The Threefold Personality of God Foreshadowed in the Old Testament

Chapter I: God’s Threefold Personality Proved from Sacred Scripture

Section 1: The Threefold Personality of God Foreshadowed in the Old Testament

taken as a pluralis maiestaticus, nor yet as addressed to the angels; for man was not created to the image of the angels, but to that of God Himself. There is a similar passage in Gen. XI, 7 sq.: ” Come ye, therefore, let us go down, and there confound their tongue… . And so the Lord scattered them.” 4 Many theologians in this connection recall the liturgical blessing of the priests, Num. VI, 24 sqq., which they regard as a parallel to the Christian formula, * In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.* This Old Testament benediction, dictated by Yahweh Himself to Moses, is as follows: ” The Lord bless thee and keep thee. The Lord show his face to thee, and have mercy on thee. The Lord turn his countenance to thee and give thee peace.” The clearest allusion to the mystery of the Blessed Trinity in the Old Testament is probably the so-called Trisagion of Isaias (VI, 3): ” Holy, holy, holy, the Lord God of Hosts, all the earth is full of his glory,” which is rightly made much of by many Fathers and not a few theologians. This triple “Holy” refers to an ecstatic vision of the Godhead, by which Isaias was solemnly called and consecrated as the Prophet of the Incarnate Word, an office which won for him the title of the ” Evangelist ” among the four major prophets.5 2. in the Theophanies. — The various apparitions commonly known as theophanies, in which Yahweh figures both as sender and messenger, mark the grad4 For the Patristic interpretation of this passage consult Petavius, De Trinitate, II, 7. 5 Cfr. John XII, 41.

ual breaking of the dawn in the history of our dogma. The God who is sent is called rnrp *. e., messenger, Angelas Domini, the word angelus being here employed in its literal sense of ayycAos, from ayyc’AAcw, to send. Since the ” Angel of Jehovah ” is described as nw, i. e., true God, we have in these theophanies two distinct persons, both of them Yahweh, the one ” sending ” and .the other ” sent.” An apparition of this character was the angel who spoke words of comfort to Hagar shortly before the birth of her son Ismael • in the desert. According to Gen. XVIII, i sqq., ” the Lord [iW] appeared to [Abraham] in the vale of Mambre,,, in order to announce to him the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrha.7 Probably the most familiar of the Old Testament theophanies is the apparition of in the Burning Bush. Exod. Ill, 2: ” Apparuit ei ninj:J8$>D in flamma ignis de medio rubi — And the Lord appeared to him [Moses] in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush.” It is to be noted that the Lord who appears to Moses is Jehovah Himself. Exod., Ill, 14: ” God said to Moses: I am who am.” Viewing this apparition in the light of the New Testament Revelation, the appearing God can be none other than the Logos, or Son of God, because the Father cannot be ” sent.” True, may also be ” sent; ” but He cannot have appeared in the bush to Moses because the prophets expressly identify the ” Angel of Jehovah ” with the future Messias (t. e., Christ). Cfr. Is. IX, 6 « Gen. XVI, 7 sqq. general, H. P. Liddon, The Divin7 On this passage, cfr. Newman, ity of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Select Treatises of St. Athonasius, Christ, pp. 78 sqq., London 1867. II, 267 sq.; on the theophanies in (in the version of the Septuagint): ” McyaA.175 fiovkrj

3. The Future Messias as True God. — The Messianic prophecies of the Old Testament were primarily designed to emphasize the Divinity of the future Messias. Hence Christ Himself and His Apostles justly appealed to them to prove not only the divine mission but likewise the Divinity of the Saviour and the fact that He was truly the Son of God. Among the prophets Isaias speaks most clearly and emphatically. Not only does he refer to the Messias as “the Wonderful, the Counsellor, the Prince of Peace,” but also as ” God the Mighty, the Father of the world to come.” 11 He styles Him ” Emmanuel,” i. e., God with us.12 It is expressly said of Him that ” God himself will come and will save you.” 13 And again: ” Prepare ye the way of the Lord… . Behold, the Lord God shall come with strength.” 14 ” His name shall be called God.” 15 In Zach. XII, 10, God prophesies His own crucifixion: ” Et adspicient ad me, quern confixefrunt et plangent eum — And they shall look upon me, whom they have pierced; and they shall grieve over him.” 18 complete the picture outlined by the prophets; nay, they go far beyond the latter both in emphasizing the difference of persons by a contra-position of the pronouns ” I ” and ” thou,” and also by indicating that the relation existing between the First and the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity is a relation of Father to Son, based upon Filiation. At the same time they do not omit to accentuate the ills. IX, 6; cfr. Luke I, 32. 14 Is. XL, 3, xo; cfr. Mark I, 3. 12 Is. VII, 14; cfr. Matth. I, 23. 15 Is. IX, 6. 18 Is. XXXV, 4; cfr. Matth. XI, 5. i« Cfr. John XIX, $7.

undivided nature of both Divine Persons, which they express by the word nin\ Thus especially Ps. II, 7: ” Dominus [njnj] dixit ad me: Filius meus es tu, ego hodie genui te — The Lord hath said to me: Thou art my son, this day I have begotten thee.,, 17 Similarly Ps. CIX, 1-3: “Dixit Dominus Domino meo [Vri*£ nin?] • sede a dexteris meis; … ex utero ante luciferum genui te — The Lord said to my Lord: Sit thou at my right hand … from the womb before the day star I begot thee.” 18 If the future Messias is the ” Son of God,” and at the same time Jehovah, it is obvious that there must also be a ” Father ” who is Jehovah. Consequently, there must be two Divine Persons in one Divine Nature. This notion was so familiar to the Jews that Jesus, in order to prove His Divinity, had merely to advert to the fact that He was the Son of God to provoke them to anger and blasphemy.19 They well knew that to admit His Divine Sonship was tantamount to recognizing His Divinity.20

4. The Teaching of the Sapiential Books. — A great step towards the complete unfolding of the mystery is made by the Sapiential Books.21 There we find the notion of Hypostatic Wisdom closely blended with that of Filiation, and are given to understand that the Filiation which takes place within the Godhead is a purely spiritual process, and that He Who is “begotten by 17 Cfr. Hebr. I, 5. 18 Cfr. Math. XXII, 42 sqq. l» Cfr. John V, 18; X, 33. 20 Cfr. John I, 32 sqq.; I, 49; IX, 35 SQQ-i Luke I, 35 sqq., et passim. For further information on this point, see infra, § 3. 2iProv. VIII; Wisd. VII sqq.; Ecclus. XXIV. God” must be essentially conceived as “Begotten Wisdom” (Logos). speak of Uncreated, Divine Wisdom in a manner which leaves no doubt that they mean more than a personified attribute. The following texts read like parallel passages to certain verses of St. John’s Gospel. Prov. VIII, 24 sqq. ” Nondum erant abyssi et ego [i. e., sapientia] iam concepta eram: … ante colles [i. e., ab aeterno] ego parturiebar… . Cum eo [scil. Deo] eram, cuncta componens et delectabar per singulos dies, ludens coram eo omni tempore, ludens in orbe terrarum, et deliciae meae esse cum filiis hominum — The depths were not as yet, and I [Wisdom] was already conceived … before the hills I was brought forth. … I was with him [God] forming all: and was delighted every day, playing before him at all times: and my delights [were] to be with the children of men.” The subject of this passage is obviously not a divine attribute, but a Divine Person, who is called ” Conceived Wisdom.” The expression, ” I was with him,* 22 has a parallel in John I, 1: * The Word was with God* (Verbum erat apud Deum; irpb? rbv ©cov). The Book of Wisdom,23 in designating Divine Wisdom as * a vapor of the power of God ” (vapor virtutis Dei), ” a certain pure emanation of glory ” (emanatio claritatis), “the brightness of eternal light” (candor lucis), ” the unspotted mirror of God’s majesty ” (speculum maiestatis), “the image of his goodness” (imago bonitatis), reminds one of the manner in which St. Paul characterizes Christ’s relationship to God the Father,24 i. e., as * 22 * Cum eo eram ; the Septua- 28 Wisd. VII, 25 sqq. gint has: faqy wap atfry; the 24 Hebr. I, 3. Hebrew: .

” the brightness of his glory, and the figure of his substance ” (splendor gloriae et figura substantiae eius) . The following sentence,25 ” And thy wisdom with thee, which knoweth thy works, which then also was present when thou madest the world — Et tecum (/actu gov) sapientia tua, quae novit opera tua, quae et affuit tunc, quum orbem t err arum facer es (irapovoa ore hroUis rov Koafwv)* is again distinctly Johannine in style and sentiment. The same impression is conveyed by Ecclus. XXIV, 5: *I came out of the mouth of the most High [as the Word], the firstborn before all creatures.” 26 In view of this striking concordance between of the Old Testament and the Gospel of St. John, it is not astonishing that certain learned Jewish rabbis at a later period elaborated an independent theory of the “Word of God,” called Memrah,27 by which they endeavored to explain the Old Testament teaching regarding Wisdom without any reference to Christ.28 It is easy to see, too, why the Fathers of the Nicene epoch appealed to of the Old Testament to prove the and consequent Divinity of Christ. The Arians, on their part, quoted in support of their heretical tenet that the Logos was a creature.29

5. The Holy Ghost.— The Old Testament references to the Third Person of the Blessed Trinity are neither as plain nor as definite as 25 Wisd. IX, 9. 26 * Ego ex ore altissimi prodivi [ut Verbum], primogenita ante omnem creaturam.* 27 A Chaldaic word for Wisdom. Cfr. J. Lebreton, Les Origines du -Dpgme de la Trinity pp. 145 sqq. ^iThis theory is incorporated chiefly in the writings of the Targumim and Onkelos. Cfr. The Jewish Encyclopedia, 29 Cfr. Newman, The Arians of the Fourth Century, pp. 202 sqq.; Idem, Select Treatises of St. Athanosiust II, 337 sqq. .Cfr. also Chapter II, § 2, Art. 3, infra. the texts relating to the Son. “It is natural to expect more references to the Son than to in the Old Testament, because it prepares and announces the coming and manifestation of the Son in the Incarnation.” 30 The Old Testament references to can nearly all of them be explained as personifications. “Spiritus Dei” may merely mean a breath of the Divine Omnipotence,81 or the supernatural effects of the spirit of God, which, according to Ps. CHI, 30, “renews the face of the earth.” The Fathers in their exegetical works quote a number of Old Testament texts in which they profess to find references to the Holy Spirit as a Person.82 But their interpretation of these and similar passages is inspired by, and owes its impressiveness to the light derived from, the New Testament. It is in this light, too, that we must regard Wisd. IX, 1 sqq., the only Old Testament passage in which the Three Divine Persons are mentioned together: “Deus patrum meorum, … qui fecisti omnia Verbo tuo, … da mihi sedium tuarum assistricem sapientiam… . Sensum autem tuum quis sciet, nisi tu dederis sapientiam et miseris Spirit um Sanctum tuum de altissimis? — God of my fathers, … who hast made all things with thy so Wilhelm-Scannell, Manual, Vol. 32 Joel II, 28; Job XXXIII, 4; I, p. 283. Wisd. I, 7; Is. LXI, 1, etc. 81 Cfr. Gen. I, 2. word, … give me wisdom, that sitteth by thy throne … Who shall know thy thought, except thou give wisdom, and send thy Holy Spirit from above ?” It cannot therefore be seriously maintained that the mystery of the Divine Trinity was clearly revealed in the Old Testament. Aside from certain specially enlightened individuals, such as Abraham, Moses, Isaias, and David, the Jews could not, from the more or less enigmatic hints scattered through their sacred books, have obtained a sufficiently distinct knowledge of the Blessed Trinity to make it appear as an article of faith. Nevertheless it remains true that the Trinity was not announced in the New Testament suddenly and without preparation. On the contrary, the great mystery of the Godhead was foreshadowed from the very beginning of the Jewish Covenant and assumed more definite and luminous proportions during and after the time of David, until at last it stood fully revealed in the mystery of the Incarnation,33 and the mission of on Pentecost Day. Readings: — Drach, De I’Harmonie entre T£glise et la Synagogue, Paris 1844. — P. Scholz, Theologie des A. B., Vol. I, §§ 29 sqq., Ratisbon 1861. — Scheeben, Dogmatik, Vol. I, § no, Freiburg 1875 (Wilhelm-Scannell’s Manual, I, pp. 283 sqq.). 83Matth. I, 18 sqq.; Luke I, 3 5, etc. — *Heinrich, Dogmat. Theologie, 2nd ed., Vol. Ill, §§ 214-218, Mainz 1883. — Franzelin, De Deo Trino, thes. 6 and 7, Romae 1881. On the “Angel of Jehovah,” cfr. A. Rohling in the Tubinger Quartalschrift, 1866, pp. 415 sqq., 527 sqq. — *L. Reinke, Beitrdge zur Erklarung des A. T., Vol. IV, pp. 355 sqq.; J. Lebreton, Les Origines du Dogme de la Trinite, pp. 89 sqq., Paris 1910. On the Messias, cfr. *K6nig, Theologie der Psalmen, Freiburg 1857; L- Reinke, Messianische Psalmen, 2 vols., Giessen 18571858; H. Zschokke, Theologie der Propheten, Freiburg 1877; H. P. Liddon, The Divinity of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, London 1867; A. J. Maas, S. J., Christ in Type and Prophecy, 2 vols., New York 1893-5. On of the Old Testament cfr. *Fr. Klasen, Die alttestamentliche Weisheit und der Logos der judischalexandrinischen Philosophie, 1878; also J. Reville, Le Logos oVapres Philon d’ Alexandria, Paris 1877; Zschokke, Der dogtnatisch-ethische Lehrgehalt der alttestamentlichen Weisheitsbiicher, Wien 1889; E. Krebs, Der Logos als Heiland im ersten Jahrhundert, Freiburg 1910; J. Lebreton, Les Origines du Dogme de la Triniti, 89 sqq., 441 sqq., Paris 1910.

Though the exact terms in which the Church has formally defined the dogma of the Blessed Trinity (jpw* = trinitas, ovcria = substantia,