|
The mystery of the Trinity is obscurely expressed in the
Old Testament. We give here certain passages that have
a meaning more clearly understood after the revelation of
the New Testament.
1. A certain plurality in the one God is indicated,
sometimes in the words of God and again in the
theophanies.
God's words seem to express a council between several
persons in Gen. 1:26,"let us make man to our image
and likeness." It might be said that this is the plural
of majesty, but this interpretation seems to be excluded
by God's words to Adam after the Fall," behold Adam
is become as one of us" (Gen. 3:22). The
expression "one of us" indicates more than the plural of
majesty. We may also cite God's words, provoked by the
pride of the builders of the tower of Babel, "come ye,
therefore, let us go down, and there confound their
tongue" (Gen. 11:7).[87]
The mystery of the Trinity sheds some light on why the
seraphim cried to one another: "Holy, holy, holy, the
Lord God of hosts, all the earth is full of His glory"
(Isa. 6:3). Another triple invocation of God is
found in the Book of Numbers in the formulas of
benediction (6:24 ff.).
Something similar is found in the theophanies. In the
opinion of St. Augustine and St. Ambrose, Jahve
appeared to Abraham in the guise of three men to adumbrate
the Trinity: "And the Lord appeared to him in the vale
of Mambre... and when he had lifted up his eyes, there
appeared to him three men standing near him: and as soon
as he saw them he ran to meet them from the door of his
tent, and adored down to the ground" (Gen. 18:1
f.). The Roman Breviary in explanation says, "We
saw three and adored one."[88] This was also the
interpretation of St. Augustine and St. Ambrose, but
others, among them St. Hilary, understood this passage
in a different sense.
In these words of God and in the theophanies,
therefore, a certain plurality is implied as existing in
the one God, but it is not expressed so explicitly that
the Jews could understand it.
2. The person of the Messias is more explicitly
revealed in the Messianic prophecies, 1. as the Son of
God, distinct from the Father, 2. as God, 3. when
He is called wisdom.[89]
In the psalms we read: "The Lord hath said to me:
Thou art My son, this day have I begotten thee"
(2:7). This psalm is Messianic in the literal
sense, for the power that is promised to the new king is
universal domination, extending over the universe, and
the concept of any universal dominion is essentially
Messianic. Therefore the king who is here proclaimed and
who is to assume this dominion is the Messias.
To this Messianic king Jahve said, "Thou art My
son, this day have I begotten thee." This sentence may
be taken in the literal sense as referring to the
only-begotten Son, or in a metaphorical sense as
referring to a son by adoption. From the text alone it
would be difficult to prove that this statement is to be
taken in its literal sense as referring to the divine
generation and to the eternal Messias. This passage
merely states that the Messias is formally constituted a
king, but such election as king gave any Oriental king
and especially the king of the Jewish theocracy the title
of "son of God" in the metaphorical sense. From the
text and from the context as well it is difficult to affirm
the divinity of the Messias with any certainty, but we
can easily conclude that the Messias would be a universal
king and in some very special way the son of God.
In the light of a new inspiration, the author of the
Epistle to the Hebrews determined the meaning of this
psalm verse (2:7) when he said: "For to which of
the angels hath He said at any time, Thou art My son,
today have I begotten thee?" that is, the Son of God
is above the angels. Thus the Epistle to the Hebrews
teaches us in what sense that most special filiation of the
Messias is to be understood: not as some metaphorical or
adoptive filiation, but as actual filiation. The
argument here is theological, based on the New
Testament.[90]
In Psalm 109 (V. I, 3), which the Biblical
Commission attributes to David, we read: "The Lord
said to my Lord: Sit thou at My right hand;... with
thee is the principality in the day of thy strength: in
the brightness of the saints: from the womb before the day
star I begot thee." David is speaking of a colloquy
between Jahve and some person whom David calls his
Lord. Who is this person?
In order that David could call him his lord (Adonai),
this person must be someone greatly superior to David; he
must have dominion over the whole universe; and he must be
a priest for all eternity according to the order of
Melchisedech. The two last qualities are verified only
in the Messias. With regard to the first quality, the
superiority over David, we may ask whether this
superiority is one of degree only, as when both are human
beings and one is higher than the other, or a superiority
of nature, as when the Messias is not only a man but God
also, the only-begotten Son of God. The point is not
clear either from the text or the context. Sometimes the
expression, "it thou at my right hand," is used to
indicate the divinity of the Messias, but it is also an
Oriental figure of speech implying that an individual has
been raised to some special dignity, generally to the
royal state. From the text and the context alone we can
conclude merely that the promised Messias would be greatly
superior to David; but what this superiority actually was
is not clearly stated. In the second century before
Christ the Septuagint version interpreted this
superiority over David as one of nature, that is, they
understood it as referring to the divinity of the
Messias, and later Christ Himself in His disputations
with the Pharisees argued His divinity from this
text.[91]
In St. Matthew's Gospel we read: "The Lord said
to my Lord... . If David then call him Lord, how
is he his son? And no man was able to answer him a word"
(22:44 ff.). The full meaning of the text appears
from Christ's interpretation in the New
Testament.[92] As St. Augustine pointed
out,[93] in the expression, "Today have I begotten
thee" the word "today" signifies the permanent present
moment of eternity, where there is no past or future.
Thus this eternal generation of the Son is above time.
St. Thomas, too, says that the generation is eternal;
it is not a new begetting but one that is eternal. "The
'today' designates what is present; and that which is
eternal is always."[94]
In Isaias we read: "For a child is born to us, and a
son is given to us, and the government is upon his
shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful,
Counsellor, God the Mighty, the Father of the world
to come, the Prince of Peace" (9:6). The
expression "God the Mighty" (El Gibbor) is found in
Isa. 10:21, Deut. 10:17, Jer.
32:18, Neh. 9:32 and always refers to Jahve.
It is never used with reference to a creature, even the
highest, and therefore Catholic exegetes accept this
expression as designating the divine quality of the
Child.[95]
In these texts we see illustrated what was later said of
Wisdom in the Sapiential Books. In Prov.
8:22-31, Wisdom itself says, "The Lord
possessed me in the beginning of His ways, before He
made anything from the beginning. I was set up from
eternity, and of old before the earth was made. The
depths were not as yet, and I was already
conceived,... before the hills I was brought
forth,... I was with Him forming all things: and was
delighted every day, playing before Him at all times."
This text is illuminated by Ps. 2:7, "Thou art My
Son, this day have I begotten Thee," and Ps.
109:3, "Before the day star I begot Thee, " and
it proclaims what St. Paul will say to the Hebrews
(1:3) concerning the Son, who is "the brightness of
His glory, and the figure of His substance." In this
text from Proverbs, we find a certain distinction between
the persons in the words, "The Lord possessed Me,"
for no one properly possesses himself. The pronoun "me"
also designates a person, and not a divine attribute, for
later we read, "I was with Him forming all things and
was delighted, " that is, affected by joy, and only a
person would be affected by joy, not a divine attribute.
In this text also we find some indication that the
principle of distinction between the two persons is the
fact that one is begotten by the other, begotten not
made: "I was conceived, I was brought forth." We
find even some indication of the order of procession, and
nothing of inequality: "I was set up from eternity."
Thus this text, considered alongside the analogy of
faith, or when it is compared with other earlier and later
texts, contains much that does not appear at first sight.
Gradually the contemplative mind is able to penetrate its
full meaning with the aid of the gift of understanding.
For all these texts can be studied in two ways:
superficially with whatever aid comes from grammar and
history, or more profoundly in the light of faith and the
gifts of the Holy Ghost. Thus we search out the meaning
of the word of God, understanding it in that supernatural
light in which it was originally written under the guidance
of the Holy Ghost. In this way it was that the Fathers
read these texts. In our churches the stained-glass
windows can be looked at in two ways: from the outside,
where the figures cannot be discerned; and from within the
church, where all the design of the window can be seen in
the light intended by the artist.
Here, too, we should read the text of the Book of
Ecclesiasticus (chap. 24): "I [Wisdom] came out
of the mouth of the Most High, the first-born before
all creatures. I made that in the heavens there should
rise light that never faileth... . In me is all grace
of the way and of the truth." In this text, the
procession is indicated in the words, "I came out of the
mouth of the Most High": on the day of the
Annunciation the archangel Gabriel called God the
Father the Most High and, Jesus the Son of the Most
High. The text also declares that Wisdom is begotten
not made: "the first-born of all creatures." Finally
we find some indication of the order of procession in the
words: "there should rise light that never faileth...
in which is all grace of the way and of the truth."
It might be raised in objection that verse 14 refers to
creation, "From the beginning,... was I created."
Father Lebreton replied that this verse is to be
explained from the context, in which, a little earlier,
it is said that Wisdom "came out of the mouth of the
Most High, the firstborn before all creatures."
Therefore when we read, "From the beginning,... was
I created, " the word "create" is to be understood for
the production of a thing, as when it is said that
children are procreated.[96]
Lastly, we read in the Book of Wisdom
(7:25-30) that Wisdom is "a vapor of the power
of God, and a certain pure emanation of the glory of the
almighty God: and therefore no defiled thing cometh in to
her. For she is the brightness of eternal light, and the
unspotted mirror of God's majesty, and the image of His
goodness... . She can do all things,... and
conveyeth herself into holy souls, she maketh the friends
of God and prophets... . Being compared with the
light, she is found before it. For after this cometh
night, but no evil can overcome wisdom."
In the light of the preceding texts, this passage
insinuates very probably the existence of a person distinct
from the Father, the same as that person referred to in
the psalms: "Thou art My son, this day have I
begotten Thee" (2:7), and "The Lord said to my
Lord: Sit thou at My right hand" (109:1).
Here Wisdom, as "the certain pure emanation of the
glory of the almighty God, appears as God from true God
and as light from light." Here Wisdom is called "the
brightness of eternal light, and the unspotted mirror of
God's majesty, and the image of His goodness," that
is, His adequate image, not an imperfect representation
like the angels and men, who are created to the image of
God. Of this perfect and adequate image we read that it
"can do all things," because it is God Himself, and
that it sanctifies souls, which is an attribute proper to
God. It is, therefore, the uncreated light, without
spot or blemish.
Many of the Fathers have compared this text with the
beginning of the Epistle to the Hebrews: "God, who,
at sundry times and in divers manners, spoke in times past
to the fathers by the prophets, last of all, in these
days hath spoken to us by His Son,... who being the
brightness of His glory [Wisdom was called 'the
brightness of eternal light'] and the figure of His
substance [Wisdom was called 'the unspotted mirror of
God's majesty, and the image of His goodness'], and
upholding all things by the word of His power [Wisdom
was said to be able 'to do all things'], making
purgation of sins, sitteth on the right hand of the
majesty on high [Wisdom was said to 'make friends of
God and prophets']."
Lebreton, speaking of this chapter 7 of the Book of
Wisdom, says: "Wisdom has not all the features of a
living personality,... yet in this book we find the
most precise presentiment of the Christian dogma. Soon
the authentic interpretation of the Epistle to the
Hebrews will show in full light that theology of the Word
which we have been able to perceive there only
obscurely."[97]
In this passage of the Book of Wisdom, the Holy Ghost
delineated what was to appear more brilliantly in the
prologue to the Fourth Gospel: "In the beginning was
the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was
God." In opposition to all this, Philo's logos was
either a creature, when he spoke as a Neoplatonist, or a
divine attribute, when he spoke as a Jew.
The Old Testament contains only obscure references to
the Holy Ghost. Often, indeed, the Spirit of God is
mentioned, and He is represented as the principle of life
by which the face of the earth is renewed (Ps.
103:30), and as the distributor of heavenly gifts
(Isa. 11:2), the classic text concerning the gifts
of the Holy Ghost. But the personal distinction of the
Holy Ghost from God the Father can be hardly inferred
from these texts of the Old Testament. This is not
surprising, since the Old Testament was to announce the
coming of the Messias, or of the Son, whereas the New
Testament was to bring the Son's announcement of the
mission of the Holy Ghost.
We find, however, some indication of this distinction in
the Book of Wisdom (9:1 f., 17): "God of my
fathers, and Lord of mercy, who hast made all things
with Thy word, and by Thy wisdom hast appointed
man... . And who shall know Thy thought, except
Thou give wisdom, and send Thy Holy Spirit from
above?"
Some light is thrown on this passage by the words of
Isaias: "And there shall come forth a rod from the root
of Jesse, and a flower shall rise up out of this root.
And the spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him: the
spirit of wisdom, and of understanding, the spirit of
counsel, and of fortitude, the spirit of knowledge, and
of godliness. And he shall be filled with the spirit of
the fear of the Lord" (Isa. 11:1 ff.). Joining
these two texts from the Old Testament, we see what
Christians understand by the words, "And who shall know
Thy thought... except Thou send Thy Holy Spirit
from above?" On the feast of Pentecost the Church
repeats the words of the Psalmist, "Send forth Thy
spirit, and they shall be created" (Ps.
103:30). It should not be surprising that the
first lineaments of the mystery of the Trinity should be
obscure. Some features of the mystery were announced in
the beginning, but that which was to be more fully
revealed later on could not then be known. In the natural
order the whole river is virtually known in the initial
spring of a great stream, but from that spring alone the
whole course of the river cannot be known. So also the
extraordinary talents of a great genius are virtually found
in the mind of the child, but they are not explicit in the
beginning.
Conclusion. All that was revealed in the Old Testament
about the Messias, Wisdom, and the Holy Spirit is the
primitive delineation of the mystery of the Holy
Trinity. The Jews, however, apparently were not able
to understand these things or to unite them into one body
of doctrine, as is evident from the rabbinical and
apocryphal writings. Thus it often occurs that the father
and the mother of a child who later becomes a great thinker
are not able to appreciate the acumen of the child,
although later when the child has grown to manhood they can
discern his unusual gifts in the light of a maturer mind.
It is said of St. Thomas that when he was five years
old he often asked his teachers, "Who is God?" Most
of his teachers were not able to foresee what would become
of the child. St. Albert the Great, however, seems
to have foreseen the child's future.
Doubt. In the Old Testament what kind of faith was
necessary for salvation with regard to God?
Reply. The answer is found in the Epistle to the
Hebrews (11:6): "But without faith it is
impossible to please God. For he that cometh to God,
must believe that He is, and is a rewarder to them that
seek Him." As St. Thomas explained,[98] it was
always necessary to believe something above reason, that
is, not only the existence of God as the author of nature
but also the existence of God as the author of grace and
salvation. Faith in the Trinity is implicitly contained
in this supernatural belief. Explicit faith in the
Trinity was not necessary for salvation in the Old
Testament. "Before Christ the mystery of the
incarnation of Christ was explicitly believed by the
majority, while a minority believed it implicitly and
vaguely; the same was true of the mystery of the
Trinity."[99] It was in this sense that St.
Thomas says in the same place, "Therefore from the
beginning it was necessary for salvation to believe
explicitly in the Trinity," at least for the leaders,
among whom were the prophets. In the same article in the
reply to the first objection, St. Thomas says: "It
was necessary at all times and for all to believe
explicitly these two truths concerning God (that God is
and that He is the rewarder). But these two truths were
not sufficient at all times for all."
|
|