HOMILY FOR TRINITY SUNDAY
Since the publication of Jürgen Moltmann's "The Trinity and the
Kingdom of God" in 1981, more and more books about the Holy
Trinity have appeared. We get a lot of them and I read most of
them. It seems to me that books about the Holy Trinity are almost
never mediocre but either extraordinarily bad and boring or
astonishingly intriguing and exciting.
One that I found to be in the latter category is "These
Three are One: The Practice of Trinitarian Theology" by David S.
Cunningham. Some will find his avoidance of the term "person" and
his attempts to find alternative names for the Father, Son, and
Holy Spirit aggravating, but he explains his reasoning. And I
think that an author who is courteous enough to take the trouble
to apologize for making a daring attempt to accomplish something
worthwhile deserves a sympathetic hearing.
Cunningham says that one extremely important aspect of
Moltmann's book and the works that have been inspired by it is
the insistence that belief in the Trinity ought to make a
difference. What one truly believes ought to manifest itself in
how one acts. The Trinity ought not to be an optional extra. Nor
should it be seen as a matter of earning merit in a religious
game, as if one were increasingly holy the more numerous the
incomprehensible things one affirmed. This is all well and good,
but the problem, according to Cunningham, is that the statements
about what belief in the Holy Trinity ought to mean in terms of
how we live our lives are so vague and bland that they don't
really say anything at all--certainly nothing that is connected
with belief in the Holy Trinity. Cunningham examines what the
consequences of a truly Trinitarian outlook ought to be in
various topics, including sex and violence in a way that would
appall Pat Robertson, but I was gratified that any author would
suggest concrete ways in which belief in the Trinity should make
a difference in how you live your life. That is what is
important--how you live your life.
But I don't intend to go into that--there is no time to
follow all his reasoning in a sermon. Read the book. Instead, I
want to look at how he approaches the mystery of the Trinity
itself. He notes something that I have commented on earlier--that
writers about the Holy Trinity either begin with God and then try
to show that God is three persons or begin with the three persons
and then try to show that they are one God. Logically one might
think that one has to begin someplace--at one end or the other of
the loaf, as one might say, but Cunningham suggests that this is
only because we are asking the question incorrectly. He begins
neither with the one and the many nor with the many and the one
but with relationships. It was all interesting and pretty
abstract and was just added to my porous memory without making a
great impression, but the seed was planted.
The catalyst was another book, this one not about the Holy
Trinity (though, to take Cunningham's suggestion to a logical
conclusion, if the book is about something true, it ought to
manifest, however vestigially, the truth of the Trinity). The
book was "The Puppet of Desire: The Psychology of Hysteria,
Possession, and Hypnosis" by Jean-Michel Oughourlian. I don't
normally go in for that sort of topic, but Oughourlian is an
interpreter of the theories of Ren‚ Girard, so I looked at his
book.
He said that one of the great post-Enlightenment myths about
personality is that there is a real "self." He said that the
"self" as it differs in all its relationships is all the "real
self"--that relationships make the "self." He was saying the same
sort of thing that Cunningham was saying about God, but he was
saying it about me. It was no abstraction any longer but as real
as myself. There is a post-Cartesian myth that we are autonomous
individuals who freely to choose to enter into relationships. It
is not true. I am the product of relationships--those between my
parents, between my parents and myself, relationships that
everyone and every group I have ever encountered has had with me
and with every other entity that has ever been in relationship
with any other. Existence is relationships.
If God exists, then God is in relationship. If God is the
creator, as Judaism, Christianity and Islam teach, then he must
have been in relationship with himself before creation. Rather
than the Trinity's being an unnecessary abstraction, it is a
necessary truth. If existence is relationships, then a God who is
not a Trinity could not exist. Because He does, we do.
---Fr. Aelred
|