Tuesday, July 31, 2007

Hints About the Trinity Puzzle

Came upon a blog by a priest in England. She seems to offer well informed & interesting perspectives. Her writing on the Trinity has some things I find worth further reflection.


So far, off the cuff, I'm thinking I like the way she backs us up to look at the concept of Trinity in terms of the concept of God this gives us before letting us jump too quickly to applications for worship and mission. She's getting the horse & the cart in the right order. This lends to exploration and development of the concept with a sense of credibility and integrity.


I think she has good points about the effects of "unitarian" worship as a face off between us and God...but I have the sense that there are also other better ways seeing God as a unity can work out too. I'm not ready to put that concept aside quite so much.


I have issues about how predominantly we anthropomorphize our concept of God. Even though her language about the Trinity includes some of that, somehow her explanations help show me a window for thinking of God as Trinity without necessarily carrying the personified, anthropomorphic concepts as far as usual. I think that comes largely from her talking about the movement, exchange and non-coercive openness that can be implied in the concept of Trinity. That can be understood in non-anthropomorphic ways.


Finally, I notice that she's talking about responding to the invitation to join with the Trinity in a way where we may end up hardly noticing the seams....this is some of what I was wondering about in my previous thoughts stemming from the Rublev icon...she has the courage and clarity to say what I didn't.


Her work and my response deserve more careful treatment than I've given them here. My reading and writing have been hasty and I hope I haven't misrepresented her perspectives, or my own for that matter. But...I think I'll give myself this disclaimer and thereby try to give myself permission to let go of some perfectionism and post....Here goes.

Monday, July 23, 2007

Increased Interest in Trinity

Two things have struck me and increased my interest in the Trinity since the BCMS paper got my attention on the topic.

One is the The Holy Trinity Icon and explanation that Aron brought to my attention. The Trinity is pictured around a table, with an open place (with food)...an open place for us. In this concept I sense a new perspective with new potential.

How might that image speak to the nature of God and to the nature of God as Trinity?

Might that open place for us be understood as inherent to the nature of God?


What does it mean to have that open space there for us? Is it an invitation or something else?

If an invitation, what are we invited to do or be? If something else, what?

The other thing that struck me and piqued my interest was the image (called a triquetra) that I found in the lower picture on this page while searching for labyrinths to walk. Apparently this familiar image and the concept of Trinity extends beyond its specifically Christian associations. Finding "Christian" concepts in other contexts tends to increase my sense that the relevance of those concepts isn't limited to a certain sectarian way of framing things, but that they speak to something basic and broad.

How accurate is that sense in this case? If accurate, what is that relevance?

Why has trinity been important in other belief systems as well as in Christianity?


What about reality, what about the Divine does it reflect that I haven't been keying in on?

How might my response to these questions impact my perspective on orienting our understanding of mission to our understanding of the Trinity...?

Friday, July 20, 2007

The BCMS Paper & The Trinity as an Understanding of God

So, I'm finally going to add some more in response to the BCMS paper. The end of my last post pointed to some next questions including: Should I/we relate more stongly to the concept of the Trinity? Why or why not? Thoughts in that vein follow.

I see the Trinity as a way to think of God, but not the only way to think of God. I'm suspicious of treatments of the Trinity as more or less the be-all end-all, exclusively right & necessary way to conceptualize God. Christians in general, and the BCMS paper, tend too much toward this approach in my opinion. At the same time, a couple things that have come up since I've started thinking about this lead me to believe that the concept of Trinity deserves more credit and attention than I have previously given it. Let me fill in a little on those thoughts as I continue.

All our language for God is metaphor. Each metaphor keys in on some aspect of the truth. But none of the metaphors adequately capture, completely describe or explain God. We come closer to understanding God, and our spiritual lives expand through use of varied and multiple images for God.

Though the authors of the BCMS paper may (or I suppose may not) understand things this way, the language of the BCMS paper doesn't leave me feeling that way. For example, in the section "Mission Begins with the Trinity" the paper states, "The Christian understanding of God is highly relational: God's identity consists in the loving communion...of three distinct yet inseparably united divine persons..." (bold emphases mine). This makes things sound pretty definitive and limited. It sounds like beyond this particular understanding we are no longer in Christian territory. It sounds to me like beyond this we are no longer talking about God as God should be understood. Does it sound that way to you too, or not?

I don't argue against Trinity being a good and important way to understand God. But to make it too exclusive a way to understand God limits our ability to comprehend God in and around us as fully as possible. It also unduly limits our ability to communicate and relate to people in our society. This makes the adequacy and wisdom of orienting our whole sense of mission around such exclusive sounding concepts of God questionable.

That said, what HAS interested me more in the concept of the Trinity lately? See my next post - hopefully coming soon, where I finally get to be more positive, and hopefully add credibility to the idea that I do want to do more than be part of a "culture of 'complaint, critique and criticism.' ”

Wednesday, July 18, 2007

Stars

The natural and the spiritual have a big overlap in my perspective.

Over the last few months I've been observing the stars more.

Part of what fascinates me is that they are simultaneously something so ancient and so much a part of our everyday world.

We take them for granted, and for most of us their details & patterns of visibility go on without our awareness. (We speak about the stars moving. But this just points all the more to our self-centeredness and limited of awareness of the context of our existence. The movement is really that of the earth on which we are riding.)

How much goes on around us of which we are unaware.

What an interesting contrast between us and people of times past. They may not have know that the earth was round or the shapes the continents take. Yet I'm sure many were much more knowledgeable about the patterns of the stars, and familiar with them, than most of us are.

What an interesting connection we have to people through countless ages as we look at stars that they also observed - specific individuals, and people in general.

Such thoughts increase my sense of connection to aspects of spirituality that extend beyond my own life, beyond our own times, beyond history that we know...to reaches that we have a limited and vague knowledge of, then beyond that to reaches I can not comprehend, about which I do not know.

And yet in the midst of that I remain grounded by the physical reality of the stars that I see and the tangible, definable information that I have and continue to learn about them.

What a wonderful combination!