Re-Viewing the Trinity
June 16, 2008
The Reverend Anne Felton Hines
The story is told to us that one day, Jesus said to his disciples, “Who do men say that I am?” And his disciples answered and said, “Some say you are John the Baptist returned from the dead; others say Elias, or other of the old prophets.”
Jesus answered and said, “But who do you say that I am?”
And Peter answered, saying, “Thou art the Logos, existing in the Father as His rationality and then, by an act of His will, being generated, in consideration of the various functions by which God is related to his creation, but only on the fact that Scripture speaks of a Father, and a Son, and a Holy Spirit, each member of the Trinity being co-equal with every other member, and each acting inseparably with and interpenetrating every other member, with only an economic subordination within God, but causing no division which would make the substance no longer simple.”
And Jesus answered and said, “What?”
That’s always been my reaction when reading explanations of the Trinity – the idea that God is three Persons in One. Indeed, the only time I really got a handle on it was during Seminary, when another student, Philip, explained the Trinity and the arguments against it, through the art of juggling!
It was on the anniversary of the martyrdom of Michael Servetus, one of our Unitarian “saints.” Some of us had organized a worship service and party to commemorate the event.
Philip used four juggling balls, as I recall: One was a volleyball, I think – representing God; and the other 3 were tennis balls, each representing one “Person” in the Trinity – the father, the son, and the Holy Spirit (which I’m pretty sure had a white scarf covering it!).
It was the most amazing juggling act I’ve ever seen – hysterically funny, and educationally enlightening. (Eventually Philip decided that his true “calling” was juggling, and the last I heard, he was happily performing in Las Vegas, undoubtedly making more money than any of his fellow students who went into parish ministry! J)
Servetus and others who claimed that the doctrine of the Trinity was Biblically unsound were correct; the Trinity was a concept developed long after the death of Jesus, by men trying to understand the nature of God, and the relationship of God to their great prophet, Jesus of Nazareth. But nowhere in the four Gospels does Jesus claim to be God, or does he describe God as a Trinity.
None of this was of consequence to me when I was growing up in the Episcopal church, where every Sunday we recited one of two creeds – either the Apostles Creed, which is a very succinct statement of belief about the three “Persons” of God; or the Nicene Creed, which reiterates the tenets of the Apostles Creed, but in slightly more elaborate form.
It’s believed that the Nicene Creed is the earliest, developed during the Council of Nicea in the 4th century – a Council convened by the Emperor Constantine for the purpose of defining Church doctrine. It’s there that the first “anti-Trinitarians,” led by an Egyptian priest named Arius, denounced the idea that Jesus was both human and God, and for that they were deemed heretics. Arius did eventually renounce his views, but died a sudden and mysterious death during the ceremony readmitting him to the church – some say poisoned by those who still believed him to be a heretic.
Ahhh, such intrigue!
It was at the Council of Nicea that the doctrine of the Trinity became the official doctrine of the Christian church. Several centuries later, a third creed was created – the Athanasian Creed. It’s far longer and much more complicated than the other two, and it was probably what later anti-Trinitarians like Servetus used to tear apart the idea of a Triune God. And I’m sure it’s the basis for the joke with which I opened this sermon; reading the Athanasian Creed is like reading a legal document!
It wouldn’t be until the 16th century, however, that the so-called “Arian controversy” would re-surface. When Michael Servetus was only six years old, Martin Luther nailed his 95 Theses on the church door – an act that resulted in his excommunication from the Catholic Church, and signaled the onset of the Protestant Reformation.
Fourteen years later, at the young age of 20, Servetus wrote his book, On the Errors of the Trinity, in hopes of convincing Protestant leaders like John Calvin that the doctrine of the Trinity was misguided. And maybe if he’d just put the idea out there a little more gently and respectfully, things would have turned out differently.
But Michael Servetus was not known for his gentleness! He mocked the doctrine, writing that “We have become Atheists, because we don’t have any one God.”
He went on to claim that “the tradition of the Trinity is the laughingstock to Mohammadans,” and the “Jews laugh at our foolishness…Even the beasts of the field would make fun of us” if they could grasp “our fantastical notion,” he wrote.
Not surprisingly, the Protestant leaders were outraged by his insults, and very concerned as to what his views might do to their still-young movement. Servetus’ book was banned, and for 20 years he was forced to live in France under a different name. Eventually he was recognized, arrested, and finally burned at the stake with almost all printed copies of his books at his feet.
Francis David, author of our second Responsive Reading this morning, was a popular 16th century Unitarian spokesman in Transylvania who had an easier time getting his anti-Trinitarian views accepted. For one thing, Transylvania was more open to differing theological views; its king was the first to issue an Edict of Religious Toleration. And it was there that the first church to be designated Unitarian was established; by 1571, Unitarianism was such an accepted religion that there were almost 500 congregations! But after the king’s death, the spirit of religious tolerance was quickly usurped by Calvinists, and David was arrested. He died in prison.
But I suspect that if Servetus or David were alive today, their ideas about the Trinity would seem pretty harmless to fellow Christians. I know a number of Protestant clergy for whom the doctrine of the Trinity is no longer central to their ministry. Indeed, one Lutheran minister told me years ago that he was uncomfortable with the idea of God as “Father, son and Holy Spirit.” Instead, he liked to think of God as “Creator, Redeemer, Sustainer.” He acknowledged, however, that he could never talk to his congregation about this!
But I liked his Trinity. I think of how often we Unitarian Universalists sing the words, “Spirit of Life, come unto me…” Is it not that Spirit of Life which has created all that is; and which redeems us – lifts us up – when we feel most hopeless; and which breathes life through us until we take our last breath? Could those three words – Creator, Redeemer, Sustainer – not be applied to whatever it is that we claim as our Higher Power, that Mystery so impossible to name?
Last Sunday was Trinity Sunday in Christian churches, and I thought about that Lutheran colleague of mine who couldn’t share his concept of the Trinity with his congregation. I wonder what he preached last Sunday? How did he talk about this doctrine so integral to his faith tradition, and also remain true to himself?
Perhaps he’d say something similar to what I read on another minister’s blog – that “the Trinity teaches us something about ourselves: First, that God exists in relationship, not in isolation and individualism;” therefore, we—made in God’s image – are not isolated beings, but live in relationship to all that is. And second, the minister wrote, we learn from the Trinity “that true love requires three partners. We become fully human when in relationship with God and with others.” Another way to say that might be that “we become fully human when in relationship” with the Holy Spirit of Life and Love, and extend that relationship to others.
Perhaps my Lutheran friend would utter this prayer I found on another website: “O Father, our hope; O son, our refuge; O Holy Spirit, our protection.” For those of you who have faith in a personal God, do you not turn to that God for “hope” in time of despair; for “refuge” in time of fear or sorrow; for “protection” in time of danger?
In American Unitarianism during the 20th century, when Humanism became such a strong and vital presence, other words began to arise as a Trinity: “Freedom, Reason and Tolerance” – though today we’ve replaced “tolerance” with “acceptance of one another,” as “tolerance” tends to imply judgment of another.
Every time I receive an e-mail from Ann Fisher, I am reminded of her Trinity: “Respect, Freedom and Justice.” Can’t argue with that! Nor can I argue with the three attributes named in our opening hymn this morning that could be considered a holy Trinity: Hope, Peace and Love.
In the Holistic Health movement, I think the “trinity” of “body, mind, and spirit” is often referenced. And of course, probably the most popular Biblical reading chosen for weddings is from St. Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians, in which he offered another Trinity of sorts: “Faith, hope and love; these three abide,” he wrote; “but the greatest of these is Love.”
Today we don’t hear much said about our Unitarian roots being founded in the anti-Trinitarianism of the early Christian church and the radical arm of the Protestant Reformation. At most, we hear reference to those roots in the joke: “Unitarians believe in one God, at the most!” But the anti-Trinitarian movement is what led to the first half of our name: Unitarian versus Trinitarian.
Today we’re much more apt to define Unitarianism as pointing to the “unity” of all that is – as being the grounding for our 7th Principle, which affirms our “respect for the interdependent web of all existence….” And that’s fine; it has much more significance to most of us than the complicated and now-meaningless doctrine of the Trinity.
But I wonder if it might still be helpful to reflect on what our Trinity might be today? What three values are most precious to us – guide us most steadily through life and bring wholeness?
I’ve been reflecting on what my “Trinity” might be, and at first I thought of St. Paul’s: Faith – that in which I put my trust and to which I give my heart; Hope – the power to face fear and despair, and move beyond them; and Love – that spirit of compassion and commitment that calls me to work for the common good.
But if I return to that Trinity of the Holistic movement – Body, Mind, and Spirit – I might claim as my Trinity, “Love (or “Body/Heart”), Reason (or “Mind”), and Faith (or “Spirit”) – all of which strengthen my ability to hope, and lead me to work for peace and justice.
What would be your Trinity – the three “essences” that form the Whole? What is it that sustains you, guides you and brings you peace?
May we never stop seeking our “Star of Truth.” May we embrace with joy our reason, our faith, and our love. And may we live each day with gratitude for those brave souls of so long ago, who risked their lives and spoke their truth, in order that we might freely live and worship, and create a world of peace for all beings.
Amen.
© 2008-2010 Anne Felton Hines. All rights reserved.
