So, I've been away for a bit... and now, I'm catching up.
I had an excellent question offered after the sermon on Trinity Sunday.
Here it is:
At the risk of committing heresy, doesn't the Trinity
allow Christianity to connect with and inspire a wider group of people?
Those who need God the Father: A director, creator,
loving parent
Those who need Jesus: A living example of God’s love
active in human form.
Those who need the Holy Spirit: A spirit connecting us all to each other and
God; a guiding presence or common understanding; a gentle drawing into
goodness.
Aren't the Father and Son, by definition, not equal? Although at times they may be equal, the
relationship necessitates one coming BEFORE the other and being MORE (at least
for a while) – stronger, more powerful, etc.
For me, this underlines one of the major difficulties for religion:
Finding language that makes Faith more, not less, available to those searching
for meaning.
I love these
questions.
I have no answers… but, boy oh boy, do I have a lot of
love.
The struggle with the Trinity is that every time someone
tries to explain it, it becomes a heresy.
For me, the Trinity is to Theology (and Faith) as an irrational number
is to mathematics and physics. You can’t
resolve the square root of two, nor can you resolve Pi… and yet, we rely on
even numbers and we use circles all the time.
When you think of if it, it’s as if every circle in our finite reality
has, at its core, an infinite component.
A number that never ends….
My understanding of God, is satisfying, rewarding and understandable
to me, but at its core lies an infinite mystery.
And it does work for many, just -as you describe it. Some need an awesome God who directs, creates and loves – anything less is a “minor deity” and hardly worthy of commitment or passion. However, there are also people who do not respond well to being “controlled” or overseen by another… they feel that their freedom of choice is infringed. Others also struggle with God the Father, because their own experience of “Father” has not been good or helpful. A distant, violent or horrific Father can drive people away from the love of God, when we insist on the term Father.
At present Jesus is what is needed for a great many
people – as we try to figure out what God’s love looks like; what God’s will
requires… we look to Jesus and we can understand how the Cosmic God responds to
a nagging next door neighbour. Without the
“human” expression of God, that would be quite challenging.
And a bunch of us need a Holy Spirit… present and
intimate, active in the world right now, at home in my kitchen and inside my
heart and head. That still small voice
giving me courage, reminding me of my responsibility for the world… giggling in
times of joy when it’s best that I keep a straight face.
And the mystery of our faith is that they are all onyou e…
one and the same. Same substance. They are the same “What”… but they are
different “Who”s. In practical terms, I
don’t know how to think of them as one – I pray to God, I talk to Jesus, I feel
the Spirit – they’re kind of different.
But my theology pushes me to imagine them as one… no priority or subordination. And maybe in this contemplation, I just be
able to imagine the people in my life as one… without priority or
subordination. Or my place in Creation:
without priority or subordination. I don’t
know..
What I do know is that the Great Schism: the first major
division of the church into East and West: Orthodox and Catholic (Roman) was
officially over the translation of the Creed that said that the Spirit proceeds
from the Father. Now, you’d think that
the problem is that the Spirit proceeding FROM the Father would make the Spirit
subordinate to or at least younger than the Father. That wasn’t the problem. There
was no problem because the Spirit desired to proceed from the Father – the desire
comes before the proceeding, so linear time is already messed up… and so the
Spirit can proceed from and yet still be contemporary with the Father. Follow that??
The problem is that the Spirit should proceed from the
Father AND the Son. By not including the
Son; be having the Spirit proceed only from the Father, you have subordinated
the Son.
And so the church split.
One Church got the Pope and other got really long beards. Did it really matter that much?
It did to some.
Trying to understand God is like sculpting a great chunk
of marble. Every day you try to cut away
all the bits that aren't “GOD” and reveal the beauty beneath… but every now and
then, someone thinks that you've cut away the most important “God” part: In this example, it’s the lack of Hierarchy
that must not be cut away….
Which brings us back to your final comment - our struggle is to go deeper and deeper,
discovering new ways of thinking about God; new ways of being open to the
Sacred and Divine.. but also to, provide a language that is communicative and
inviting to others – others not immersed in 2600 years of Faith history.
I think that the best that we can to is to keep trying…
becoming heretics and then trying again… Remember that Jesus was a Heretic and
that yesterday’s Heresy is tomorrows Orthodoxy
Thoughts?
First of all, I have no idea what you are talking about with the Great Schism... I sure am glad I didn't live then and have to decide which branch to follow - I might have given up entirely!
ReplyDeleteA couple of the other ideas work well for me - First off, the idea that we don't have to understand or resolve irrational mathematics to use a circle does inspire some leeway in a comprehensive understanding of the Divine. Secondly the way you refer to the Trinity as the same substance: They are the same “What”… but they are different “Who”s. That works for me if I think about atoms or other building blocks of matter. All things are made of the same 'what' - matter, but are different 'who's - tables, grass, water, humans, etc... When reduced back to their most basic parts, they are all the same, all equal, but when built, they are used for very different purposes and have very different qualities and characteristics. How's that for heresy? What does still prove to be a problem is that while some people may be able to accept a mystery as a basis for belief, many people want to be able to talk about their ideas, use analogies like yours (the Heretic Minister) and use language to explore their Faith. Limiting the language by calling it heresy (no criticism of you personally, but the thology as a whole) makes it really difficult to discuss, explain or share a topic that is already hard to throw into conversation but which begs to be discussed and shared.
I think that I agree with you... it is hard to share an irrational idea with someone - and yet, I appreciated the reality that every time I think that I've figured it out - I haven't. This encourages me to keep wondering; to keep open to others (after all, I haven't figured it out, either); and keep journeying. It humbles me to be a heretic and many of us religious types could use a little humility. I am quite persuaded by your "building blocks of matter" insight (very Aristotelian, if I may show off my classical education). As for the Great Schism... it was the first major split in the church: giving us the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church - primarily points of contention were the use of leavened and non-leavened bread for Communion; home of the Papacy in Constantinople or Rome and the "Filioque" clause about the Spirit proceeding from the Father (as noted above). 500 years later, the Roman Catholic church would split again, giving us the Protestant Church. (note: as we are now 500 years past that split, it seems we are due for another)
ReplyDelete