and the Son is expressed clearly in the Gospels of Sts Matthew
and Luke, but not so much in St Mark.
■ Lk 10:22, No one knows who the Son is except the Father and no one knows who the Father is except the Son and the ones
to whom the Son chooses to reveal Him.
■ Mt 11:25-27, .. .And no one knows the Son but the Father, and neither does anyone know the Father but the Son and he to
whom it shallplease the Son to reveal Him.
• St. Matthew uses a stronger verb of knowing in the original Greek, so who is is congruous with the
state of really and actually knowing.
• These quotations are denoted as fohannine logions, that is, John-like sayings in the synoptic Gospels.
o Christ’s relation to the Father is a privileged epistemicposition, that is, He must be God to be able to stand in such a
position (this was used to counter Arianism).

■

■

•

Rational exegetes who deny our Lord’s divinity try to explain the words of Christ quoted above as a mere
proverbial saying with some vague analysis of Himself: Nobody knows a daddy like his boy, and nobody knows a boy
like his daddy.
However, there is no evidence that such a proverb exists in any tradition·, secondly, any proverb must be
plausibly true, and this saying obviously is not (mom would probably have something to say about it...).

The Holy Ghost.
o The Holy Ghost is mentioned explicitly early on in the annunciation of Christ’s birth to the Blessed Mother; He is
also mentioned in the proclamation of the birth of St. John the Baptist to Zacharias.
o St. John the Baptist specifically testifies to the person of Christ and the role of the Holy Ghost in Mk 1:7-8, There will
come after me one mightier... he shall bapti-ye you with the Holy Ghost.
o Christ was led out into the desert by the Holy Ghost (Mk 1:12).
o The Holy Ghost is the referred to as the witness of truth, or the ideal witness from Mk 13:11 and Mt 10, Do not worry
about how to answer. ..the Holy Grhost will speak throughyour mouth.
o Mt 12:31-32 testifies to the divinity of the Holy Ghost: Hut blasphemy against the Spirit will not beforgiven. ..in this world or
the next.
o The distinct difference between the Son and Holy Ghost is based upon role; the Son is the visible principle of divine
revelation whereas the Holy Ghost is the invisible principle.

2-2. Regarding the Trinity as a whole in the Synoptics.
• In reference to Baptism.
o At our Lord’s Baptism recorded in Mk 1:9-11, the Trinity manifests itself with the voice of the Father and the
descending of the Holy Ghost in the form of a dove, You are My beloved Son in whom I am well-pleased.
o Christ commands His Apostles to baptize all nations (the Great Commission), as recorded in Mt 28, in the name of the
Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.
■ Rationalists attempt to dismiss the baptism of our Lord, calling it unhistoncal; however, how is one to
explain the Great Commission then?
■
Furthermore, the historic practice of the Church from Apostolic times used the formula proscribed by our
Lord; if there never was an even, never an instruction, how can this be explained?
• At the Transfiguration (Mt 7, Mk 9, Lk 9).
o At the Transfiguration, the Trinity· again manifests itself with the voice of the Father, the presence of the Son
incarnate, and the Holy Ghost in the form of the brightness and radiance, This is My beloved Son.. .Hearye Him.
o The Transfiguration serves as the prototype to baptism and the prelude to the glorified body.
■
Boltmann challenged the Transfiguration with his blasphemous theory of ontological promotion from Son
of man to Son of God: the Resurrection was on account of the Transfiguration, which was on account of
Christ’s baptism, which was due to His birth.
3. The Trinity in the Acts of the Apostles.
• delation of the Son to the Father.
o Acts 3:13, ... the God of ourfathers has glorified His Son Jesus.
o Acts 3:26, To youfirst God, raising up His Son, has sent Him to blessyou.
o St. Peter’s answer in Acts 4:29-32 includes reference to all three Persons.
•
The Holy Ghost.
o Acts 5:3-9, Sin against the Church is a sin against the Holy Ghost.
o Holy Ghost gives divine instructions:
■
St. Philip told by the Holy Ghost to join the Ethiopian, as recorded in Acts 8:26-40.
■
St. Peter is instructed to meet the men waiting for him in Acts 10:19.
■ The Holy Ghost is present at the council of Jerusalem with St. Peter’s decision on the matter of JewishGentile fellowship: It seems good to the Holy Ghost and to us that...
o St. Paul has vivid experiences with the Holy Ghost; he is prevented from going to Bethinia in Acts 16:67 and the
Holy Ghost is seen falling upon Cornelius and his family.
4. Testimony to the Trinity in the Pauline Epistles.
•
Use of the title Kyrios in general.
o Christ is referred to as Kyrios throughout the book of Acts, and is a highly specified term in Greek.
■ Kyrios was always used to refer to God the Father (Adonai); it was not likely that Christ was referred to as
Adonai by the disciples but rather as Rabbi.

Use of designation Kyrios in the earliest writings is significant.
■ Rom 10:13, Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved, (cf. Joel 3:5)
■
1 Cor 10:9, Do not tempt the Lord to wrath, (cf. Ps 94:8-9)
■
1 Cor 10:21, .. .the table of the Lord... (cf. Mai 1:7-12)
o Old Testament refers to Lord God, while New Testament refers to Lord Jesus Christ.
Warious texts serve to be strongpieces of theological writing.
ο 1 Cor 1:24, Christ, the power of God and the wisdom of God. (cf. Prov 8:20 ff)
ο 1 Cor 8:6 serves to describe the divinity of Christ without surrendering the oneness of God: But one God, from Whom
are all things, and one Lord Jesus Christ, through Whom are all things.
o St. Paul’s testimony to the pre-existence of the Son is brought forth in 2 Cor 8:9, Brich though He was, He became poor so
that we through His poverty might become rich, and Col 1:14, .. .in Him who is the image of the invisible God, both of these
passages served as a model for St. Athanasius’ writings on consubstantiality in response to Arius.
■
1 Phil 2:6-11 gives further support, incorporating the doctrine of the two natures, indicating that Christ
already possessed one form (God) and took upon another (man), but did not change form: ...though abiding
in theform of God did not deem equality with God something to be grasped, but rather emptied Himself, taking upon theform
of a slave...
The Holy Ghost in the epistles ofSt. Paul.
o Holy Ghost is sent by the Father or by the Son.
■ Rom 8:9-14, .. .for whoever is led by the Spirit of God... are sons of God.
■
1 Cor 2:11, . ..things that are of God. ..[are known] by the Spirit of God.
o The divinity of the Holy Ghost.
■
1 Cor 6:19, .. your members are the temple of the Holy Ghost, who is inyou, whomyou havefrom God.
■
1 Cor 3:16, Knowyou not thatyou are the temple of God and the Spirit of God dwells inyou?
■ Eph 4:30, ... do notgrieve the Holy Spirit of God.
■
1 Cor 2:10-12, ... God has revealed them ly His Spirit... that we know the things given usfrom God...; this is the most
important single text of St. Paul’s epistles regarding the divinity of the Holy Ghost.
• The Holy Ghost is the agent of revelation; if Fie was a creature, what can He know?
• The text clearly points out that He cannot be a creature since we have received the Spirit of God
by which we are able to understand things regarding salvation.
Trinitarian blessingformulae of St. Paul.
o 2 Cor 13:13, The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the charity of God, and the communication of the Holy Ghost be withyou.
ο 1 Cor 12:4-6 indicates the tie between the Mystical Body of Christ and the different gifts, offices and operations:
Difference ofgifts but same Spirit, different offices but same Lord, differences in operation but the same God who works all in all.
o Gal 4:6 points out that it was by the sending of the Son that adoption became possible, which further permits the
sending of the Holy Ghost by which we can call God Father: God sentforth His Son, bom of a woman... and we become
adoptive sons, and becauseyou are sons, God has sent the Spirit of the Son intoyour hearts.
o Rom 8:14 indicates the necessity of conforming our interior lives to Christ and that the Holy Ghost bears witness to
our souls that we are heirs of God the Father with our Lord: Those moved by the Spirit of God are children of God. ..Spirit of
adoption. ..children the heirs and heirs of Christ.
o Titus 3:4-6, ...He saved us by the washing of redemption and renewal by the Holy Ghost, who He has poured outfreely upon us
through Jesus Christ, our Lord.
ο 1 Cor 6:11, ... butyou have been purified, sanctified, andjustified in the name of our Tord Jesus Christ... Spirit of our God.
o 2 Cor 1:21-22, He who has strengthened ns withyou in Christ and anointed us in God, and has marked us with a seal by giving us the
pledge of the Holy Ghost. (Confirmation)
o Eph 4:4-6 points out that God is the single source for all supernatural and natural operation: But one body and one
Spirit,... vocation to one hope, there is gne Lord, onefaith, one baptism, one God the Lather of all who works through all.
o Heb 1:1-5, God has spoken to us through His Son, who He made the heir of all things, through whom He created the worlds... has
expiated our sins and sat down at the right hand of the divine majesty, (cf. Wis 7:26)

o

•

•

•

5. Johannine Testimony to the Trinity.
1. The relation between Logos and only-Begotten (monogenes)
5•
The Prologue of the Gospel of St. John and the prologue of hisfirst Epistle are closely related, as they contain a doctrinal summary of the person of the
Word Incarnate.
o The use of the term Logos is unique to these two sections of St. John’s writings; Word is a correct meaning of Logos,
but not in the sense of word in the dictionay (rhemd).

■

o

Logos has a greater meaning in the sense of the suffix —olog, taken to mean an account of (e.g., theology as an
account of God), thus in reference to God, Logos takes on the sense as the explanatory wisdom of God.
■ Note the immense distance between Philo’s mediator theory of the Logos and the bold declaration of the
divinity of the Logos in the Prologue of the Gospel: kai Theos en ho Logos (Deus erat Verbum).
The term only-Begotten (monogenes) is used specifically in Jn 1:14 and Jn 1:18.
■ The Logos who IS God (Jn 1:2) is the only-Begotten of God, pointing to the full and equal divinity of the
Father and the Son; this doctrine is maintained throughout the Gospel.
• Christ bears witness to His divinity as well as His eternity in Jn 8:56-58: Before Abraham was, I am;
and again in Jn 8:14,1 know where I amfrom and where I am goingyou do not know [thisj.
o It is further significant that the words I am (Ego eimî) were used at our Lord’s arrest, as
these were the words Christ used again to identify Himself, (cf. Exod 3)
• Christ issues authoritative testimony on heavenly things in Jn 3:11-13: No one goes up to heaven except
He who has come downfrom heaven; and again in Jn 8: I amfrom above.. .1 speak of what I have seen with the
Father.

2. Jesus Christ as the Son of God is the life-giving light.
5• St. John gives clear testimony to our Lord’spower to give and restore life, which is only properly said of God and is taken in this sense.
o

Both light and life refer back to the words of the Prologue: In Him was life, and the life was the light of men.
■ Jn 3:19, ...the light is come into the world...
■ Jn 11:25,1 am the resurrection and the life...
■ Jn 6:51-52, Ifyou eat not theflesh of the Son ofman, you will not have life inyou.
■ Jn 8:12,1 am the light of the world.
■ Jn 9:5, .. yetfor a little while, the light is withyou.

5-3. Relations between the Father and the Son.
• The Father and Son glorify each other in different ways, the Son by bearing testimony to the Father and the Father by giving
the Son power over all flesh and creation, as recorded in Jn 4:34, My will is to do that ofHim who sent Me; and again in Jn 17:1-2,
Father, glorify Thy Son so that Thy Son may glorify Thee.
•
The Father as the eternal origin oflife and operation.
o All the Son does is from the Father, pointing to His relation of origin to the Father.
■ Jn 5:19-23, ... The Son can do nothing on His own, but as the Father does so the Son does...
■ Jn 6:58, And the living Father has sent Me, and I live by the Father, so that he who eats ofMe will live by Me.
■ Jn 14:28, Ifyou loved Me, you would rejoice that I am going back to the Father, because the Father is greater than I.
• This points to the order of origin in the Trinity, as the Father is Unbegotten and the Son is from
the Father as Begotten.
• Mutual indwelling of the Father and the Son (circumincession).
o Jn 14:6-11 spells out the doctrine of circumincession: Ifyou have known Me, you will have known the Father. ..I am in the
Father and the Father is in Me... the Father who is in Me does all these works.
■ This passage serves to 1) counter subordinationism, since it demonstrates the co-equality of the Father and
tlie Son; 2) counter modalism which attempts to separate the Trinity; and 3) guarantees that the Father and
the Son are inseparable and our Lord is never a separate source of operation
o Jn 17:11 shows the unity of the Church to be modeled on the unity of the Trinity: That they may be one, Father, as we are
one.
■ Jn 17:20-23 is a prayer of our Lord for all those who will come to believe through the examples and
preaching of the original disciples: ...lin them and Thou in Me.
• The oneness that our Lord alludes to is not one as in personal identity, but rather a personal
•
•

indwelling
Unity is grounded in love: the Church may be one in Him and in the Father, so that the Church is
love by God as the Father loves the Son.
Adoptive sons are not secondary objects of the love of God.

5-4. The Holy Ghost.
• St. John s Gospel contains the richest and fullest doctrine of the Holy Ghost in the New Testament.
o Jn 3:5-6, ... that which is bom of the Spirit is spirit.

o

o

o

o

Jn 7:37-39, ... out oj his belly shallflow rivers of living water, which St. John corresponds to the Holy Ghost; at this time the
Holy Ghost had not yet been given in a manifest and visible wav and our Lord speaks of the coming of the Holy
Ghost as a specific future event.
Jn 14:15-19 shows that Christ possesses a spiritual presence of His own distinct from the Holy Ghost, and He clearly
does not associate the Holy Ghost with Himself: ... I willpray the Father and He will sendyou another Comforter, that He may
be always withyou...
Jn 14:25-26 indicates that the sending of the Holy Ghost is the means of the spiritual presence of our Lord: ...the
Paraclete will teachyou all of these things, and He will recall toyour minds all the things that I have said toyou.
■
Jn 15:26 gives further support to this, while also showing the difference between who sends the Spirit (ymssio
ad extra) and the procession of the Spirit (processio ad intra) which is eternal: When the Paraclete shall have come,
Whom I will sendfrom My Father, namely the Spirit ofTruth who proceedsfrom the Father will bear witness to Me.
Jn 16:7-15, ...the Paraclete will leadyou into all truth and will not speak of Himself and will tell of all things He has heard.. .All
things the Father has are Mine and He shall receive ofMine and show it toyou.
■ Mission of the Holy Ghost is to glorify the Son, communicate truths of the Son, and by these truths those
of the Father; thus He bears witness to the Father and Son from whom He proceeds.
■ This also indicates a parallel Father-Son relation to that of the Son-Spint: Son is sent by the Father and
glorifies Him, saying nothing on His own while the Holy Ghost is sent by the Son and glorifies Him saying
nothing on His own except what is heard from the Son.
■ Thus the Holy Ghost is not a new subject of evangelization, so there is no coincidence that the Holy Ghost
is the least spoken of the three persons in the revelation.
■ Two important differences: 1) the Son is clearly affiliated to the Father while there is no affiliation said of
the Holy Ghost; 2) the Son is from the Father but the Holy Ghost is not said to be from the Son exclusively
and thus He is also sent from the Father.

6. Observations on the Trinity in post-Apostolic writings.
1. Early evidences of the Creed.
6• All legitimate creeds seem to have a tertiary format with one article for each person of the Trinity.
o Tertullian’s (ca. AD 212) Contra Praxium, 2 asserts belief in one God, His Son, the Word, and the Holy Ghost who
sanctifies those who believe in the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; this has come down from the Gospel preaching and
the first Apostolic generation.
o Hippolytus alludes to a creed formed from the baptismal procedure of the time; the three separate dunkings of the
catechumen were symbolic of the profession of faith in the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost: In every blessingsay thus: Glory
be to the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, in the Holy Church, now and alwaysfrom ages of ages.

2.
6-

Early evidences in prayer.
• St. Justin Martyr (ca. AD 140).
o First Apology, 3 on belief in God:... that which is always the same as itself, immutable and the cause of beingfor all the rest.
o On belief in Christ as the Son of God.
■ Ibid., 13: ... truly distinctfrom the Father.
■ As numerically other, but not in thought alone (Ibid., 56): (Nothing made or said other than what God has willed, done
or said.
■ Ibid., 128 sets out to show that God is distinct in name and number, in that Father and Son are not two
names for the same thing; yet despite numerical distinction in persons, there is one God.
o On tlie Word’s pre-existence.
■ Ibid., 63: Father has a Son, being Logos andfirst-born of the Father who is also God.
• In reference to Prov 8:22, The Lord set Me up at the beginning ofHis ways; the word set is from the
Hebrew hegim which is not to be taken in a creative sense, which would be the case if the Hebrew
bara was used.
■ Ibid., 20, 62 shows that generation of the Son does not cut off the Son from God or divide the Father’s
substance: Logos is offspring of God and no one other than He is the Son of God.
■
Ibid, 61: It is also like when we see afin enkindledfrom anotherfin... the one enkindled does not diminish thefirstfin.
• St. Justin understands the generation of the Son from the Father is as an uttering of the Word by
the Father; problem is how this uttering generates the Son, that is, is it an eternal or contingent
event prior causally to creation (refer to 7-2 below)?
o Ibid., 65. In allprayers and offerings, praise is rendered to the Father through the Son through the Holy Ghost.

•

•

•
•

•

Third century text on the martyrdom of St. Polycarp, ch. 14, makes reference to the prayer of St. Polycarp when facing his
martyrdom: For this grace.. .1praise Thee, I bless Thee, I glorify Thee through Him [Christ] through the Spirit unto ages of ages (note the
semblance to the Gloria at Mass).
St. Basil’s (ca. AD 360) De Spiritu Sancto.
o Arguing for the divinity of the Holy Ghost, St. Basil uses proofs from both Scripture and Tradition.
o Citing the hymn Tumen Hilariae, he writes: 0joyful light of the Eternal Father... we praise Thee in song Father, Son, and Holy
Ghost.
o Basil observes that the hymn has apostolic origin, for the lighting of the evening light is allegorized as a symbol of
Christ; Christ is hailed as the joyful light and glory of the Father.
St. Clement of Alexandria’s The Great Teacher, 3,12 points out that the Son reveals the Father with His teachings with the Holy
Ghost: 0 Teacher..., 0 Son and Father, both being the Lord.
From the various writings of St. Ignatius of Antioch.
o The Son does nothing without the Father being united to Him; the Father, the operator, achieves things through the
Son.
o Christ, before all ages, was with the Father: There is one God who has manifested Himself by the Word who has come out of
silence; St. Ignatius comments that the mysteries of God are carried out in silence in order to be kept from Satan.
The Shepherd of Hermes (early second century).
o Generally regarded as a literary composition of Roman origin, possibly written by a relative of Pope St. Clement;
Hermes is a visionary and the shepherd a celestial guide.
o Similitude 5 of the work contains some problems.
■ The analogical story of the vineyard depicts the Son as the Holy Ghost and a servant as the Son of God; it is
obvious that this is problematic, as the title Son of God is being used to cover both the Son and Holy Ghost.
■
Furthermore, this leads to the confusing conclusion that the Holy Ghost dwelt in the flesh and conducted
well with the Spirit of God, pleasing God because the Holy Ghost incarnate did not blemish this Spirit.
• This confusion possibly arises from the fact that the Son is a Spirit as well as holy, and thus
although the Son is «holy Spirit, He is not the Holy Ghost.
• Still, this conclusion smells of binaturianism and then adoptionism. the Holy Ghost is begotten of the
Father, and the man, Christ, indwelt by the Holy ghost is given a supreme reward and thus in glory
there is the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; Jesus is the first of the adopted sons.
o Thus, there is the Father and the Holy Ghost, and a man so possessed by the Holy Ghost
that he becomes divine, thus giving rise to the Trinity of persons; this is heretical.
o Similitude 9 of the work is a better text.
■ Here is provided an image of an old rock with a new door carved into it.
• The rock and door taken together is symbolic of the Son of God; taken separately, tire rock is the
Son of God before all creation and has been counselor of the Father in all creative work, while the
door is the visible manifestation of the Son by the Incarnation by which man can enter salvation.

7. Second century process of thought.
7-1. A critical look at a theory from the time regarding the generation of the Word.
• The theory amounts to the concept that the Word apparently came into being when it was spoken.
o The theory is problematic immediately, since tire one and same word present in the mind can be communicated by
speech, but even if it is not, it is still present; a distinction must be drawn:
■
Interior word (endiathetic): God always possesses His wisdom from all eternity, the Logos, and at a certain
time He utters this Word and creates through it (note the distinction already of procession of God ad intra
and ad extra, in the fact that the Word is always present and creation is not).
■ Exterior word (spoken./prophorify. Communication of the divine Word does not entail division, as the Father
does not lose anything by speaking since the Word remains present in Him.
o This distinction does possess a vulnerability which Arius picked up on: it is true that the eternity of the Word is
preserved, but is the speaking of the Logos the begetting of the Son; in other words, since the speaking of the Logos is not
eternal, the begetting of the Son is not and thus there was time when the Son was not.
■ However, the correct interpretation is that the Logos has been eternally Word and eternally Son, for the
internal conception of the Word (endiathetic) by the Father is always the Son.
■ Arius concluded that the speaking of the Word was the coming to be and begetting of the Son, rather than a
change in the status of the Word (part II of this outline will critique this further; cf. la q.27).

2.
7-

Criticism and resolution of some of St. Justin Martyr’s writings.
• From Dialogue with Trypho, 61: As beginning before all creatures, God engendered in Himself a power, the Logos, and it executed the designs of
the Father and bom of the Father by will.
o Arius jumped on the phrase by will and applied it to mean contingency, however, divine speech is, in fact, by will, for
God did not need to speak.
■ Existence of speech act is contingent to the Logos, not necessary, and the Sonship of the Logos is eternal
regardless of speech, as was said above.
In Ibid., 62, St Justin speaks in a manner that could suggest a strong subordination of the Word to the Father and this is
inconsistent with the equality of Persons of the Trinity: This Son really emitted before all creatures was with the Father and it was with
Him that the Father held conversation; this same being is before all creatures and it is He who God calls Wisdom.
o This is to be contrasted with tliis is weak subordinationism, which is consistent with equality of Persons, as this serves to
demonstrate priority of the Father over the Son by order of origin or procession; all Persons are without beginning
but only the Father without origin.
o Second Apology, 6: His Son who will alone be properly called Son, His Logos before all creatures was with Him and was begotten at the
beginning when the Father made and ordained all things.
o On the role of the Logos as light, from Second Apology, 10: God the Father is invisible and the Logos manifests Him. ..anything
comet has been obtained by partialparticipation of the Logos.

3.
7-

Problem with the Stoic distinction:
• The Stoic distinction (exterior vs. interior word) provided confusion between the concepts of pronouncement and begetting.
o
o
o

Tatian’s Fifth Oration (pupil of St. Justin): By will of the Father’s simplicity, the Word wentforthfrom Him.
Athenagoras’ Apologia, 10: The Father and Son being but one... not that the Son wasproduced but the Fatherpossessed eternally the
Logos... but the Word cameforth to organise and create... andpower shown in unity and distinction in rank.
Theophilus of Antioch (ca. AD 140)
■
Identifies Wisdom as the Holy Ghost in Apologia 2,10: God created the universefrom nothing,... God having His
inner Word begot Him along with His Wisdom, pronouncing Him before the universe... and through Him were all things
made.
■
From Ibid., 2, 22: Adam heard a voice, the voice which was the Word of God, the Son. For before anything wasproduced,
God has His Word as His counselor, but when God made what He planned, He begot Him, engendered the Word, but did
not lose the Word and kept company with Him.

ΊΑ. Observations from the Adversus Hereses of St. Irenaeus.
• 5, 20, 1: Error departsfrom the truth on the three principle articles of our baptism: either they mistake the Father, or they do not receive the Son by
refusing to believe the economy of the Incarnation, or the Spirit because they refuse the prophecies.
• God is not one in Himself and two by way of man: One God the Father. ..who made creation through the Logos called Son, and the Father
is glorified by His Word, the eternal Son, begotten beforefoundation of the world... Father is Lord and Son is Lord, Father God and Son God, for
He who is bom of God is God... the economy of salvation, there is Father and Son.
• 2, 28, 5: God who is through and through reason, through and through Logos, says what He thinks and thinks what He says... .Thegeneration is
known by the Father who begot and the Son who is born.
• 6, 6, 6: That which is invisible in the Son is the Father, and that which is visible in the Father is the Son.
• 2, 32: The Son coexists with the Father.
• St. Irenaeus is clear about the eternity of the Son and the Holy Ghost in 4, 20, 1; furthermore, with Theophilus, he identifies
the wisdom texts as the Holy Ghost: God is intelligent, and this is why all creatures made through the Logos... .Logosgives each being
substance, and the Spiritprocures to each wisdom.
• St Irenaeus writes in 5, 18, 12 that God reveals Himself in temis that help us to understand the roles of the divine Persons, but
he does not set out to develop the doctrine of appropriation: Father bears at once the creation and the Logos, and the Logos gives to each the
Holy Ghost as He wills. Above all things is the Father... through all things is the Christ, the head of the Church, and in all things the Holy Ghost,
the living water.
• Overall the security and solidity of St. Irenaeus’ thought provides a touchstone for future theological doctrine.

7-5. Further observations and criticism.
• The surfacing of adeptionism in the second century, which reduced Christ to a mere man who is adopted to a unique relation
with the Father, presented new problems.
o Paul of Samosatta spoke only of the Father as possessing divinity, and that the personal Logos was only a
commandment or an order of God.

■

•

•

The humanity of Christ was an effect of the divine commandment; the physical rcalitv of Christ is God at
work in the world, and the Logos does not indicate a substance but a speech act.
■ Thus, the Father is the substance who creates, the Son as speech act in a pure human being, and the Holy
Ghost is the grace found in the Apostles; hence the Trinity is God, man, andgrace, which is heretical.
Tertullian presents a doctrine with regard to the Holy Ghost.
o Contra Praxium, 13 states directly: The Holy Ghost is God, and in Ibid, 4 that He proceedsfrom the Father through the Son... the
Spirit is a thirdfrom God and the Son.
o Ibid., 2, on the communication of the divine being can be problematic: All come through unity of substance andyet the unity
ofmanagement is kept which disposes the unity into Trinity; three not in state but in order, not in substance butform, not three in power
but in beauty.
Numerical distinction vs. division: Summa quaedam res quae est Pater et Filins et Spiritus Sanctus.
o In regard to the 'I riti11\ , res is not synonymous with persona which would imply three gods; the Son is eternally united
to the Father as a shoot from a root, a flow from a font, a ray from the sun.
■
Every· origin is a parent and everything that comes ex origine is an offspring hence the Logos is properly Son.
o The three Persons are numerically distinct: I and the Father are one [unumi.
■
Important to note that unum rather than unus is. used, since unus would designate the singularity· of person
whereas the neuter unum designates unity of substance and not oneness of number.
■
Unity of substance is not just generic unity, for the three Persons possess one and the same substance.
• Novation (ca. AD 250) De Trinitate, 31: God the Father.. .is Creator of all things... From Him alone is bom
the Son... who although born of the Father, He is always in the Father before all ages or else Father would not have
always been the Father.
o Ibid, further indicates an asymmetrical ordering Godproceedingfrom God making a second
person qua Son, but not taking awayfrom Father what is to be one God.

8. Observations on the writings of Origen on the Trinity.
1. In general.
8• Origen’s colossal work De Principiis is the first attempt at a Catholic systematization of dogma (theological treatise) in which all
revealed data is catalogued, pondered, and synthesized with the aid of philosophy; Origen would run into doctrinal problems at
points because of the novelty of this work.
o The Preface to Took 1 treats of Apostolic teaching: But one God who created,... Christ bom of the Father, all things made through
Him and... while still remaining God, He became man... .The Holy Ghost inspired all holy writers both prior to and after the coming of
Christ.
1,1,6: God is an utterly simple intelligence. Creatures reflect Him without giving adequate idea of Him.... We believe a Trinity of three
hypostases... equally perfect in knowledge.... The Son of God is truth and no truth escapes Him... and the Holy Ghost searches the deep
things of God and since He knows the depths of the Father, He eternally possesses complete, all-seeing knowledge.
Origen is very clear on the eternal begottenness of the Son (although he never used the term homoousios) and the distinction
between the Father and the Son in Ibid., 4, 28: Son is not created but eternally begotten... .It is not true that some part of God’s substance was
converted into the Son or was produced. Wisdom and Word is begottenfrom the invisible and bodiless God.. ..The Word is God according to
substance.
Regarding the divinity of the Holy Ghost, Origen does not hail the Holy Ghost as Son in his comments on Jn 1:3: Admission of
the Holy Ghost is producedfrom the Word who wasprior... but denial of this would call the Holy Ghost unproduced. Confession of three hypostases
that the Holy Ghost is the highest of all beings producedfrom the Father by way of Christ, and this is why He is not called Son:for Christ is the
only-Begotten and the Son is needed to communicate hypostases to Him who participates in the divine nature.
o This can be interpreted with an incorrect subordinationist slant on the Filioque, as the Spirit depends on the Word in
order to proceed, and the Holy Ghost is subordinate to the Father in the same way the Son is subordinate.
Origen pioneers about the use and the omission of the definite article in St. John’s Prologue, noting that it is used when God is
referred to as Sovereign and not used when God is referred to as Logos; St John writes this way so that only the true God may
be known, in that each person is not the God through Himself, but by the communication of the divinity.

o

•

•

•

2.
8-

Origen’s flirtation with subordinationism.
• Origen use of Platonic thought, which adopts modes of excellence, in reference to God; the Father is God per se and the
Logos participates in the divine nature, being Son only by way of participation in the divinity rather than by the possession of
the fullness of the divinity· by communication from the Father.
o Participation in form is ontologically inferior to the form itself: God the Son can be God but all that which is not identically
the divine nature is not God absolutely. ...Participation gives way tn a relative God. ..Father is God through Himself and the Son is God
through participation.

Commenting on the line from the epistle to the Romans, Son image of invisible Gods. Son as image is not truth when compared
to the Father but in relation to us who are incapable of receiving the Father.
Father, Son, and Holy Ghost have different ranges of action and operation:
o De Prine. 1, 3, 5: Father attains each of the beings and He is Being andgives being to all. Inferior to the Father is the Son whose being
extends to rational beings and inferior still is the Holy Ghost whose action attains only the saints.
o Origen sees no purpose in prayers addressed to Christ, De Oratione 15: If we understand whatprayer is, we would see that we
should notpray to an proceeded or begotten being... .Pray to the Father only but not separating Himfrom the gnat High Priest.
■
Further still in De Prine. 13, 3, 19: Christ is life, but He who is greater than Christ is greater than life.
■ The Neo-Platonic form of the One surfaces in Ibid., 2, 23, 151: God, Father of truth, is greater and higher than
truth.. .superior to wisdom surpassing the true light... .God is beginning beyond beginning, beyond essence. (Dare we ask: is
He beyond BEING??).

o

8- 3. Origen’s orthodox thought would contribute to the condemnation of Sabellianism by Pope Callistus.
• Patriarch Dennis of Alexandria was the leading proponent of orthodoxy against Sabellius, and in a series of letters to the Pope,
he deals with the concept of distinction of the divine Persons: The mindprocures the word and manifests itself in the word. ..so that the
word meals the mind... the mind goingforth. The mind is like a father” and the word is as a ‘daughter”, for they are one while remaining two and
thus the Father and the Son are in the other.
o The mind as expressed is present in the word that expresses it and vice-versa; this is the model of the mutual
indwelling of the Father and the Son which demonstrates the doctrine of circumincession.
9. Arianism: its doctrine and its condemnation.
9- 1. Basis of Arianism.
• The error of Arius finds its basis as well in the Neo-Platonic form of the One: Then is only one eternal, unbegotten true God. This
absolute God cannot communicate His being or substance. For there an only two such ways this could happen: division is impossible because God is
simple, spiritual, and indivisible; emanation is impossible because God is immutable and by definition without beginning.
o Emanation pertains to emergence from one who is God already, and since that which emerges comes to be, is
therefore mutable and not God.
•
Furthermore, it arises from the misunderstanding of the processions of God ad intra, confusing them with procession ad extra.
\Fhat lies outside God must be creatures, and the Logos is thefirst and mostperfect creature. Although there was not exactly a time, there was a
moment when the Logos was not.
o And still further: Prior to being begotten. He did not exist... and He only exists because of the mil of God. So when Tradition calls
Him “God” this is in terms of accommodation... The Son is other and dissimilar in all resects regarding the Father’s substance.
o Thus, the Logos, as a perfect creature, was the agent of creation and the redeemer of it; regarding the Incarnation, the
Logos took on a body and it played the role of the soul of that body (which would lead to the conclusion that Christ
was not true man).

2.
9-

Solution and condemnation.
• Writings of St. Athanasius.
o Although the Council of Nicea would formally and authoritatively condemn Arianism, it would do so by the
introduction of the new word homoosios (consubstantial) which would cause some controversy between the Greeks
and the Latins.
■
Hypostasis and oasis were roughly used synonymously at the time (a century of theological discussion
following the council would arrive at a clear distinction); however, homoosios created worry among the Greeks
because they feared that it would cause loss of distinction between the Father and Son and result in
modalism.
■
Furthermore, the Greeks would not use the word prose on (person) because it was not clear enough to them;
the Latins had a settled vocabulary on the matter from the start: ulna substantial et tresspersona.
o St. Athanasius’ work would help bring clarification to the matter.
■
Contra Arius 1, 14: Never was the substance of the Father imperfect or incomplete. ..Son is begotten of God. ..and existed
from all eternity. Men beget in time because ofimperfect nature and divine begetting is eternal because God’s nature is eternally
complete.
■ The Son is the invisible image of God, as related in Ibid.: Fternal, immortal Light, King... Creator and author is
the Father and all must be in the image to be a true image ofHim... .Since Father is eternal. Son must be eternal [to be a true
■

image],
It is clear that there is only one who begets and one who is begotten, because the Son gets the whole nature,
total and entire, as is clear from Ibid., 3, 6: Son possesses in Himself the whole substance op the Father because this

substance has been communicated and cannot be divided, Therefore, the substance must be entire... There cannot be more than
one Son of God because He has exhausted the totalfecundity of the Father.
• In further support of this, Ibid., 2, contains commentary on Prov 8:22: Scripture does not wish to speak
ofsubstance and divinity of the Iagos nor... His authentic generation from the Father. Father, it speaks ofHis
humanity and Incarnationfor us.
o Letters to the Semi-Arians would bring further clarification.
■ De synods: Those who accept allfrom Ficea and hesitate only on account of the word “consubstantial” should not be treated as
enemies.. ..They have the same view as us but only disagree about words.
■ Ibid., 41: Ifyou say like in substance (homooisios)... it is not at all like saying “from the substance” (homoosios). The wolf
is similar in substance to the dog... but the wolf does not comefrom the dog.... So he that affirms only homooisios does not say
Son comesfrom the substance ofthe Father ; but homoosios embraces both “similar and like substance” and “from the same
substance”.
•
Contra Arius 3, 4: All true of the Father is true of the Son. All of the Father is of the Son, but Son is not the
Father. IfSonis another as begotten, He is the same thing as God.
• One must distinguish between relational and absolute predicates: all properties of the Father are
attached to Son in terms of absolute properties', Father and the Son are the same, but are distinct in
relational properties only.
o St. Athanasius’ stand on the divinity of the Holy Ghost in his Fetter to Cyprian gives further support: In the Holy Ghost
we become partakers of God. IfHe was a creature, He could not have participation through Him and since through the Spirit we have a
share in participation of divinity... it is the Spirit who divinises and therefore He must be divine.
Definition of the Council of Nicea: Christ is begotten, the only-Begotten of the Father as the same substance (homoosios)... through whom all
things are made in heaven and on earth.
o Thus, all are anathematized for holding:
■
There was a time when the Son did not exist or did not exist before being begotten.
■ He was madefrom non-being or another hypostasis.
■
The Son of God is mutable and created.
Synod of Alexandria (AD 362)
o The Tome to the Antiochens expressed clearly that, in God, there is one nature and three hypostases; problem here was that
there was no clear meaning of the term hypostasis, which would be tackled by the works of the Cappocian Fathers.

10. The Writings of the Cappodocian Fathers.
1. St. Basil
10• St. Basil worked to clarify the meaning between the terms ousta and hypostasis.
o According to St. Basil, ousia is that which is common to the individual of the same species, what they possess equally, and that by
which they are referred to by a common name.
■ Hence, ousia pertains to the common nature or substantial form (essence): This ousia cannot exist in the real
except on condition of being completed by individuallying traits; individualising traits added to ousiayields a lypostasis:
OUSIA

■

•

+

INDIVIDUALIZING TRAITS

=

HYPOSTASIS

Thus each divine person possesses one and the same essence and an individualizing trait; simply speaking,
ousia and hypostasis have the same difference between them as the general and the unique.
o Problem arises here: is this is the meaning of ousia, why does it not follow that there are three Gods?
■
St. Basil answers: Between the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, there is nothing interposing no reality distinctfrom nature that
intrusion would cause division in it.
• Thus God is consubstantial and undivided: One cannot conceive the Father without the Son, and one cannot
isolate the Spirit without the Son.
• He draws an analogous comparison to a rainbow: A rainbow is at once continuous and distinct. It is
multicolored but the various hues are so mixed that the point of transitionfrom one color to another vanishes and
escapes notice.. ..IFe cannotperceive any exact division of color and so it is with the Trinity.
■
He concludes: So we adore Godfrom God, but we remainfaithful to the unity of origin.
The individuating traits of the three divine Persons.
o St. Basil was able to determine the individuating traits for the Father and the Son based on generative procession, but
not for the Holy Ghost: The Father is agennetos (mibegotten) and the Son isgenetos (begotten).
o Regarding the Holy Ghost, the individuating trait is not in the name, since all three are spiritual Beings and holy by
their very divine nature.

■
■

The Holy Ghost is known after the Son and arises with the Son from the Father (as shown by the sequence
in revealed Scripture).
In terms of the procession of the Holy Ghost, the procession is not a generation, that is, it is an
ungenerative procession unlike that of the Son’s; St. Basil got this far, but was unable to determine an
individuating trait in terms of this ungenerative procession (cf. |n 14).

2. St. Gregory of Nyssa
10•
If ousia ri, common essence and hypostasis is a concrete individual, there is a clear understanding of the three hypostases, but
the unity and oneness of God must still be accounted for.
o St. Gregory· provides two (problematic) conclusions to the challenge of the three Gods.
■
Conclusion based on the Platonic grounds of ordinary linguistic usage.
• Peter, lames, and John are, strictly speaking, one man for man cannot be pluralized for there is only
one nature man.
• Peter, James, and John are therefore three individuals or hypostases, but not three men; thus
individuals of a common nature are non-continuous and separate, but this is not the case with the
divine nature.
• This obviously poses a problem, since this treats the common noun man (nouns that apply to many
and describe individual nature) as an abstract noun humanity (applies to nature); what occurs is the
abolition of the grammatical difference between concrete and abstract nouns.
■
What if God and divinity do not classify natures? What if the divine nature is ineffable and we can only describe God by
His activities?
• Three Persons do not work independently; all operations from God arise from the Father, through
the Son and completed in the Holy Ghost.
• Thus there is one worker of activity, although this activity is itself multi-faceted.
• The problem here is that the divine Unity· seems to be reduced to an economical standpoint
regarding transitive action; thus if no creatures were created, would the Father, Son, and Holy
Ghost be one in action? This must be applied to imminent acts.
• Regarding the procession of the I loly Ghost: The Son is immediately caused by the Father while the Holy Ghost is not caused by the Father
except through the intermediacy of the Son. No doubt that the Son remains the Son and the Holy Ghost comesfrom the Father. The Son guards
His quality as unique but notpreventing the Holy Ghostfrom having natural relation with the Father.
o Therefore, the Son’s relation is direct, but the natural relation regarding the Holy Ghost is through the Son; however,
we must be careful with the use of the term cause, keeping in mind that the Father is not the cause of the Son but the
principle of origin, which does not have to be a cause.
10-3. St. Gregory Naziens
•
Orationes Theologicae, 31-33 secure the doctrine tying together the critical insights of ousia and hypostasis. The three divine Persons differ
only in characteristic of origin.... The Son is not the Fatherfor there is but one Father, but the Son is what the Father is. The Spirit is not the Son
but the Spirit is what the Son is. The three are one in divinity and the one is th ne in participating traits... .[but in the way that we have] neither the
one ofSabellius nor the three ofArius.

11. St. Augustine’s De Trinitate (ca. AD 416)
• The first seven books establish the dogma of the Trinity according to Scripture and by the refutation of heresies; books 8
through 15 attempt to conjure up natural analogies which best help one to understand the mystery of the Trinity (best
analogies are the ones bearing reference to the operations of the soul).
• He begins the work with the divine Unity: That there is but one God. ..one substance in the First Truth. What name can be given to a being
so elevated? The Father, Son, and Holy Ghost allpossessfullness of divine substance an all the same substance. The Father and Son are unique,
but allpossess same unity and equality.
o Hpistle 170 deals with consubstantiality: This Trinity is one and same nature and substance. Neither smaller in each of the three
Persons than all together.... The divine substance is not larger in the Father alone or Son alone or Holy Ghost alone, but same in Father,
Son, and Holy Ghost together. The Father did not reduce His substance by begetting... .The Holy Ghost received originfrom the divine
essence... and being does not add to one who proceeds... .He proceeds without diminishing. Three persons are one without confusion and
three without division. Although each is one, they are three, and although three they are one.
■
Hence the divine substance is not question of division or addition fine quantitate magnitudf.
o Oe Trim, 7: I call essence what the Greeks call ousia, but I do not know the difference between ousia and hypostasis.
o Ibid., 2: The three Persons have a single will ad extra·, since there is no difference in substance, there is no difference in will.

Ibid, 8: Equality is such that not only is the Father not greater than the Son in reference to divinity, but he Father and Son taken together
are not greater than the Holy Ghost, thus no inequality in persons.
Absolute vs. relative terms.
o Introduction to Book 8: All that is in God which concerns nature and expresses something absolute is not said in the plural but
singular... .Then are not three Gods, but one God, one Good One, one Omnipotent One.
■ Hence, God, Good, and Omnipotent are absolute terms, which attaches to a thing looked at in itself, whereas a
relative term attaches to a tiling looked at via something else; relative involves a relation in meaning.
Substance vs. relation.
o Citation unknown: How can divine Persons really distinct not divide unity or break up simplicity. They are relations which do not get
confused with substance or nature because the relations are not absolute...An absolute can be broken up into two absolutes... but the
relations are not accidents... because they are essential to the nature.
o De Trin., 5, 5: In God, nothing is said according to accident because in Him there is nothing changeable.... Nevertheless, not everything
said of God is substance... As Father and Son, for God was always the Father. ..sinceforeverSon has been bom and never began to be
Son.. .for He would then be Son by accident and Father as well. But they are not called Father and Son by substance, but the names are
received reciprocally, that is, by relation, one that is not an accident because it is immutable.
■ Thus, that which is eternally present is not an accident; in the case of the Trinity, substance vs. accident is not
synonymous with substance vs. relation.
Three models of the Trinity according to St. Augustine.
o Mens (thought), notitia (grasp), and amor (natural tendency of thought to affirm itself): Thought loves itself and affirms
itself whole and entire.
■ Ibid., 9, 4: One cannot love without knowing. Thought must know itself to love itself.
■ Thought, knowledge of self, and love of itself are equal and one; thought seeks to affirm itself through
grasping itself, while remaining one and the same thought.
o Memoria (habitual self-consciousness), intelligentia (achieving expression), voluntas (desire to express).
o Memoria Dei (unconscious thought of God), intelligentia, voluntas.

o

+
Sicut cervus desiderat adfontes aquarum,
ita desiderat anima mea ad te, Deus.

TRACTUS DE DEO TRINO

A compiled outline divided in two parts:
Part I, containing the Scriptural, patristic, and conciliar foundations of the tract,
is taken from the first half of the course De Deo Trino (THEO 308)
as organized, presented, and lectured by Dr. William Marshner, STD,
Christendom College, Front Royal, Virginia
Spring 1996.

Part II is based on the first half of the dogmatic treatise
The Trinity and God the Creator by Rev. Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange
in full accordance with the tract as laid out in the
Summa Theologiae of St. Thomas Aquinas
Ia qq.27-43.

+
Quid retribuam Domino pro omnibus quae retribuit mihi?
A.D. MMII