Wisdom after Bulgakov: A Trinitarian Sophiology

I recently had an extended discussion with a couple of friends about the nature of Divine Wisdom, which is called Sophia (in Greek) and Hokhmah (in Hebrew). We find this Divine Wisdom as a feminine co-creator with God in Proverbs 8, and as the Creative Spirit sent by God to create and sustain the world in Wisdom 7. Indeed, Wisdom is strongly correlated as the character trait that is associated with God's Spirit and those indwelt by God's Spirit (cf. Deut. 34.9; Is. 11.2; Dan. 5.11, 14; Wis. 1.6; 7.7, 22; 9.17; Sir. 39.6; Acts 6.3, 10; 1 Cor. 2.4, 13; 12.8; Eph. 1.17). Anytime any person or chain of events is guided by God's will toward God's ends, this is the gift of Wisdom at work gently but persistently influencing things in a Godward direction. Thus, it is God's Spirit who is ultimately active to shape and mold and guide creation to fulfillment in its Creator, as the Spirit strives and suffers with us to bring about the new birth of Creation (cf. Romans 8).

The Many Loves of the Love of God

When we speak of the Love of God, or praise God for God's Loving-Kindness, we are remembering that above all, God is Love. But this Love is not merely the feeling we tend to associate with liking something a great deal, such as when we say "I love this coffee" or "I love that activity". Rather, we mean that God's Love is something deep and active, constantly working for the abundant life and flourishing of those God loves. In short, it is Love operative in sacrificial acts of kindness: Loving Kindness. Many Scriptural words and concepts fill out what this Divine Loving-Kindness means.

A Prayer for Trinity Sunday

Today was Trinity Sunday. Many people consider the idea of the Trinity to be conceptually difficult at best, and outright contradiction at worst. But that’s only if you consider it a verbal puzzle to work out, instead of a living Reality we are invited into. The idea of the Trinity is the outcome of the early Church knowing there is one God, but experiencing the fullness of that God in the Father who is over us, in the Son who walks with us, and in the Spirit who dwells within us. 

It is the Christian grammar of what it means to say God is Love: God is the Source of Love as the Father, the Object of Love as the Beloved Son, and the Relation of Love that binds Father and Son together as the Spirit. And this Three Relational God invites us to live in God’s Love, to dance in God’s Life, and to radiate God’s Light. CS Lewis even notes that the very act of praying is a welcome into the Life of the Trinity: As we pray TO the Father THROUGH the Son BY the power of the Spirit. And with that in mind, here is one of many prayers celebrating God as Trinity:

LORD of Love: Today we celebrate you as the Holy Trinity. You alone are God who shares love and life and light forever in Community, as three distinct Relations within the singular Ultimate Reality that upholds all creation. From the overflow of your communal life you create us and redeem us and complete us. And so today we come to you, O Father, through your Son Jesus Christ, by the power of your Holy Spirit, that we may more fully share in your love, be drawn into your life, and shine with your light, now and forever. Amen!

*The image above is a colorized version of a drawing made for me by former student and fellow Episcopal priest Arnoldo Romero. He drew this in response to a weekend we spent studying the Trinity in the patristics and ecumenical councils. The seeing eye representing God's providence is straight out of Orthodox iconography and can be found in thousands of Orthodox churches, particularly on the ceiling. The use of color-- that three colors make up white Light, and can be used to make up any other kind of light-- was a limited analogy of the Trinity we discussed. The rainbow in the Divine Eye harkens back to the Covenant Rainbow of Noah (Genesis 9) and forward to the Rainbow surrounding the Divine Throne (Revelation 21-22; Ezekiel 1). The fullness of color indicates the fullness of all reality contained and overflowing from the Holy Trinity. The Möbius Strip with three interconnected "sides" which are "one" is a favorite modern visual analogy of the Trinity for me. And on the "Son" side is an image of a brain, depicting the Son as the Logos or Mind of God, with a "D" and a "H", indicating Jesus is fully Divine and fully Human. 

Overview of the Seven "Ecumenical" Councils

Ecumenical derives from the Greek word "oikumene", which roughly translates to "whole inhabited world". A Church Council is an official gathering of representatives to settle Church business, often dealing with doctrine (belief), behavior (morality), and questions of Church polity (canon law). Worldwide Councils are called rarely and are not the same as the regular regional gatherings of church leaders (synods, conventions, etc). An "Ecumenical Council" is one at which the whole Church is represented from throughout the world. 

Sophiology: Holy Wisdom as the Divine Feminine

Throughout Church history, Orthodox theologians from the Second Council of Nicaea (787) to the 20th century Russian "Sophiologist" Sergei Bulgakov have identified the Divine Feminine in God with "Holy Wisdom" (which is a translation of the feminine Greek term "Hagia Sophia", and the Hebrew term "Hokmah"). Nicaea II states it thus: "Our Lord Jesus Christ, our true God, the self-existent Wisdom (Sophia) of God the Father, who manifested Himself in the flesh, and by His great and divine dispensation freed us from the snares of idolatry, clothing Himself in our nature, restored it through the cooperation of the Spirit, who shares God's mind..." In more recent configurations, Divine Wisdom is identified as a personified attribute shared by all the members of the Trinity, yet primarily embodied in Jesus Christ. This has led to charges against Sophiologists that they have made Divine Wisdom into a fourth member of the Trinity, or a kind of separate "Mother Goddess" like Gaia. 

Christ and the Cosmos: A Review and Proposal for Trinitarianism

Recently I finished reading "Christ and the Cosmos: A Reformulation of Trinitarian Doctrine" by Keith Ward. It is a stunning and masterful restatement of the idea of the Trinity in light of the findings of modern science and the philosophy of personal idealism. In it, he lays out a powerful case for why the Trinity should be conceived as three Intersubjective Relations within One Divine Self, rather than as three Independent Persons in a Community of Three Divine Selves. I have written before about the difference between this "One Self" or "One Consciousness" view of the Trinity versus a "Three Self" or "Three Consciousness" view of the Trinity. 

The Trinity Matters So Black Lives Matter

Pictured: An Icon of the Trinity from the Ethiopian Orthodox Church.

The following is a sermon that was given for Trinity Sunday at Grace Episcopal Church in San Antonio, and online during the COVID Pandemic. Another version of this sermon was preached for Black History Month at TMI - The Episcopal School of Texas (as is linked below). It was an attempt to help our diverse and divided community steer a path beyond the destructive conflict that has occurred in the wake of the George Floyd Murder, toward a more constructive dialogue in light of the fact that we are all made in the image of a God of Love, and beloved as God's children. 

Welcome to Trinity Sunday, where we get to talk about one of the most abstract ideas that Christian History has ever developed, in the midst of one of the most concrete social crises many of us have faced in our lifetime. On one hand, we need to talk about the transcendent, ineffable, infinite nature of the Source of the Universe, who we know as one God in the three Persons of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. You don't get much more abstract than that.

On the other hand, we need to connect this concept of God to the real life, concrete struggles people are facing right here, right now. And we are not just undergoing one major crisis. Or even two. We are hemorrhaging crises! We have a pandemic which lurks around every corner, which can easily make some people sick enough to be hospitalized or even die, while it has absolutely no effect on other people.

On top of this we have a looming economic crisis which has affected about one in four Americans in a major way, from lost jobs to lost businesses. People are struggling from paycheck to paycheck, and worried about keeping a roof over their family's head. And to top all of it off, to use a Biblical phrase, it seems that in matters of racism and violence, the "sins of the fathers" are being visited on the next generations.

Theological Topology: Placing the Trinity in Reality

At first glance, topology and theology have nothing to do with each other. Theology, on one hand, is "the rational discussion of God" (from the Greek words "theos" meaning God, and "logia" meaning study of, or reasoned discourse about). Topology, on the other hand, is the study of geometric properties and spatial relations between various kinds of objects in space, and the way in which constituent parts are interrelated or arranged. So, theology seems to deal with an Ultimate Reality beyond our world, while topology deals with spatial relations within our world. Nothing could be more different. It is like comparing apples to oranges, or Infinite Being to mere beings.

Visions of Ultimate Reality

Ultimate Reality and Visions of Truth
The goal of our spiritual journey is to explore what is True, pursue what is Good, and practice what is Beautiful. And this journey begins with the question: What is Truth? Some say that Truth resides in a Holy Book of some sort, or a set of infallible statements about Reality. Some claim Truth is found in an inner experience, while others say it is found in evidence gathered from our senses. And then we find great spiritual teachers, such as Krishna who says “no Truth is superior to me”, or Jesus who says “I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life”. Despite all of the apparent differences, these visions of Truth share some commonalities: They assume we are part of a greater Reality. And we come to experience Reality, as it really is, through many ways. These ways include books, and our senses, and inner experiences, and relationships with others. Through these ways we find Truth when our inner self conforms to what is really Real, and we are brought into harmony with Ultimate Reality. And in history there are enlightened persons-- like Krishna and Buddha and Jesus-- who are so filled with Ultimate Reality that they claim to be living embodiments of Truth. 

So what is the greater Reality that we need to conform ourselves to, so we also can embody Truth? What is really Real in the world we experience? What is the Ultimate Reality which is beyond, or within, or underneath, the apparent reality we experience every day? 

Heresies Alive!

This weekend I was honored to teach seminarians about the Age of the "Ecumenical Councils" and help them understand the heresies which helped define orthodoxy in the Imperial Church. One of the persistent problems in teaching this material is the interconnected and confusing convergence of different groups in the early Church and the specialized terminology they used to explain themselves and condemn each other. 

So, to help students understand these issues and concepts, I find it helpful to discuss how we find these heresies alive and well in our churches today. We tend to think of heresies as something that happened "back then" which are only of academic interest today. But the fact is, the same heresies pop up over and over and affect people in profound ways. Thus, I created the chart above (and available in PDF HERE) which helps students connect these heresies with the contemporary world. 

The Möbius Strip and The Holy Trinity

The history of discussions about the Holy Trinity is littered with dead analogies and metaphors which fail to do justice to the God they are trying to represent. The hallowed Ice-Water-Steam analogy ends in the heresy of Modalism. Patrick's Three Leaf Clover inevitably leads to Unitarianism. The "mother who is a daughter who is a wife" analogy leads to Modalism yet again, while the analogy of "three men who share a common human nature" leads to Polytheism. The Triangle is too impersonal, whereas Augustine's analogy of Lover-Beloved-Love seems too personal, and makes the Trinity seem to be three separate consciousnesses. We could also heap up "1x1x1=1", or "Thinker-Thinking-Thought", or "Giver-Giving-Gift", or one Person as "Mind-Heart-Will", or one Family as "Father-Mother-Child", on the pile of analogies that are too inaccurate or mundane to be definitive examples of the Trinity.

All fail. All fall apart. None fully conveys, or captures, the Mystery of the Trinity. Like I saw online the other day: The Trinity is a Mystery, not a Puzzle.

And yet. And yet!

The opposite end of over-explaining is under-explaining: The Trinity is a Mystery we cannot understand, so don't even try. Just affirm it and go about your life. Keep calm and don't think too much.

The Trinity grounds Inclusion

To be inclusive, one must have something or someone to include people into. And for that inclusion to be “good” we must include people into something that brings abundant life and full human flourishing. It is not enough to include people into communities or families. Street gangs, prisons, cartels, and Nazis all form strong communities. We must ask what greater good— what God— is served by those communities, and if that God is worthy of worship. That God could be racial identity, profit making, power acquisition, or even some version of “God” itself. But how do you define the God you include people into? 

Trinity and Identity

I want here to give a brief account of who we are as created persons living in a reality upheld by the Triune God. There are a baffling number of images of who we are presented within the Judeo-Christian tradition. We are variously lost and found; sinners and saints; justified and glorified; children of God and servants of Christ; made in God's image yet destroyers of that image; created and mortal, yet eternal and immortal. We partake in the Divine Nature and yet are alienated from that same Source. 

Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi: How the liturgy shaped the worldview of early Christians

A 2004 paper written for the History of Christian Doctrine, exploring the extent to which ancient liturgies both express early Christian theology, and also were instrumental in shaping the worldview of early Christians. This paper looks at extant Christian liturgical materials used around the ancient world up to circa 400 CE as evidence of early Christian belief and theological formation.

1. Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi: The role of liturgy in worldview formation

How are the words that we pray and say and sing in worship connected to what we believe?  How did the worship of early Christians shape their beliefs and actions?  The ancient Latin tagline "Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi" (literally: the law of prayer is the law of belief) has a lot to say about this.  This maxim, first popularized by Prosper of Aquitaine between 435 and 442 (Wainwright, 224-225), tells us that how and what we pray shapes how we believe and hence, how we live.  The converse is true as well.  What we believe will eventually be reflected in our prayers, our worship, and our lifestyle.  This means that our worldview, what it means to think and believe as a Christian, is somehow implicit in our liturgy and prayer life.  That is true now, it was true for Prosper, and it was true for the early Church as well.  What it means to be distinctively Christian, and believe as a Christian, should be available to everyone in our worship, at least in theory.

Do Christians and Muslims worship the same God?

I see this question a great deal on the interwebs, lots of people ask me my educated opinion, and there are dozens or hundreds of books written about this. Yet most people are not going to read those books, but they might read a short, under two minute write up. So, as a Christian priest who believes in the Trinity and follows Jesus as God incarnate, and who also serves as a chaplain at a school with many Muslim families, and also teaches World Religions year after year, here is my answer:

A Meditation on Buddhist ideas of contingency and emptiness in relation to Western Trinitarianism

Today I was doing some reading on Indian philosophy, and in particular on the ideas of the Buddhist philosopher Nagarjuna who argued powerfully that the ultimate source of the empirical world is "emptiness" which cannot be fully identified with, nor fully distinct from, the chain of causality (or dependent origination) which upholds the empirical world. For Nagarjuna this emptiness cannot be identified with either existence or non-existence, because both of these states of (non)being are contingent on a whole host of other causes. And emptiness as such is ontologically distinct from the entire contingent world of dependent origination, and hence the ultimate emptiness which grounds the world cannot be said to exist or not exist in any meaningful sense. Thus it is erroneous to think of ultimate reality as a "being" that (a) exists, or (b) doesn't exist, or (c) exists and doesn't exist, or as (d) neither existing or not existing. In short, no categories apply meaningfully to describe the ultimate reality that grounds the world, and thus this reality is purely "empty".

Trinity and Humility

A Plea to All Theological Nerds (like myself) for Trinity Sunday:

I think much of the reason why we don't talk about the Trinity more is due to insider backbiting. Clerics and Scholars who think they have a handle on the Trinity have a habit of being snide, backbiting, and, well, bitchy, toward anyone who does not talk about the Trinity using their preferred formulae, metaphor, analogy, or lack of analogy. If you speak in the language of Eastern Orthodoxy, the Westerns gripe. If you speak in Western Augustinian terminology the Easterns gripe. If you use economic language, you get accused of denying the immanent Trinity. If you use immanent or essentialist language, you get accused of hellenizing and philosophizing the Biblical narrative.

If you use a folksy analogy, people from both sides will find a heresy that they think best fits your analogy, even if that is intentionally not what you tried to imply. And God forbid you should try and reframe the Trinity using any philosophical categories birthed in the Enlightenment or after. And if you describe the Trinity in a way that is long enough and nuanced enough to placate (most) of the Theo-haters, then the 98% of people who are non-specialists will (rightly) complain that your explanation is unnecessarily complex and confusing. And yet, if you don't talk about the Trinity and choose something that most people can relate to, you get called a heretic, Arian, or even worse, Joel Olsteen.

So, perhaps in our efforts to describe and explain the Trinity we should exercise the very thing that God is, the very thing that Christ embodied, namely: Love. While I absolutely believe that some descriptions of the Trinity are closer to The Truth than others, all are necessarily limited, incomplete, and flawed. And when we meet God face to face we will all find out how wrong we are, despite our best attempts to be accurate. So perhaps in humility and Love we could cut each other some theological slack, and gently suggest fuller understandings to those who seem to lack important aspects of Trinitarian understanding.

The Monstrosity of Theodicy

For many, the greatest possible objection to belief in God-- and often the most painfully personal-- is the existence of immense amounts of pain and suffering in the universe. From Christian apologist CS Lewis, to Catholic philosopher Peter Kreeft, to Jewish Rabbi Harold S. Kushner, to "new atheist" Christopher Hitchens, to conservative Evangelical Alvin Plantinga, to liberal physicist-cum-theologian John Polkinghorne *1, there is a wide swath of agreement that this very problem forms the key objection to theism in general, and Christianity in particular. It can be stated in many ways: "Why does God allow bad things to happen to good people?" "Why would a good God allow evil to destroy his creation?" "How  could God allow [insert name of tragedy] to happen to [insert name(s) of victim(s)]?"

Theodicy in Outline

In light of the recent Boston Bombings, I thought I would publish the following notes on the problem of Theodicy. This is, admittedly, an academic rather than pastoral treatment of the problem of suffering. I figure many people will be doing pastoral works over the next few days and weeks. I thought I would instead publish something that is both academic and readable by the average person.

The following is a teaching outline for discussing the problem of suffering in the light of a God who is said to be both all-good (desiring the full flourishing of all persons made in God's image) and all-powerful (able to bring about the full flourishing of those he desires good for). Thus experiences of suffering and tragedy cause us to question the goodness, power, and existence of God. This is a skeletal outline intended mainly as lecture notes.

Is there any better symbol for God than the Trinity?

What is the best, most complete possible way to speak of the nature of God? In the Christian Tradition, the answer is clear: The Holy Trinity. And for the sake of argument, let us posit that the idea of the Trinity is the most complete expression of the data about God that has been revealed in Christ, through Scripture, within the Christian Tradition.

Even if it is the most complete expression of God available on the basis of the data of revelation, does this mean that there could not possibly be a better model, or symbol, of God's nature, if we were only able to increase our intellectual ability, or develop new categories of linguistic expression?