Ursinus on the relations within the eternal Trinity and the personal properties of the Three Persons

"We may now readily perceive the difference between the Essence of God, and the Persons, subsisting in the divine essence. By the term, Essence, we are to understand, in reference to this subject, that which the eternal Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are considered, and declared to be, singly and absolutely in themselves, and which is common to the three. By the term, Person, however, we are to understand that which the three persons of the Godhead are considered and declared to be individually and relatively, or as compared with each other, and which they are according to the mode of existence peculiar to each. Or, we may define Essence as the very being of God—the very, eternal, and only Deity—whilst the term Person refers to the mode, or manner, in which the being of God, or the divine essence, subsists in each of these three. God the Father is that Being who is of himself, and not from another. The Son is that self-same Being, or essence, not of himself, but of the Father. The Holy Spirit is in like manner the self-same Being, not of himself, but from the Father and the Son. Thus the Being, or divine essence, of the there persons of the Godhead is one and the same in number. But to be of himself, or from another—from one, or from two; that is, to have this one divine essence of himself, or to have it communicated from another—from one or from two, expresses the mode of existence which is three-fold and distinct; to wit, to be of himself, to be begotten or generated, and to proceed; and hence, the three persons which are expressed by the term, Trinity."

ZACHARIAS URSINUS, The Commentary of Dr. Zacharias Ursinus on the Heidelberg Catechism, trans. G. W. Williard (Cincinnati, OH: Elm Street Printing Company, 1888), 130. (modified)

The Father as the beginning (arche) of the Godhead (contribution to the ongoing debate on Trinitarian theology and subordinationism)

The debate regarding Trinitarian theology and subordinationism continues in evangelical circles in the USA and beyond.

The debate surrounds the question of the eternal relations within the Godhead of Father, Son and Holy Spirit and whether this might provide a theological underpinning for relations within the family.

On one side are advocates of what has been termed 'eternal subordination', including Wayne Grudem and Mike Ovey. On the other side are those who oppose any notion of eternal subordination.

Issues about theology proper, the doctrine of God, are so central to everything that it is hard to overestimate their significance. We are talking about the Being at the centre of everything that exists, commanding our worship and service.

One of the lynch-pins of historic Trinitarian theology has been the notion of personal properties of the divine persons. In historic, Biblical Trinitarian theology the persons of the Godhead are not only each equal and equally worthy of being "worshipped and glorified"; they are also distinguished from one another. These distinctive properties are termed in Greek idiotetes, whereas in Latin theology the focus was on relationships (relationes).

In the words of Donald Fairbairn, "The Father is not exactly the same as the Son, because if he were, there would be two Brothers, not a Father and a Son. The Father is the head and the source of the Godhead, and the Son is God because he exists eternally in a filial relationship with the Father. SImilarly, the Spirit is God because he eternally proceeds from the Father, the source."

We should be careful not to venture too far in speculation in respect of God. However, within the bounds of the revelation we have, we can affirm that Father is unbegotten, begets and spirates; the Son is begotten and the Spirit proceeds. (We can for the moment leave aside the issue of whether the Son also spirates.) In affirming these truths we are affirming an order (the Greek word is taxis) within the eternal Trinity. In particular we are affirming the primacy of the Father. In traditional Trinitarian theology the terminology has been that the Father is the beginning (arche) and source of the Godhead.

What does it mean that the Father is unbegotten and the Son is begotten? Well, it means that one is the Father and the other the Son. But that is just repeating the obvious. It also means, and this is the inescapable logic of revelation, that the Son is OF the Father in a way that the Father is not OF the Son. In affirming that the Father is unbegotten and the Son is begotten we are affirming an asymmetrical relationship which begins with the Father. Traditionally this has meant a derivation of origin; Gregory of Nazianzus compares the Trinity to the first family - Adam was the father, Eve was taken from his side and Seth was born of him; and yet together they were the human race. John of Damascus writes that light comes from fire, not fire from light. However, even for those who would refuse to speculate on such matters, even if we perceive of the Trinity only in terms of relationships, it is the Father who first loves the Son and the Son who receives this love and responds. Either way the Father is the beginning (arche), the starting point; as such he has primacy within the Godhead.

Notwithstanding his contribution to this doctrine which further undergirded the equality of the Son, Calvin wrote in the Institutes, "... but inasmuch as the Father is first in order and of himself begat his own Wisdom, he, as we lately observed, is justly regarded as the principle and fountain of all the Godhead" (Institutes, I.13.25)

In Christian theology there is a concept called Rahner's rule which states, "The economic Trinity is the essential Trinity." Deciphered this means that the way in which the persons of the Godhead interact as they perform the works of creation and salvation reflects the eternal relations which exist between them. In John's gospel especially countless times Jesus speaks of his deference to the Father and his dependence on him. He does so not only as incarnate Man before eternal God, but as eternal Son before this heavenly Father. For example John 5:26. "For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself." Not 'the Son of Man', not 'Christ', but the Son.

It may well be that the language of submission and subordination is too ambiguous and tainted with controversy to be appropriate in our Trinitarian theology. And at all times we must all affirm the equality of the Son and Spirit with the Father. However in so doing we must not allow the expediency of controversy and earthly agendas to blur our vision as to the distinctive personal properties of the divine persons - Unbegottenness, Begottenness and Procession. And, if we are to be true to our Lord Jesus Christ, we must not be loath to affirm the Father as the beginning (arche) of the Godhead.

Gloria Patri, et Filio, et Spiritui Sancto. Amen.