{"id":53,"date":"2006-09-12T13:00:59","date_gmt":"2006-09-12T13:00:59","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/trinities.org\/blog\/archives\/53"},"modified":"2006-09-12T13:02:15","modified_gmt":"2006-09-12T13:02:15","slug":"the-orthodox-formulas-4-the-council-of-toledo-675","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/trinities.org\/blog\/the-orthodox-formulas-4-the-council-of-toledo-675\/","title":{"rendered":"The Orthodox Formulas 4: The Council of Toledo (675)"},"content":{"rendered":"

Skipping ahead a little, here’s a little council that is sometimes mentioned in recent trinitarian discussions. I understand that this council was attended by all of 17 Bishops<\/strong>. So it was a regional council, remembered only, I take it, for its trinitarian statement. It isn’t thought to have the kind of authority that a larger meeting would have. Nonetheless, I thought it worth putting on the table.<\/p>\n

11th Council of Toledo, 675, its \u00e2\u20ac\u0153Symbol of Faith\u00e2\u20ac\u009d:
\nAlthough we profess three persons, we do not profess three substances, but one substance and three persons<\/strong>. For the Father is Father not with respect to Himself but to the Son, and the Son is Son not to Himself but in relation to the Father; and likewise the Holy Spirit is not referred to Himself but is related to the Father and the Son, inasmuch as He is called the Spirit of the Father and the Son. So when we say ‘God’, this does not express a relationship to another, as of the Father to the Son or of the Son to the Father or of the Holy Spirit to the Father and the Son, but ‘God’ refers to Himself only.
\nFor, if we are asked about the single persons, we must confess that each is God<\/strong>. Therefore, we say that the Father is God, the Son is God, the Holy Spirit is God ‘ each one distinctly; yet there are not three gods<\/strong>, but one God. Similarly, we say that the Father is almighty… yet there are not three almighty ones, but one Almighty, as we profess one light and one principle. Hence we confess and believe that each person distinctly is fully God, and the three persons together are one God<\/strong>. …
\nThis Holy Trinity, which is the one true God, is not without number; yet it is not comprised by number, because in the relationships of the persons there appears number, but in the substance of the Godhead nothing is comprised that could be counted. Therefore they imply number only in so far as they are mutually related, but they lack number in so far as they are by themselves (ad se)<\/strong>. For this Holy Trinity has so much one name referring to its nature that it cannot be used in the plural with relation to the three persons. This then is, in our faith, the meaning of the saying in Holy Scripture: “Great is our Lord, abundant in power, and of His wisdom there is no number” (Ps. 147 (146) 5 Vulg.).
\nHowever, though we have said that these three persons are one God, we are not allowed to say that the same one is the Father who is the Son, or that He is the Son who is the Father, or that He who is the Holy Spirit is either the Father or the Son. For He is not the Father who is the Son… even though the Father is that which the Son is, the Son that which the Father is, the Father and the Son that which the Holy Spirit is, that is one God by nature. For, when we say: He who is the Father is not the Son, we refer to the distinction of persons; but when we say: the Father is that which the Son is, the Son that which the Father is… this clearly refers to the nature or substance, whereby God exists since in substance they are one<\/strong>; for we distinguish the persons, but we do not divide the Godhead.
\n…While then these Three are One and this One Three, each of the persons retains His own characteristics<\/strong>: The Father has eternity without birth; the Son has eternity with birth; the Holy Spirit has procession without birth with eternity. (http:\/\/www.fordham.edu\/halsall\/source\/toledo.txt<\/a>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

This one has the same problem with apparent inconsistency as the Quicunque Vult<\/a> – three Persons, each with properties not had by the others, and each a god, yet there is only one god. At this point, though, there’s a new move – the qua<\/em><\/strong> move. (Latin for “as.) This is a strategy for trying to avoid inconsistency<\/strong>, and it is much-employed in the later tradition. Some recent philosophers have dug deeply into this issue (of “reduplicative propositions” or “reduplicative predication”), but here I just want to explain it, and show why it is at first glace a real head-scratcher.
\nHere the qua<\/em> move is in the third paragraph: As related<\/em>, the Three Persons “have number” (i.e. they are three). But as they are in themselves<\/em>, they have no number (i.e. they are one). So it isn’t that we’re affirming and denying the same thing, right? They’re three qua<\/em> related, and not-three qua<\/em> separate individual(s). Does anyone see a problem with this?
\nSuppose I told you that<\/strong> my brother was fat qua<\/em> husband but skinny qua<\/em> uncle. Or stinky qua<\/em> cousin, but not-stinky regarded alone. Would you believe these things? Why or why not?<\/p>\n

Technorati Tags: qua<\/a>, trinity<\/a>, theology<\/a>, Toledo<\/a>, council<\/a>, Latin Trinitarian<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Skipping ahead a little, here’s a little council that is sometimes mentioned in recent trinitarian discussions. I understand that this council was attended by all of 17 Bishops. So it was a regional council, remembered only, I take it, for its trinitarian statement. It isn’t thought to have the kind of authority that a larger… Read More »The Orthodox Formulas 4: The Council of Toledo (675)<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"neve_meta_sidebar":"","neve_meta_container":"","neve_meta_enable_content_width":"","neve_meta_content_width":0,"neve_meta_title_alignment":"","neve_meta_author_avatar":"","neve_post_elements_order":"","neve_meta_disable_header":"","neve_meta_disable_footer":"","neve_meta_disable_title":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-53","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-theories"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/trinities.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/53","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/trinities.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/trinities.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/trinities.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/trinities.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=53"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/trinities.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/53\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/trinities.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=53"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/trinities.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=53"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/trinities.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=53"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}