Blog of the Word - Trinity Sunday
Readings for Sunday:
http://www.usccb.org/nab/readings/051808.shtml
This is one of the so-called “doctrine feasts” on the church’s liturgical calendar. This particular Sunday is also one on which many preachers and homilists like to punt. They’ll often say that the Trinity is a mystery we can’t possibly hope to understand. So after a few pious platitudes about “three-in-one” and “one-who-is-three” and a few high sounding comments about Trinitarian heresies of the ancient past (adoptionism or modalism anyone?), many often leave people with the impression of the many paintings from centuries past that the Trinity is “two men and a bird” floating in the clouds somewhere, completely disconnected from our reality.
Not exactly the insights we get from this Sunday’s Liturgy of the Word, which reveals a whole lot more beauty, mystery, humility, compassion, and overflowing love in the life of our God than we could ever imagine on our own.
If there is anything that can be said about God from these readings, it is that God desires relationship with us – a relationship of communion. The Exodus reading reminds us of that, talking about God and the Divine Name. The readings from the New American Bible, like all the English translations of the Bible, use the word “Lord” (usually in special capital letters) as a substitute for what was (in the original Hebrew text) the Divine Name (Y_HW_H) spoken by God to Moses in the story of the burning bush. Using “Lord” in public proclamation was the way the ancient Israelites could speak of God without speaking “The Name,” as a sign of reverence for the transcendence of God. Christian biblical scholars often debate how best to render Y_HW_H in grammatical English. Many follow the translation “I am who am,” “I am who I am,” or simply, “I AM.” Many Jewish scholars, though, offer a much more intriguing and theologically powerful translation, which I prefer: “I will be there howsoever I will be there.”
What an image of God for us who seek the transformation of the church and the world! God WILL BE THERE, always, in many different ways, in unimagined ways, and in places where we think God is absent. Yet always “merciful, gracious, slow to anger, rich in kindness.” Even among a “stiff-necked people!”
The well-worn phrasing of John 3:16 tells us the same story, but with a new intensity. The evangelist in the tradition of John tells Jesus’ story as the Word made flesh, the promises of God made manifest in our human history – in an unimaginable way. Sadly, this verse is often used, out of context, to verbally bludgeon those who do not confess faith in Christ or to proselytize. Many who do use this verse neglect the one after it — that Christ comes not to condemn the world, but to save it.
The words about condemnation for unbelief can be seen in the same negative way. But remember that for this gospel writer, as well as those who wrote Matthew, Mark, and Luke-Acts, belief in Jesus is not about knowing doctrines about essence, nature, and Person, but about allowing a relationship with the Christ who lives and is present in the whole church to effect all that we do and say and are. It is this invitation that stands open to us as we gather for Eucharist each Sunday, or as we struggle in the hard slog of justice-seeking and peacemaking, or as we seek to break open the minds and hearts of those who lead our churches by our witness to this relational God, who even in the very divine essence is communion of persons.
The ancient Cappadocian theologians said that the Persons of the Trinity are the same except in regard to their relations: “One is not the other, is not the other.” Pretty abstract stuff! Until you make it relational. Father, and Son, and Spirit (Creator and Word and Spirit) are who they are because each One is “other.” Each one is unique in their relationships within God and to creation. It is in the full embrace of the otherness of each that true communion lives, in God’s life and our own (I am indebted to John Zizioulas, an Eastern Orthodox theologian, who, in his latest book, Communion and Otherness beautifully draws out the implications of this truth for all Christians).
What might our church and our world look like if we were persons who could, as St. Paul invites us in the second reading, “mend our ways, encourage one another,” and find ways to live in peace – a peace, of course, that is not the passive acceptance of injustice, but a dynamic righting of relationships in “The Name” of the Triune God we celebrate every day of our lives, and especially on this Sunday?
***
(As an additional thought, I am interested in how people relate to the imagery of Father, Son, and Spirit. Patriarchal though it is, I find that a relational understanding of God through a biblical lens can re-claim these “male” images in a more holistic way. At the same time, I am sensitive to those who find difficulty in the images, precisely because they are male and have a history of patriarchalism attached to them. I am interested in thoughts / reflections on this issue, or, of course, anything else that struck you in the readings for this week or in what I have reflected on.)
Finally, others have shared a bit about themselves in other posts, and I neglected to do so in my first, so here’s a little something about me!
Marc DelMonico is a Catholic lay ecclesial minister and theologian. Originally from upstate New York, Marc has been involved in various parish-based ministries, especially liturgy, adult faith formation, and music ministry. He holds a B.A. in Philosophy and Theology from St. Bonaventure University, an M.Div. and M.A. in Theology from Washington Theological Union and is presently a Ph.D. student in Systematic Theology at the Catholic University of America, with a focus in his on the theology of church. Deeply committed to the rich tradition of Catholic social teaching and the transforming power of God’s Spirit in the church and the world, he also works part time for the Franciscan Action Network (www.franciscanaction.org), a nonprofit legislative advocacy organization based in Washington, D.C., while occasionally presenting adult faith formation workshops and serving as a liturgical consultant and cantor.
3 Responses to “Blog of the Word - Trinity Sunday”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
May 16, 2008 at 7:33 pm
You are quite right in that we rarely get a homily on Trinity Sunday that gets to the heart of this wonderful feast, and I have even heard one horrible homily where the entire focus was on why we could NOT possibly refer to God as Creator, Redeemer and Sanctifier because God is “most certainly Father, Son and Holy Spirit”-who is also male “because we say HE in the Nicene Creed.”
Recalling that homily leads into your question about the male imagery of Father, Son and Holy Spirit. In both my personal theology and in my ministry, I always emphasize relationship with God using whatever language or metaphor works best for an individual. That is why I struggle with “Creator, Redeemer and Sanctifier,” though I most certainly don’t agree with the homilist referenced earlier on this subject, but because for me, the second two words are theological jargon that can be very difficult for a theology student (me) or a pew sitting Catholic to relate to.
On the other side, having worked with survivors of domestic/interpersonal violence, sexual abuse, and prostitutes who have been horribly abused by men, many of them by their fathers, I have a huge problem with the Church’s confinement of God to Father and Son. When I once explained to a group of women who had been sexually abused the history of the image “Ruah” and Spirit Sophia from Genesis to Acts, one woman, in tears, announced to the group that I had given God back to her because she could not relate to a father god no matter how loving he was because that was a metaphor she could not move past.
For me, I prefer the image of creator or birther for the first person of the Trinity. I also have no problem communally using parental figures as long as we do not confine God to being male all of time. People often relate well to God as Father or Mother because they have parents who love them unconditionally like God does. As for son, I agree that it works well theologically, and I have seen fewer issues with this in people’s ability to relate to God as Son in their personal prayer life. In my own life and teaching, I very much like the image of Logos/Word, but again, that is pretty theologically heady. I also like referring to the second person as “Jesus Christ” because of its duel emphasis on God as human and divine—a God whose image we can see in ourselves.
Thank-you for the prayerful and thought provoking post!
May 21, 2008 at 3:49 pm
Thanks Becky for your response! I appreciate your sharing about your experience and those of others with the male imagery of the Trinity. I think it would be wonderful someday when we might be able to have prayers in the liturgy that reflect male and female imagery for God. Right now, the reason given is that the prayers of the liturgy need to reflect the traditional Trinitarian formula. There is something to be said for that but also the new need we clearly see for those for whom the male imagery is a hindrance and even for those who might not imagine God as other than a male.
The rather ridiculous comment from the priest’s homily that you shared reminds me of a ridiculous line in the Catechism of the Church which says, completely seriously “God is neither male nor female. HE is spirit.” The priest is also doubly wrong because the Nicene creed, in both its Greek original and Latin translation do not use “he” like the English translation does. Greek and Latin link all the clauses in the creed as prepositional phrases using “kai” (and) or “ton” or “qui” (who) and doesn’t explicitly use “he.” (Granted, this is not because of a concern about male imagery but because the way the languages are structured gramatically.)
Anyway, your post is a reminder that all images fall short in the face of hte Divine Mystery and we should recognize that many images can and should be used wherever possible to put us in touch with the Great Mystery.
May 23, 2008 at 9:22 pm
Ha! God is neither male nor female. He is spirit. This is my problem with the 12 steps to. It says you have come to rely on a higher power however you conceive HIM.
Becky, what a moving experience with the woman who said you gave God back to her. That is beautiful! Thank you for sharing that. The language she used was perfect.
I come from a perspective where the parental language as a whole is not positive for me. But Creator I get. When all the chips are down so to speak, looking at nature always makes me feel loved and cradled. However, I’ve only had positive experiences with nature. I’ve never been in a hurricane or tsunami, or hit by lightening, etc. Interesting how these different settings can sure affect what one believes.