But we all, with unveiled face beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord.
(2Cor 3:18)
Introduction
It seems anachronistic that we are navigating the issues of 21st century Catholicism by examining the errors of 1st century heretics. What light could their missteps shine on the most sophisticated dark age the world has ever known? Contemporary Catholicism may be in a mess, but do answers lie in the history of Christian heresies? The answer is: yes. But the reason why, requires you to have some understanding of human nature: sin is never creative. Despite the lure of transgression and the cultural exaltation of the unorthodox- the wayward are repetitive. The serpent in the garden of Eden tempted us into thinking that there would be a shortcut to glory if only we just did this one ‘little thing’ and coloured outside lines we knew were drawn for a reason. If you are and I are both honest, all our sins are the repetition of this one lie: “If I just do this one thing, then I will have the thing I want and be the person I want to be.” That ‘thing’ may seem bold and adventurous in the moment, but wisdom teaches that your sins like mine are merely variations of a very static theme- they are never, bold, adventurous or exciting. First century Gnosticism may seem like it is worlds aways from where we are. The truth is, much of the mess in the 21st century is merely a repetition of an error in the 1st. It is not even its elaboration; it is merely its duplication. The apple of iniquity falls very near the tree of infidelity.
The challenge that Gnosticism posed to 1st and 2nd century Christianity, developed into the Christological heresies of the 3rd and 4th centuries. The effect of these errors, which we have examined briefly, eventually called into question the doctrine of the Trinity. The first disciples of Christ had to work out a way of following Him; especially in the light of the Ascension and the absence of Jewish law. Before however, they could work out a Christian moral system of living according to the person of Christ, Christians needed to observe what the life of Christ actually was. And the greater part of Christ’s life, as recorded in the Gospels, was the revelation of God as Father and the promise of the Holy Spirit who was to come after Him. The first and greatest truth that Christ revealed was that the God of the Old Testament was actually Father; and along with Him was the Son who then revealed the gift of the Holy Spirit. If Christians were to follow Christ- then they must establish themselves within the very doctrines that Christ taught. And the first of those doctrines was trinitarian, even though the word trinity appears nowhere in the Old or New Testament[1].
This presented quite a challenge, the central doctrine of Christianity- the Trinity- is not presented systematically in the New Testament. Unlike the doctrines of justification, the incarnation and redemption- all of which are revealed and explained in Sacred Scripture- the Trinity is revealed but not explained. At least not in a systematic way. The errors of Gnosticism forced us to make precise our Christological doctrines, which in turn forced us to come to terms with Trinitarian revelation. And this is where we turn to Augustine- not the Church’s first son- but perhaps Her most gifted; at least in the ancient world.
The Trinity, Tradition and the Christian Vocation
One of the key ideas we have developed in these lessons thus far, is the idea that Tradition- Sacred Tradition- is as much a process as it is a content. That the Sacred and Apostolic Tradition of the Church is not simply a collection of doctrines- although it most certainly is a deposit of those doctrines (Fidei Depositum)- it is also the sacred process of transmission of those doctrines. Tradition is both that which is handed on and the process by which that content is handed on. The two are distinct but inseparable. This is not merely a curious fact about Catholicism, it is a decisive factor in the Church’s identity and the Christian vocation. The theology of the Church’s Tradition demonstrates that it is something dynamic- it is a Living Tradition- which speaks into the very mystery of Catholicism itself. Although Christian revelation was concluded with the death of the last Apostle, the Church’s understanding of that content was not completed in that same moment. This is a concept that needs to be understood well; for when it is only partially understood, or even misunderstood, it can be used for ends and purposes that are in direct contradiction to the Faith. However, when we grasp it in its entirety, it is a principle of dynamism in the Catholic Church and a catalyst for its growth and development. When properly defined and explored, it leads to the authentic development of doctrine- for example the Immaculate Conception. When it is not understood- it can be used to justify female ordination. A Living Tradition- a Tradition that is both process and content- shapes the Christian vocation and is an agent for Church renewal. Renewal we need right now. So, how does the process of Sacred Tradition shape the Christian vocation and bring about renewal in the Church? And what does this idea have to do with the doctrine of the Trinity and the creation of the philosophical and theological category person. These are the questions we will address in this lesson by studying the invaluable contribution of Augustine.
Original Nature
Many theologians have speculated on what the state of humanity would have been like prior to the fall. The Church has given some particular teachings about our state of original justice in order to clarify the nature of sin and the justification we have received in Christ. One idea that is slightly less well developed, is the role that time plays in our redemption. Why is there such a long period of time between the fall and the incarnation? We mentioned this question previously when we examined the extensive period of time it took to compose Sacred Scripture and to formulate its doctrine.[2] The first part of our answer explained that such intervals give us the opportunity to perfect our will and learn to love these doctrines by living them out (see lessons V and VI). The second part of our answer sheds light on the Christian vocation and the Church’s role and mission in the world. And this second part of our answer can be illustrated by studying the Church’s development of the doctrine of the Most Holy Trinity and Augustine’s contribution to the philosophical and theological category person.
In our original state of nature- prior to the fall- humanity was naturally perfect. Something very difficult for us to imagine, given our own experience and everything we know about the world. Even though this idea is practically impossible for us to imagine, the central idea is that we would live in perfect harmony- with God, with each other and with ourselves. Original sin destroyed this harmony and introduced a new understanding of the world- that nothing is what it should be. Redemption is the rectification of this situation according to the order of grace, not according to the order of nature. At baptism we are given back that likeness of God we lost through sin with the indwelling of sanctifying grace, in a way that surpasses the original justice of our first parents. But we are not given back a perfect sate of nature. We receive perfect grace in a very imperfect nature. The preternatural gifts, or the state of original justice[3] of Adam and Eve is not returned to us, rather we are redeemed in order to live according to a new vocation- to become like Christ (1Cor 11:1). And this is where a proper consideration of time and the role it plays in salvation history becomes important. Redemption, like Sacred Tradition, is both process and content. The content is the grace we receive at Baptism (and worthy reception of the other sacraments) which is the origin for the process of our sanctification- of living into the person of Christ in order to become like Him (of exercising those virtues that are of Christ that make us like Christ). This is the Christian vocation. Redemption is both the initial gift of grace and the process of sanctification in the meantime. This structure- content and process- is Catholicism’s spiritual DNA and is repeated analogously in the Church’s Tradition, the Christian vocation and as we will see as we continue these lessons, wherever the Catholic religion is made manifest. So, wherever there is a process, time is a necessity. This applies as much to the Tradition and the development of doctrine, as it does to the Christian vocation and our sanctification.
This introduces a certain philosophical and theological problem- how are we to understand redemption? How can the redeemed be transformed and still remain what they originally were? The ancient world did not have any category that adequately accounted for both change and enduring identity.[4]
The nature of Redemption
Christianity and Judaism, although drawn from the same Godhead; do not reveal the same divine truths about the Godhead. The unity and singularity of God in the Old Testament is elaborated and revealed as a tri-unity in the New. The God of Christianity is monotheistic- but it is also triune. This ‘duality’ of existence in God determines the nature of Christian redemption; because Christian redemption is the re-establishment of a relationship with that God. Nearly all major religions share this common element- each promises a way of connecting with the divine- regardless of the ‘divine’ and regardless of what they mean by ‘connection’. The ‘connection’ that Christianity prescribes is both a coming into being- we become like Christ- and a perichoretic participation[5] in that divinity- we partake in the very inner life of the Trinity through grace. This is unique to Christianity. So unique in fact, the world did not have the necessary philosophical and theological categories in order to make sense of it. We had to invent them. We began to analyse this process of theological and philosophical development in Lessons I through VI.
Unlike nearly all other religions, the redemption that Christianity proposes is not some external relationship with the divine, but rather an internal transformation which permits the redeemed to live within that divine life and with that divine life in them. But this left Christianity with very real philosophical and theological questions: what or whom do we say is redeemed? Humanity or human nature? Where does humanity or human nature exist? And did Christ come to reedmen a universal- something abstract and intangible.[6] The individual? If only individuals are redeemed, then what is the purpose and function of unity in the Church and charity. There are also questions about the nature of the thing into which we are redeemed: into the life of what are we delivered? What are these three entities we know as Father, Son and Holy Ghost- and how are we to relate to them. And once we relate to them- what are they? God is a trinity- but a trinity of what. Three gods- that is polytheism. A trinity of emanations- that is modalism. The debates about these issues raged for centuries. We tend to think that early Christianity was some idyllic moment when everyone was getting on with everyone else; where the main threat was trying to avoid the lions in the colosseum. Christianity was passionately fractious and ideas were hotly contested because the truth mattered. And the truths of God and the nature of the redemption He offered needed to be established with clarity.[7]
Augustine, the West and the person
And this is where Augustine enters the debate. After the work of Irenaeus, Athanasius and the Cappadocian fathers, Augustine needed to find some way of translating their philosophy and theology into the Latin West. In particular, he needed a way of translating the idea that each member of the Trinity is an individual without falling into the error of tri-theism; and at the same time emphasising that there is only one God, without collapsing into modalism. And this doctrine had to be both consistent with and an explanation of the revelation of Christian redemption. What were the right words to translate ideas that were entirely new into the Latin West? But more than just invent a vocabulary, which we did not have, he also had to make sure his definitions were robust. Augustine begins where his philosophical training in Neo-Platonism had brought him and his Christian faith had guided him- into the interiority of the soul as an image and likeness of God. This becomes Augustine’s philosophical starting point for his concept of personhood- both human and divine.
Augustine’s philosophy and theology must capture and preserve the integrity of three truths: the first is the truth of the being of God, the second is the truth of the nature of man, and the third is the truth of Christian redemption. Redemption is conformation of the redeemed to Christ so that they may enjoy the fullness of Trinitarian Life for all eternity: For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren (Rom 8:29). The redemption of man however, must imitate the incarnation of Christ- the Logos became flesh without compromising either His divinity or humanity- He became perfect God and perfect man: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not a thing to be grasped to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men (Philippians 2:6-7). Redemption is conformation to Christ; it is not an absorption of the redeemed into Christ, just as the incarnation of Christ was not a collapse of the divine into creation. Through baptism we are made like Christ, but we also become more our true selves: For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ (Gal 3:27). And once the process of sanctification is complete- we are fully conformed to Christ- we are taken up into the Trinity but we are not absorbed by the Godhead- we still remain ourselves: And have put on the new man, that is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him (Col 3:10). Otherwise, to be absorbed into God would mean that we are no longer what we originally were- we would not actually be redeemed, we would be annihilated. An ‘absorption’ into Christ or the Trinity would extinguish and not redeem. That is not redemption- that is destruction. How can we be transformed and yet at the same time remain what we once were? What becomes like Christ must still be what it originally was, as an individual- its identity must persist through time and endure into salvation; otherwise, salvation would be a kind of amalgamation. The identity of the redeemed would collapse into the reality of God- a kind of reverse pantheism. This is not Christianity. But this doctrine required something in man as well as in God- how are to understand that man can be transformed and still retain his identity? And how are we to account for how God can become man and lift up those He redeemed into His divine life.
In order to answer these questions, Augustine begins by examining what separates man from every other creature, which for Augustine is the inner man (2 Corinthians 4:16, quoted in De Trin 11.1) or the mind (mens). If there is some vestige of the Trinitarian life in the creation of man, then it must be found in what is most essential to man and what is most like God. Augustine begins by reflecting on revelation:
For God said, “Let us make man in our image and likeness”: a little later, however, it is said “And God made man in the image of God.” It would certainly not be correct to say “our,” because the number is plural, if man were made in the image of one person, whether Father, Son or Holy Spirit. But because he is made in the image of the Trinity, consequently it was said “in our image.” Again, lest we choose to believe in three gods in the Trinity, since the same Trinity is one God, he said, “And God made man in his image,” as if he were to say “in his [own triune] image.” – man has been created in the image and likeness of God. We lost that likeness in our sin, but it was restored to us in grace. Therefore, there must be vestiges of that created image still present in man. Can we look to the image of man and see a likeness of God- and will that likeness shed any light on the nature of the Trinity? (De Trin I. vii. 14)
This image, according to Augustine’s Neo-Platonist philosophy, was not merely an analogy but a causal effect of the act of creation that reflects the essential features of the Creator on a lower ontological level. But in order to uncover this mage, Augustine turns to Plotinus and his sophisticated theory of interiority, and scrutinises the human mind for an image of the Triune God of the New Testament.[8] By looking inwardly into the nature of man, Augustine establishes that the human soul includes three main faculties: memory, intelligence and will.
These three elements of the human mind (mens) are present in every cognitive act of the inner man: The first element is an object that is internal to the mind that is an image or a concept stored in our memory; the second, is the cognitive faculty that must be activated or “formed” by the object (the image or concept) if cognition is to come about (intelligence); the third, is an intentional (voluntary) element that makes the cognitive faculty turn to its object so as to be actually formed by it (will). Augustine explains that these are not separated essences, but all three participate in the substantiality of the soul:
“These three, therefore, memory, intelligence, will are not lives, but one life, not three souls, but one soul; and consequently, not three substances, but one substance” (De Trin 10. xi. 18).
By examining the inner nature of the mind, Augustine establishes the identity of the individual- that which must endure through time- but at the same time, he establishes how the redeemed is also a subject of transformation.
The pre-Christian world, thanks to Greek philosophy possessed the concepts ‘man’ (an exemplar) and ‘humanity’ (the universal common to all men). But it did not have a concept of the individuality of man; it had no explanation of what makes an individual man- an individual. To the ancient world, individual men were not ‘persons’- something unique and unrepeatable- they were just men, something interchangeable and replaceable. Augustine’s use of person- to denote what is most essential to both man and the Triune God- was to define the term persona (person), not as a mere appearance, as the ancient world had defined it, but rather as the concrete basis for individuality. Personhood was the basis of the individuality of men- it is what makes Peter disctinct from Paul- as well as being the basis for the distinctions between Father, Son and Holy Ghost. What makes each man distinct from other men is that each man is his own person- that each man possessed his own interiority- his own distinctive thoughts, memory and will- that is what made him unique and unrepeatable. What ultimately distinguishes each man from the mass of men, is his own particular and individual interiority, the foundation of his person.[9] The identity of man was that he was a person: “singulus quisque homo… una persona est” (“any single man… is an individual person) (De Trin, 15,vii,11).
However, once Augustine establishes personhood as the basis of individuality- that each man is his own hypostasis comprised of his own unique memory, thoughts and will- he must then account for how the individual can be transformed. Augustine has established what endures through time and change- the person- he must now account for how that person can become like Christ and dwell within the life of the Most Holy Trinity. Here Augustine turns to the Neo-Platonic idea of participation. To fully do justice to his idea, is well beyond the scope of this lesson. But let me give you the basics.
Everything that exists receives its existence from God and thus in some way bears, in a causal manner, some similarity to the Creator. In terms of the human person, this similarity is the image and likeness found in the interior life of the mind. Augustine teaches that the mind is created in the image of God, not as a mere static likeness as the effect of the act of creation; but because it has the potential to become wise; that is, to remember, know and love God, its Creator (De Trin. 14.21–22). But this becoming is a kind of participation- that what the person becomes is in fact more of what the person actually is in himself. As the person has received the image and likeness of God at his creation, what he receives by grace at his redemption, is ‘more’ of that image and likeness in which he was created.[10] The becoming like Christ at redemption and the indwelling of the Triune Life we receive, is something intimate to the nature of man- in becoming more like Christ, he becomes more like himself. The becoming of redemption is the perfection of that image through the light of grace. The becoming of redemption is the perfection of the effect of creation- it is an elevation by grace in harmony with nature, not the imposition of something entirely foreign to that nature. The image of God is found in man at creation, that image is perfected in redemption by grace: the very nature of God reveals something intimate of the nature of man and his divine vocation in Christ. Thus, once the person has been re-made in the image of Christ, and in a certain sense obtains the fullness of himself in Christ, he is consequently able to be lifted up into that divine life in order to take his place within that life for all eternity.
Conclusion
The interior life of the human person- our interiority- is both an image of God and a means of returning to God.[11] It is a thing in itself and a kind of relation- an ordering of the inner world according to the causal effect of creation on the soul; and a vessel of grace, a temple of the Holy Spirit that allows the person to participate in the inner life of God. This idea- the concept of the human person- is so foundational to Western Civilisation, that it is very hard for us to ever imagine a time when this notion was unknown to the world. It is the basis of almost everything we do- politically, socially, philosophically and culturally. We take it for granted- which is a tragedy in the making. But what allows us to take this seminal idea for granted, is the fact that we have abandoned any sense of tradition. Alarmingly, within the Church, we are neglecting the idea of Sacred Tradition. By sacred Tradition, I am not just referring to those revealed truths that are not contained within Holy Writ, rather I am referring to Sacred Tradition as both the sacred content handed to us and the sacred process that hands that truth on. This process, of handing on the revelation of the Most Trinity, is what lead the Church to develop the idea of the person. It is only because of Tradition- a Living Tradition- that we have the idea of person. Although the concept of person is not part of the original content of that revelation, it is so intimately linked to it, that no other formulation for that doctrine is possible.
Sacred Tradition is revealed truth in action. What lies at the heart of this intuition is a sacred reality- the revelation that God is love (1John 4:8) implies that the divine truths revealed to us by God are not simply information about God- they are a way of loving Him. Thus, in the context of our redemption- they are a way back to Him. The revealed truths of our Tradition contain within them those specific actions that are a means to love the Lord Our God. The work of Sacred Tradition, is the work of making these truths clear in each age they are preached by making those actions contained within them- explicit. Sacred Tradition therefore is a moral response to revealed truth. It is why in any age when we neglect or outright abandon Tradition, we cannot find our way back to the Lord. This series in the Oriens Journal is our attempt at clarifying this reality- of how sacred truth implies holy action.
[1] While the developed doctrine of the Trinity is not explicit in the New Testament, the New Testament contains several Trinitarian formulae: Matthew 28:19, 2 Corinthians 13:14, Ephesians 4:4–6, 1 Peter 1:2, and Revelation 1:4–6.
[2] We can also ask a similar question about the long period of time between the Incarnation and the Apocalypse. Although a more obvious answer does suggest itself in this context.
[3] According to Catholic teaching, Adam and Eve were endowed with three preternatural gifts before the Fall: infused knowledge, absence of concupiscence, and bodily immortality. These gifts, though not essential to human nature, were given by God to enhance the relationship between God and humanity. The Catechism of the Catholic Church, while not explicitly listing these gifts, describes the original state of Adam and Eve as one of holiness and justice, implying the presence of these preternatural gifts (CCC 379ff).
[4] Augustine addresses all these questions in his writings. In book XI of Confessions, St Augustine examines the question of time and makes some invaluable contributions to its study. It is beyond our scope to examine them here, but they are fascinating. Another of his major works is De Natura et Gratia (On Grace and Nature) where he examines the question of original justice, the fall and redemption. The work that we will be concentrating on is De Trinitate, where Augustine wrestles with a most profound question: who is God?
[5] Perichoresis is derived from the Greek peri, “around” and chōreō, “to go, or come”- the idea being to encompass. The Latin equivalent circumincessio comes from the Latin circum, “around” and incedere meaning “to go, to step, to march along.” The relationship of the Triune God is intensified by the relationship of perichoresis. This indwelling expresses and realizes fellowship between the Father and the Son. It is intimacy. Jesus compares the oneness of this indwelling to the oneness of the fellowship of his Church from this indwelling. “That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us” (John 17:21).
[6] Although this is a little outside our study, the idea that Christ redeemed the universal ‘humanity’, although we speak in those terms, we only do so in a general and imprecise way; would call into question the need for individual Baptism.
[7] We take the resolving of these issues and the answers to these questions for granted. Asides from an obvious ingratitude towards the work and sacrifice of those who gave these answers; the real problem is that we have rejected the very principle that made them possible. The great defect of 21st Century Catholicism, is that it has taken what is the principle of Catholic dynamism- Sacred Tradition- and turned it into something static and lifeless. We look for consensus when disputation is required. The intricate stained glass of medieval Catholicism has become the beige walls of synodal halls and meeting spaces. This is not just a problem of aesthetics; it is an issue of faith.
[8] This inward process of self-reflection is captured brilliantly in Augustine’s confessions:
And being thence warned to return to myself, I entered into my inward self, Thou leading me on; and I was able to do it, for You had become my helper. And I entered, and with the eye of my soul (such as it was) saw above the same eye of my soul, above my mind, the Unchangeable Light. […] Not like this was that light, but different, yea, very different from all these. Nor was it above my mind as oil is above water, nor as heaven above earth; but above it was, because it made me, and I below it, because I was made by it. He who knows the Truth knows that Light; and he that knows it knows eternity. Love knows it (Confessions 7,x,16).
[9] Augustine will extend this notion of person to every man, regardless of race, religion or citizenship in De civitate Dei contra paganos (The City of God). We will return to this idea whne we study the effects of the Church’s Tradition on the development of Western Law.
[10] Although that likeness is lost and distorted because of the effects of original sin- that likeness is restored in baptism.
[11] For those with a keen philosophical and theological mind, you will notice that even Augustine’s definition of person is incomplete. It will not be until the writings of Boethius that are later expanded on by St. Thomas that we will arrive at a philosophically robust definition of person. It is insufficient to define person in terms of individuality, without making it clear what is the specific difference of that individuality.