This forum was closed on October 1st, 2010. However, the archives are open to the public and filled with vast amounts of good reading and information for you to enjoy. If you wish to meet some Wardrobians, please visit the Into the Wardrobe Facebook group.

On the Doctrine of the Holy Trinity

On the Doctrine of the Holy Trinity

Postby Adam Linton » August 20th, 2005, 7:41 pm

Dear Wardrobians,

With profound thanks to John for his tremendous efforts to restore our forums, it seems a shame that nothing remains of this one on Christianity, with all our venerable, provocative, and lively offerings. So that more than an echo will sound here again, I propose this new thread on the doctrine of the Trinity. To get the conversation going, the following is a sermon of mine for Trinity Sunday. I invite those interested to read and to respond.

Sorry for the length of this post, but I wanted to help things get going again.

Regards,

Adam Linton +


THE TABLE WITH THE OPEN SIDE
[Sermon for Trinity Sunday]

Today is the conclusion of the two great cycles in the church year which are devoted to presenting the Christ event: Christ’s advent and epiphany; then Christ’s life, death, resurrection, glorification; the sending of the Spirit. In the following months, until the end of November, the appointed readings will focus more on our response to gospel message. But today, we conclude with the theme of the Holy Trinity: in the classic words - One God, glorified in Three Persons - Father, Son, and Spirit. Trinitarian doctrine is the crown of Christian theology. Yet many have found it an intimidating doctrine. But perhaps it isn’t such a bad thing to be theologically intimidated! Especially in reference to divinity, we ought to remember that all human words must be inadequate. Regrettably, we have to admit that, far too often, Christians have behaved as though our theological speaking not only expressed truth, but was itself the truth. And having done so, we have found it all too easy to play yet another variation of the “insiders-outsiders” game with our fellow human beings.

But God remains God - and it is God in God’s own self who is ultimate Truth. This being the case, “truth” must be beyond our speaking and control, “ineffable, inconceivable, invisible, incomprehensible.” I’m reminded of a saying one finds several times in C.S. Lewis’ Narnia Chronicles in reference to Aslan, the lion-Christ figure who creates and redeems: “He’s not a tame lion, you know.” Ultimate reality is not tamable, at least not by the likes of us.

We Episcopalians are more comfortable expressing our faith through liturgy and devotion than through confessional formulas. It is worthwhile remembering that doctrinal affirmations seem to make the most sense for us specifically within the context of the worshipping community. In that framework, and defining theology as our attempt at a meaningful expression of our encounter with the divine, we would have to admit that our Prayer Book contains a good deal of theology indeed. Therefore, we find these inadequate words theological words of ours not only necessary, but a gift, as well.

Regrettably, theological language has sometimes been used as an ending to thought: a mere boundary. However, I believe that the authentic purpose of these classic words of faith is the indication of a center from which we engage in an on-going process. Theology has something in common with a map. Both can only very partially describe the realities they seek to represent. And even a grand collection of well-preserved maps will do us very little good unless we set out to our destination. “Correct” yet empty recitation of once life-giving formulas can be tremendously destructive in the spiritual life. Nevertheless, especially if the trip is important, a map can be a valuable thing, indeed. We can admit the limitation and humanity of our cartographers and still be grateful for their work.

As a key affirmation, Christianity recognizes a radical and on-going otherness between what we are and what God is. However, in the Christian tradition, the Transcendent is not insulated away from the world as though the cosmos were some gigantic spiritual bureaucracy. In contrast to a number of dualistic approaches, Christianity posits the closest involvement of the spiritual with the physical. That which is radically “other” is also closer to us than our hearts. The Transcendent One has broken through to us. “We declare...what was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we have looked at and touched with our hands, concerning the word of life.” (1 John 1:1)

In spite of the weakness of language, we speak of theology because in the Person of Jesus Christ we encounter a greater and defining experience - an experience not merely private, but meant to be shared in community - an experience which has joined us into new relationship not only with God, but with the world. Our faith is rooted in Incarnation. We find, in the pattern of Christ’s own self, “treasure...in earthen vessels” - the perfect expressed through the limited, the divine manifested in the profoundly human. So too it is with the words of faith.

In a world afflicted with alienation and fragmentation, it was necessary that divine unity be a primary message. “Hear, O [people]: the Lord our God, the Lord is one.” (Mark 12:29, Deuteronomy 6:4) “We believe in one God.”

New Testament perspective reiterates this – and leads us to express more. The Mystery of Christ was key in the development of Trinitarian doctrine. In this Person, we encounter one in full unity with our own humanity, but also one who exists from all time in perfect unity with the very source of Godhead. He addresses God as “Abba, Father.” We experience Christ as the one in whom we are restored to nothing less than divine life. Therefore the church offers its affirmation, in the words of the Creed, that Jesus is “Son of God...of one Being with the Father.”

Likewise, we encounter the presence of the Spirit, proceeding from the Father, and sent as the seal of the Son’s work. As Spirit actualizes the Christ-life in us, we are enabled to acknowledge that it too, “with...Father and...Son...is [to be] worshipped and glorified.” From a mystery of shared and lived faith, and, once again, realizing the poverty of words, we nevertheless make a startling affirmation: at the heart of the one Truth, a relationship is revealed. There is something inherently relational in the nature of ultimate reality.

Such a reality should have something to say about how we see ourselves. Perhaps encouraged by our culture’s infatuation with individualism, we certainly have a way of seeing the demands of our relationships as an interruption - or perhaps even a threat. Haven’t we been told that every one pursuing his or her own good (economic or otherwise) is the very “engine” which will produce an earthly paradise? But what if these demands on our separateness - these interruptions of our own agendas - were the stuff of life itself? If we affirm an eternal community within divine existence, and we also say that we are made “in the image and likeness of God,” are we not made for life in communion?

As much as words are manifestly limited for expressing Trinitarian doctrine, iconographic presentation involves even more challenges. No one “has seen the Father,” (John 6:46) and the Spirit is Spirit. Sometimes in the Christian visual arts we find symbolic representations, such as intersecting circles. Most of us are familiar with the representation containing the three images of an old man, a younger man, and a bird. While previous ages would have also understood the risks and benefits of any visual effort, more recently - and with some good reason, many have an increased sense of the confusion associated with this well-known image.

There is another icon, rather different, which I personally find both artistically beautiful and theologically profound. This is the representation painted by the great medieval Russian iconographer Andrei Rublev. Rublev makes no attempt to portray the Trinity directly. Rather, he uses an event from the Abraham story as a sort of visual allegory. The event is Abraham's hospitality to the three mysterious visitors who announced the birth of Isaac. Rublev’s image is remarkably simple: three figures seated at a table. The figures are in human likeness, but ambiguous. From the viewer’s perspective, the Person of the Father is on the left with a hand of direction for the next figure in the middle position. The middle figure represents the Son, whose acceptance and accomplishment of the Father’s mission is shown by a slightly inclined head and by a hand outstretched, where one sees, at the center, the Bread of offering. The right hand figure, the Spirit, equal (and to us the most ambiguous of the Three) yet also with a hand extended, co-involved in the redemptive movement. If one looks at the outline of the Three figures, one sees, subtly, yet clearly, that they form a circle: the unity and perfection of the Trinity from all eternity. And yet perhaps most strikingly, these Three do not take up all the space at their table. At the nearest side, they leave for us an open place: “Join us at the table of Life!”

The transcendent God - who is radically “other,” both creates and redeems us that we may share in a glorious fellowship: a fellowship of communion with God, with one another, and with all creation. This is what is means to be baptized into the People who bear the Name of the Trinity: Father, Son, and Spirit.

In some more of those classic theological words, we say that what belongs to Christ by nature, in the work of God is now given to us by grace. “For all who are lead by the Spirit of God are children of God...When we cry, ‘Abba! Father!’ it is that very Spirit bearing witness to our spirit that we are children of God, and if children, then heirs, heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ.”

Amen.
we have not loosely through silence permitted things to pass away as in a dream
User avatar
Adam Linton
Wardrobian
 
Posts: 981
Joined: Jan 2005
Location: Columbia Falls, MT

Postby sehoy » August 21st, 2005, 9:37 am

I have read your sermon. I hope you don't mind if I post the ikon mentioned. I'm a very visual person, you see. Maybe that's my problem right now.

Please excuse my sadness when I say this [It's merely sadness]: Although the idea of ikons is to paint realities in symbolic language, to express inexpressible things and to keep us from latching onto distinct images so that we focus on the God who can not be pictured, I feel the need to point out that Abraham was not forced to look at or feed three beings with indistinct faces.

Image
cor meum vigilat
User avatar
sehoy
 
Posts: 586
Joined: Nov 1999
Location: TN, USA

Postby Genie » August 21st, 2005, 12:15 pm

Last edited by Genie on August 21st, 2005, 3:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Totus tuus

Member of the Religious Tolerance Cabal of the Wardrobe
User avatar
Genie
Wardrobian
 
Posts: 714
Joined: Jul 2004
Location: Krakow, Poland (originally from Taiwan)

Postby Adam Linton » August 21st, 2005, 12:57 pm

we have not loosely through silence permitted things to pass away as in a dream
User avatar
Adam Linton
Wardrobian
 
Posts: 981
Joined: Jan 2005
Location: Columbia Falls, MT

Postby sehoy » August 24th, 2005, 6:04 am

Hi Genie,

That's beautiful. I'm really glad to see that window and it's the first example of AN I've seen used in a religious setting. I live near the heart of the german art nouveau [called Jugendstil] movement here in Darmstadt, Germany.

Image
cor meum vigilat
User avatar
sehoy
 
Posts: 586
Joined: Nov 1999
Location: TN, USA

Postby sehoy » August 24th, 2005, 6:13 am

cor meum vigilat
User avatar
sehoy
 
Posts: 586
Joined: Nov 1999
Location: TN, USA


Return to Religion, Science, and Philosophy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered members and 17 guests

cron