TCR.15-17, 1.1.8, 'With men who acknowledge several Gods instead of one there is no coherence in the things relating to the church.'

15

(8) With men who acknowledge several Gods instead of one there is no coherence in the things relating to the church.

 

He who in his belief acknowledges and in his heart worships one God is both in the communion of the saints on earth and in the communion of the angels in heaven. These are called “communions,” and are communions, because such are in the one God and the one God is in them. Moreover, they are in conjunction with the entire angelic heaven, and, I might venture to say, with all and each of its inhabitants, for they are all like the children and descendants of one father, whose dispositions, manners, and features are similar, whereby they recognize each other. The angelic heaven is harmoniously arranged in societies in accordance with all the varieties of the love of good, and these varieties center in one universal love, which is love to God; from which love all are born who in belief acknowledge and in heart worship the one God, who is both the creator of the universe and the redeemer and regenerator.

 

[2] But it is a wholly different matter with those who approach and worship several gods instead of one, and with those who talk of one and think of three, as do those in the church at this day who divide God into three persons, and declare that each person by himself is God, and attribute to each one special qualities or properties that do not belong to the others. From this arises a disintegration not only of the unity of God but of theology itself, and still further of human thought, to which theology belongs. And what can follow from this but perplexity and incoherency in things of the church? That such is the state of the church at this day will be shown in the appendix to this work. The truth is that the division of God, or of the Divine essence, into three persons, each one of whom by himself or singly is God, induces a denial of God. It is as if a man should enter a temple to worship, and see painted on a tablet over the altar one God as the ancient of days, another as the great high priest, and the third as a flying Aeolus, with the inscription: “These three are one God”; or like seeing there the unity and trinity depicted as a man with three heads on one body, of three bodies under one head, which would be monstrosities. If anyone should enter heaven with such an idea he would certainly be cast out headlong, even if he should declare that the head or heads mean the essence, and the body or bodies its different properties.

 

 

16

To this I will add the following memorable relation: I saw some who had recently come from the natural world into the spiritual world talking together about three Divine persons from eternity. They were dignitaries of the church, and one of them was a bishop.

 

They came up to me; and after some talk about the spiritual world, respecting which they had before known nothing, I said, “I heard you speaking of three Divine persons from eternity; I beseech you to disclose to me this great mystery according to the conception you had formed of it in the natural world from which you have lately come.”

 

Then the bishop, looking at me, said, “I see that you are a layman, therefore I will set forth my ideas on this great mystery, and will instruct you. My conception of the matter was, and still is, that God the Father, God the son, and God the Holy Spirit sit in the center of heaven upon magnificent and lofty seats or thrones—God the Father on a throne of pure gold, with a scepter in his hand; God the son at his right hand on a throne of the purest silver, with a crown on his head; and God the Holy Spirit near them, on a throne of dazzling crystal, holding a dove in his hand; and that round about them in triple order are hanging lamps glittering with precious stones; while at a distance from this circle stand innumerable angels, all worshiping and singing praises; and furthermore, that God the Father is continually talking with his son about those who are to be justified, and they together judge and determine who on earth are worthy to be received by them among the angels, and crowned with eternal life; while God the Holy Spirit, on hearing the names of such, hastens to them throughout the earth, carrying with him gifts of righteousness as so many tokens of salvation for the justified; and the instant he approaches and breathes upon them he disperses their sins, as a ventilator drives the smoke from a furnace and makes it white. He also takes away the stony hardness of their hearts, and imparts the tenderness of flesh, and at the same time renews their spirits or minds, and regenerates them, giving them infantile faces; and finally he seals them in the forehead with the sign of the cross, and calls them ‘the elect’ and ‘sons of God.’” Having finished this speech the bishop said, “Thus did I in the world elucidate this great mystery; and as most of our order there applauded my utterances, I am persuaded that you also, who are a layman, will assent to them.”

 

[2] When the bishop had ceased speaking I looked at him, and also at the dignitaries with him, and I noticed that they all gave full assent to what he had said. I therefore began to reply, and said, “I have given close attention to the statement of your belief, and from it I gather that you have conceived and cherish an idea of the triune God that is wholly natural, sensual, and even material, and that there inevitably follows from it the idea of three gods. Is it not thinking sensually of God the Father to conceive of him as seated on a throne with a scepter in his hand; and of the son on his throne with a crown on his head; and of the Holy Spirit on his with a dove in his hand, and as hastening over the world in accordance with what he hears? And as such an idea results from your statements, I cannot assent to them; for from my childhood I have not been able to admit into my mind any other idea than that of one God; and since I have accepted and hold no other idea, all that you have said has no weight with me. I also saw that ‘the throne’ on which Jehovah is said in Scripture to sit means his kingdom, the ‘scepter’ and ‘crown,’ government and dominion; the ‘sitting at the right hand,’ God’s omnipotence through his humanity; also that by what is attributed to the Holy Spirit the operations of Divine omnipresence are meant. Assume, sir, if you please, the idea of one God, and rightly dwell upon that in your reasonings, and you will at length clearly apprehend that this is so.

 

[3] “Furthermore, you admit that God is one, in that you make the essence of these three persons one and indivisible; while yet you do not allow anyone to say that this one God is one person, but he must say that there are three persons and this you do lest the idea of three gods, such as you entertain, should be lost; also you ascribe to each person a property different from those of the others. In all this do you not divide your Divine essence? And this being so, how can you say and also think that God is one? I could excuse you if you had said that the Divine is one. How can anyone on hearing that ‘The Father is God, the son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God, and singly each person is God, ‘ possibly think of God as one? Is it not a contradiction, to which assent is utterly impossible? That they cannot be said to be one God, but only to have a like Divinity, may be thus illustrated. A number of men forming one senate, assembly, or council, cannot be called one man; although when each and all have the same opinion they may be said to be one in thought. Neither can three diamonds of the same substance be called one diamond; although they may be called one in substance. Moreover, each diamond would differ from the others in value according to its weight, which would not be true if they were one instead of three.

 

[4] “But I perceive the reason why three persons, each one of whom is by himself singly God, are called by you one God, and why you enjoin upon everyone in the church so to speak, namely, because all sound and enlightened reason in the world acknowledges God to be one, and in consequence you would be covered with shame if you too did not speak in like manner. And yet when you utter the words ‘one God’ while in your thoughts there are three, that shame does not prevent your giving utterance to both of these ideas.”

 

After this conversation the bishop with his clerical companions withdrew, and as he departed he turned and tried to say, “There is one God”; but he could not say it, because this thought restrained his tongue, and with open mouth he gasped out, “Three gods!” At this strange sight the bystanders laughed derisively and departed.

 

 

17

Afterwards I asked where I could find those of the learned with the keenest minds who stood for a Divine trinity divided into three persons. Three of these presented themselves; and I said to them, “How can you divide the Divine trinity into three persons, and assert that each person, by himself or singly, is God and Lord? Is not a confession of the mouth that God is one thus made as remote from the thought as the south from the north?” To this they replied, “It is not at all remote, since the three persons possess one essence, and the Divine essence is God. In the world we were guardians of a trinity of persons, and the ward under our charge was our faith; in that faith each Divine person had his office—God the Father to impute and bestow, God the son to intercede and mediate, and God the Holy Spirit to carry out the work of imputation and mediation.”

 

[2] But I asked, “What do you mean by the ‘Divine essence?’”

 

They said, “We mean omnipotence, omniscience, omnipresence, immensity, eternity, and equality of majesty.”

 

I replied, “If that essence makes one God of several you might add more yet, for example: a fourth, mentioned by Moses, Ezekiel, and Job, under the name of ‘God Shaddai.’ Something of this kind was done in Greece and Italy by the ancients, who ascribed equal attributes and a like essence to their gods, for example, to Saturn, Jove, Neptune, Pluto, Apollo, Juno, Diana, Minerva, and even Mercury and Venus; although they could not say that all these were one God. Moreover, yourselves, who are three persons, and as I apprehend alike in learning and therefore in that respect of a similar essence, are not able to combine yourselves into one learned man.”

 

They laughed at this, and said, “You are joking. With the Divine essence it is different: it is not tripartite, but one; not divisible, but indivisible; partition and division do not apply to it.”

 

[3] Hearing this I said, “Let us come down to this ground and discuss the matter.” And I asked, “What do you mean by a ‘person,’ and what does the term signify?”

 

They said, “The term ‘person’ signifies that which has no part or quality in another, but subsists by itself. Thus do all the heads of the church define it, and we agree with them.”

 

I said, “Is this the definition of ‘person’?”

 

They replied, “It is.”

 

To this I answered, “There is then no part of the Father in the son, or of either in the Holy Spirit. From this it follows that each is at his own disposal, and possesses his own rights and powers, and therefore there is nothing that joins them together except the will, which is proper to each, and thus communicable at pleasure. Does not this make the three ‘persons’ three distinct gods? Listen again: You have also defined ‘person’ as that which subsists by itself; consequently there are three substances into which you divide the Divine essence; and yet you say that this is incapable of division, since it is one and indivisible. Furthermore, to each substance, that is, to each person, you attribute properties that do not exist in the others, and even cannot be communicated to the others, namely, imputation, mediation, and operation. What can follow from this except that the three ‘persons’ are three gods?”

 

At these remarks they withdrew, saying, “We will canvass these statements and then answer you.”

 

[4] There was present a wise man who, hearing the arguments, said, “I do not care to view this lofty subject through such fine network; but apart from these subtleties I see clearly that in your thought you have the idea of three gods; but as you would incur disrepute by publishing this idea openly to all the world (for if you did so you would be called madmen and fools), it is expedient for you, in order to avoid that ignominy, to confess with your lips one God.”

 

But the three, tenacious of their opinions, paid no attention to this; and as they went away they muttered some terms culled from metaphysical lore: from which I saw that metaphysics was their tripod from which they wished to give responses.