127. Trinity and Distinction of Divine Persons

Subscribe in Podcast App | Download Transcript

Lecture Notes

Main Topics #

The Name ‘Trinity’ in Divine Things #

• Signifies determined number of persons: Trinity names the number of three persons in unity of essence, not the unity itself
• Etymology vs. proper meaning: By etymology, Trinity means ‘unity of three things’ (trium unitas), but properly signifies the number of persons of one essence
• Not strictly a collective name: While Trinity resembles collective names (implying multitude and unity), it differs because it includes unity of essence, not merely unity of order
• Trinity vs. Triplicity: Trinity is said absolutely (like simple number), while triplicity signifies a ratio of inequality; therefore God has Trinity but not Triplicity
• Persons numbered in unity of nature: The three persons are placed in the unity of divine essence just as individual substances are said to be in their nature

Proper Language: Alios vs. Aliud #

• The Latin distinction: Alios (masculine) signifies another person/supposit; aliud (neuter) would signify another thing/nature
• Application to divine persons: The Son is alios (another person) from the Father but not aliud (another nature) since they share one essence
• Avoiding heretical language: One must avoid calling the Son ‘diverse’ or ‘different’ from the Father (implying difference of nature) or ‘alien’ from the Father
• Distinction vs. difference: Distinction applies to supposits/persons; difference implies distinction of form and therefore of nature
• One unum, not unus: The Father and Son are unum (one in essence) but not unus (one person)

Rules for Speaking of the Trinity #

• Avoid diversity/difference: Would remove simplicity of divine essence; instead use ‘distinction’
• Avoid separation/division: Would imply composition of parts
• Avoid disparity: Would remove equality of persons
• Avoid alienation: Would remove likeness between persons
• Avoid singularity/uniqueness: Would remove communicability of divine nature
• Avoid confused language: Would remove the order of origin (Son from Father, Spirit from Father and Son)
• Avoid solitary language: Would deny the fellowship (consortium) of the three persons

Two Opposite Errors #

• Arianism: Says what is not, is—posits three substances/natures that don’t exist
• Sabellianism: Says what is, is not—denies the real distinction of persons
• The middle truth: One essence with three persons; mistakes about Trinity often stem from overemphasizing one element at expense of the other

Key Arguments #

Objections to the Name ‘Trinity’ #

1. Either-or argument: Trinity signifies neither substance nor relation, so lacks meaning
2. Collective name problem: Implies least unity, but God has greatest unity
3. Inequality objection: If three, then threefold; triplicity is inequality, which cannot be in God
4. Essential unity problem: Whatever is in God is in unity of essence; three essential unities is heretical
5. Concrete-abstract problem: If ‘Trinity’ means three persons, there should be nine things in God

Thomas’s Responses #

• Trinity signifies the determined number of persons (plurality); just as ‘plurality’ names the indeterminate many, ‘Trinity’ names the distinct three
• Trinity has likeness to collective names but differs by including unity of essence, not just unity of order
• Trinity is said absolutely (not relatively), while triplicity is relative and implies inequality; therefore Trinity, not triplicity, belongs to God
• The persons numbered (not the number itself) are placed in the unity of nature

Objections to Saying Son is Alios from Father #

1. Diversity objection: If alios, then diverse in substance (against Augustine)
2. Difference objection: Whoever are other differ from one another (against Ambrose)
3. Alienation objection: Son not alien from Father (against Hilary)
4. Neuter form problem: Alios and aliud differ only in gender; if Son is alios, should be aliud

Thomas’s Responses #

• Alios signifies distinction of supposit/person only; aliud would signify distinction of nature
• Difference implies distinction of form/nature; alios implies only distinction of supposit
• Distinction is by persons but not by nature; therefore Father is alios from Son, but they are unum in essence, not unus
• Neuter gender signifies common nature; masculine and feminine signify individual substances determined in that nature

Important Definitions #

Trinity (τριάς/trinitas) #

The name signifying the determined number of three divine persons subsisting in the unity of one divine essence, without implying any composition or inequality.

Alios (masculine: another person) #

Signifies distinction at the level of supposit (hypostasis/person), implying real distinction of persons but not difference of nature.

Aliud (neuter: another thing) #

Would signify distinction of nature or essence; not properly used of divine persons since they share one essence.

Distinction (distinctio) #

More appropriate term than ‘division’ when speaking of divine persons; indicates that one is not the other without implying composition of parts.

Supposit/Hypostasis #

The individual substance or person; in divine things, each person is a supposit of the one divine nature.

Examples & Illustrations #

The Sign of the Cross #

• ‘In the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, Amen’: The singular ’name’ (not ’names’) implies one nature of the three persons while professing their distinction
• Shows that ’name’ signifies nature, and the singularity hints at unity of essence despite three distinct persons

Numerical Distinctions #

• Two absolute number: Can say ‘Father and Son are two persons’ (said absolutely, not relatively)
• Double as relative: Would not say ‘Father and Son are double’ as this implies inequality and relative comparison

Translation Problem #

• English cannot capture the distinction: Alios/aliud distinction is lost in English; one must say ‘another person’ vs. ‘another thing’ to preserve the meaning
• Demonstrates why precision in Latin is necessary for theological discourse

Notable Quotes #

“From words put forth in a disordered way, heresy is incurred.” - Jerome (cited by Thomas as opening principle)

“Nowhere does one make a mistake with more danger, nor with more labor is anything sought, nor is anything found that is more fruitful.” - Augustine, on speaking of the Trinity

“All my reports go with the modest truth, nor more, nor clipped, but so.” - Shakespeare (cited by Berquist on precision in theological language)

“One ought to venerate unity in Trinity, the one nature in the Trinity, and the Trinity, the three persons in the unity.” - Athanasius

“In the divine persons there is nothing diverse, nothing alien, nothing separable.” - Hilary of Poitiers

“The Father and the Son are one in godhood and deity, nor is there a difference of substance.” - Ambrose

“When we say three persons, we do not wish to be understood a diversity.” - Augustine

“To predicate Father and Son a singular God is sacrilegious.” - Hilary of Poitiers

“Neither solitary nor diverse should God be confessed to be.” - Hilary of Poitiers

Questions Addressed #

Does the name ‘Trinity’ have any proper meaning in divine things? #

Yes. According to proper meaning, Trinity signifies the determined number of three divine persons of one essence, distinct from other names like ‘plurality’ which is indeterminate. It adds nothing real except the negation of division.

How can Trinity be a proper name if it seems like a collective name? #

While Trinity resembles collective names in implying both multitude and unity, it differs because collective names imply only unity of order, whereas Trinity includes unity of essence. The three persons are united not just by relation but by sharing one divine nature.

Why is Trinity said absolutely rather than relatively? #

Because Trinity, like the number three, is said absolutely—without essential reference to another. Triplicity, by contrast, is a ratio of inequality and thus relative. Only Trinity properly applies to God.

Can one properly say the Son is ‘other’ (alios) from the Father? #

Yes, when alios is understood to signify distinction of supposit/person only. The Son is another person (alios) but not another thing (aliud), since both share the one divine nature. This preserves both the real distinction of persons and the unity of essence.

Why must one avoid calling divine persons ‘diverse’ or ‘different’? #

Diversity and difference imply distinction of form or nature. Since the three divine persons share one nature, these terms are inappropriate. ‘Distinction’ is the proper term, signifying that one person is not another without implying difference of nature.

What is the relationship between the two heresies (Arianism and Sabellianism) regarding the Trinity? #

Both represent failures to maintain the middle truth. Arianism adds what is not (three natures that don’t exist), while Sabellianism subtracts what is (denies the real distinction of persons). The truth that there are three persons in one nature can explain both heresies: emphasis on ’three persons’ can lead to positing three natures; emphasis on ‘one nature’ can lead to denying distinction of persons.