20 by a clever cross-examination brought out the fact that all really held the same faith. This led St. Gregory Nazianzen to observe: "It was indeed a ludicrous, or rather a regrettable incident; there appeared to be divergency of faith where there was merely a dispute about words." The Council finally permitted the use of both locutions (viz.: One Hypostasis and Three Hypostases), on condition that in employing the former phrase there be no imputation of Sabellianism, and in enunciating the latter, the Arian heresy of three separate and distinct Gods be expressly disavowed. But it soon became necessary to define the dogma still more clearly. St. Basil was the first who endeavored formally to justify the phrase "Three Hypostases," and to give it universal currency.21 c) It is easy, in addition, to quote express Patristic texts showing that the Fathers understood oμoovoía to mean ravтovσía. St. Basil, for example, in rejecting Ditheism and Tritheism, writes: "Only one God the Father, only one God the Son, not two Gods, because the Son is identical with the Father (ἐπειδὴ ταυτότητα ἔχει ὁ υἱὸς πρὸς τὸν πατέρα). For I do not behold one Deity in the Father, and another in the Son, nor one Nature here, and another there." 22 St. Gregory of Nazianzus anticipates the scientific terminology of a later age when he says: "Neque enim Filius est Pater, nam unus Pater: tamen Filius est id, quod Pater. Nec Spiritus est Filius, quia ex Deo est, nam unus unigenitus; tamen Spiritus est id, quod Filius. Tres sunt unum deitate (ev rà Tpía tỹ beótyti), unum est tres proprietati 20 Or. 21, 35 (Migne, P. G., XXXV, 1126). 21 Cfr. Jos. Schwane, Dogmengeschichte, Vol. II, 2nd ed., p. 151. 22 Hom., 24, 3 (Migne, P. G., XXXI, 604 sq.). bus (τὸ ἓν τρία ταῖς ἰδιότησι = ὑποστάσεσιν) — The Son is not the Father, for there is but one Father: yet the Son is that which the Father is. Nor is the Holy Ghost the Son, for the reason that He is from God, because there is but one Only-begotten; yet the Holy Ghost is that which the Son is. The Three are one Godhead, and the One Godhead is threefold with regard to its Properties [i. e., the Hypostases]." 23 The unknown author of the Libri XII de Trinitate (believed by some to be Vigilius of Tapsus, by others St. Athanasius), cries out in holy anger: "Maledictus, qui propter tria nomina personarum tres deos confitetur - Cursed be he who, because there are Three Personal Names, professes three Gods." 24 A conclusive and definitive testimony, which expressly echoes the faith of the preceding ages, is this of St. Augustine: "Omnes, quos legere potui, qui ante me scripserunt de Trinitate, quae Deus est hoc intenderunt secundum Scripturas docere, quod Pater et Filius et Spiritus Sanctus unius eiusdemque substantiae inseparabili aequalitate divinam insinuent unitatem, ideoque non sint tres dii, sed unus Deus. All those whom I have been able to read, who have written before me concerning the Trinity, who is God, have purposed to teach, according to the Scriptures, this doctrine, that the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit intimate a divine unity of one and the same substance in an indivisible equality; and therefore that they are not three Gods, but one God." 25 This declaration of the great Bishop of Hippo embodies one of the most telling arguments against Tritheism. d) There seems to be one weak link in the Patristic chain of evidence, and that is the teaching of St. Gregory 23 Or., 31, 9. 24 In Migne, P. L., LXII, 278. 25 De Trinit., I, 4, 7. Haddan's translation, p. 7. of Nyssa, who puts the essential unity of the Three Divine Persons on a level with the essential unity proper to three human beings. But if we consider that, as a philosopher, Gregory advocated Platonic ultra-realism and conceived the specific unity of human individuals as a genuine Tavrovoía, we shall be inclined to consider the remarkable parallel this Saint has drawn between divine and human unity as a confirmation rather than an indictment of his orthodoxy. If it were true, as he held, that human nature is numerically the same in all men,2o and that many men is said by an abuse of the -term, not in its strict sense," 27 that, therefore, "Peter and Paul and Barnabas are but one man," "28 it would be perfectly orthodox to say that "Igitur unus nobis confitendus est Deus iuxta Scripturae testimonium: Audi Israel, Dominus Deus tuus Dominus unus est,2 etiamsi vox deitatis permeat sanctam Trinitatem.” 3° 66 29 READINGS:- Hefele, Conciliengeschichte, Vols. III and V, 2nd ed., Freiburg 1877 and 1886.— Oswald, Trinitätslehre, §10, Paderborn 1888.- Albert a Bulsano, Instit. Theologiae Dogmat. Specialis, ed. Gfr. a Graun, tom. I, pp. 174-200, Oeniponte 1893. - Kleutgen, De Ipso Deo, 1. II, qu. 2, cap. 1–5, Ratisbonae 1881. - Hurter, Compendium, t. II, ed. 9a, thes. 114-116, Oeniponte 1896.- Scheeben, Dogmatik, Vol. I, §112, Freiburg 1873.- H. P. Liddon, The Divinity of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, pp. 528 sqq., London 1867. 26 εἰς δὲ ἐν πᾶσι ὁ ἄνθρωπος. 27 λέγονται δὲ πολλοὶ ἄνθρωποι καταχρηστικῶς καὶ οὐ κυρίως. 28 These quotations will be found in Migne, P. G., XLV, 180. 29 Deut. VI, 4. 30 Gregory of Nyssa, Ad Ablabium (Migne, P. G., XLV, 119.) Cfr. Bardenhewer-Shahan, Patrology, pp. 300 sqq., Freiburg and St. Louis 1908. CHAPTER II ONENESS OF EXTERNAL OPERATION OF THE Oneness of external operation in the Blessed Trinity follows as a corollary from the unity of the Divine Nature, and therefore scarcely needs separate proof. For the sake of completeness, however, we shall elaborate (1) a Scriptural, (2) a traditional, and (3) a theological argument in support of this particular dogma. At a Lateran Council held by Pope Martin I, in the year 649, 105 Bishops unanimously condemned Monotheletism. True, this synod lacks the authority of a general council; but by being incorporated into the proceedings of the Sixth Ecumenical Council, A. D. 680, its canons acquired whatever universal authority they may have originally lacked. This Lateran Council of 649 affirms that in the Blessed Trinity "will, power, operation, and dominion are one." 1 This unity is explained by the Fourth General Council of the Lateran (A. D. 1215) to be one by 1 1 Cfr. Denzinger-Bannwart, Enchiridion, n. 254. Hardouin, Concil., t. III, pp. 922, 1078 sq. 275 which the Three Divine Persons are "unum universorum principium, creator omnium visibilium et invisibilium - The one principle of all things, the Creator of all things visible and invisible." 2 To remove every vestige of doubt in the matter, the Decretum pro Iacobitis (A. D. 1439) places the creative power of the Trinity on a par with the unity of the principle of Spiration that reposes in the Father and the Son, and from which the Holy Ghost proceeds unica spiratione.3 1. THE ARGUMENT FROM SACRED SCRIPTURE. -Christ on various occasions formally identified His divine operation with that of His Father. Compare, e. g., John V, 17: "Pater meus usque modo operatur et ego operor - My father worketh until now, and I work," with John V, 19: "Non potest Filius a se facere quidquam, nisi quod viderit Patrem facientem -The Son cannot do any thing of Himself, but what he seeth the Father doing." These texts, while they clearly show a distinction of Persons and origin, also intimate unity of action. Other texts identify the operation of Father and Son even more positively. Thus John XIV, IO: "A me ipso non loquor, Pater autem in me manens ipse facit omnia - I speak not of myself, but the Father who abideth in me, he doth 2 Cfr. Denzinger-Bannwart, Enchiridion, n. 428. |