The BEST Explanation of the Holy Trinity

In this video, we shall explain the mystery of the Holy Trinity. We are not setting out to prove the Trinity from scripture. Rather, this video presupposes belief in the Holy Trinity and is meant to explain the Trinity to believing Christians, especially Catholics. For those who want a scriptural proof for the Trinity, watch the video by Scholastic Answers: The Trinity and Scripture, a complete defense full video.

The Trinity is the central mystery of the Catholic faith. The whole Catholic religion revolves around the Trinity. Now given that it is a mystery, this means we cannot know about the Trinity if it were not for divine revelation or God speaking to mankind and revealing it. Even after God has revealed it, we cannot fully comprehend or penetrate this mystery. However, we can still gain some insight and this insight will give us much delight.

Now, the Trinity being a mystery of the faith does not mean we cannot know anything about it. Some people error and say that we should not think about the trinity because it is mystery we cannot fully comprehend. This is a terrible mindset. The mystery of the trinity is like an infinite art gallery that cannot be fully comprehended. But it has so much to offer and we can spend the rest of our lives studying, contemplating, and delighting in it. The trinity is an inexhaustible wellspring that the predestined will gaze upon for all eternity in the life to come. So we can have a taste of heaven in this life by contemplating on the trinity.

So let us meditate on this mystery. We shall first give a basic explanation of the trinity for beginners. Then we will provide the psychological analogy of the trinity and show how it makes sense of the dogma of the trinity as well as illuminating what scripture tells us about the divine persons and their actions in salvation history to aid your contemplation. Then we shall progress to a more technical explanation of the trinity from a tomistic perspective using more precise terminology for a more advanced audience. And finally we shall answer the so-called logical problem of the trinity.

If you are already familiar with the basic Catholic dogmas regarding the holy trinity and have already watched my video called the best analogy for the holy trinity you can skip to the timestamp provided on the screen. There shall also be a pinned comment with a timestamp that says skip to here. I guarantee you that if you watch this video until the end, you will agree that this is the best video on the Holy Trinity in all of YouTube. Now, let's begin.

Now, what is the trinity? The word trinity comes from try and unity. It is a belief that there is one God who is three really distinct persons. The father, son, and holy spirit are each god. Yet, the father, son, and holy spirit are distinct persons. The father is not the son nor the holy spirit. The son is not the father nor the holy spirit. The holy spirit is not the father nor the son.

The trinity comes from the fact that divine revelation teaches us:

1. There is one God. Deuteronomy 6:4 says, "Hear O Israel the Lord our God is one Lord."

2. The Father is God. 1 Corinthians 8:6 says, "yet for us there is one God the Father."

3. The Son is God. John 1:1 and 4 says, "In the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the word was God. And the word became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth. So we have beheld his glory, glory as of the only son from the father." So we see that the word is God from all eternity and this word is the son of God who became incarnate. And John 8:58 says, "Jesus said to them, 'Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.'" Here we see that Jesus claims the name of God as revealed in Exodus 3:14, "I am or Yahweh," showing that he is God.

4. The Holy Spirit is God. Acts 5:3-4 says, "Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit? You have not lied to men, but to God." Here we see that lying to the Holy Spirit is lying to God. This is because the Holy Spirit is God. 1 Corinthians 6:19 says, "Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, which you have from God?" Here we see that our bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit since he is God dwelling in the souls of the just who partake of the divine nature. 1 Corinthians 2:10 says, "God has revealed to us through the Spirit, for the Spirit searches everything, even the depths of God." Here we see that the Holy Spirit knows the inner incomprehensible mystery of God, showing that he is God and is a subject of intellectual nature.

5. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are not each other. Matthew 28:19 says, "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." Here we see three divine persons listed amongst the act of baptism, the very sacrament that makes us partakers of the divine nature, showing all three persons are God. John 14:16-17 says, "And I will pray the Father and he will give you another counselor to be with you forever, even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive because it neither sees him nor knows him. You know him, for he dwells with you and will be in you." Here we see the son praying to the father according to his humanity, showing that he's a distinct subject than the father. The father sends a spirit, showing the spirit is distinct from the father as a sender-sent relation indicates distinction of persons. John 15:26 says, "But when the counselor comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the Father, he will bear witness to me." Here we see the son sends the holy spirit from the father, showing the distinction of all three persons.

So there is one God because there is one divine being, nature, essence, and substance. Yet there are three really distinct persons. There is unity in essence, but distinction in persons. Matthew 28:19 says, "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." Here we see that there is one name, not three names, indicating that there is only one God, one divine being. Yet there are three divine persons listed, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Now let's define terms in a beginner-friendly way. Essence answers the question "what?" "What am I?" "I'm a man." There is numerically one divine essence in God, which means that there is one God. There's one "what?" One divine being. Person answers the question "who?" "Who am I?" "I'm Brian Dwang." That's who I am. There are three "who's" in God: the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. So there is one "what?" One God, one divine being. But there are three really different "who's": Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Before we explain the trinity more, let us cover some heresies against the sacred dogma. By understanding these heresies, we will better understand what the trinity is by showing what it is not. The two main errors against the dogma of the trinity are either:

1. Denying the unity of the divinity.

2. Denying the real distinction of the persons.

1. The Arians claimed that the Son was created and had a different essence from the Father, making him and the Holy Spirit creatures. The Macedonians denied the divinity of the Holy Spirit, making him a creature. These two errors denied the unity of the divinity, the fact that the three persons are each God and fully divine because they possess the divine nature.

2. Some claim that the trinity is polytheism and posit three gods. Christians believe that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are one God, one in being.

3. Some deny the unity of God by denying the simplicity of God. They say that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are parts of God. Catholics believe God has no parts and that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are each holy God and do not compose parts of God. Catechism paragraph 253 says, "The divine persons do not share the one divinity among themselves, but each of them is God whole and entire. 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, i.e. by nature one God." In the words of the Fourth Lateran Council, "each of the persons is that supreme reality, the divine substance, essence or nature."

4. Others, such as the Selians, also known as the modalists, deny the real distinction of the persons. They say that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are one divine person, but are three manifestations of a single person to creation. Christians believe that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three really distinct persons from all eternity, not one single person.

So when speaking about the holy trinity, we must remember to acknowledge their unity in essence and the real distinction of the persons. So the trinity is a belief that in God there are three persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Each of the three persons possesses numerically the one divine essence.

What do we mean by numerically one? Numerically one means that there's only one concrete divine essence. Three men have the same type of essence, all being members of the human species, but they have numerically three essences as they are numerically three beings. The divine persons are one in being, consubstantial, and therefore have numerically one divine essence. They are not three instances of a generic universal essence. The divine persons are absolutely co-equal because they are each the perfect divine being. So the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are all perfect with the same numerically one perfection and the same numerically one absolute attributes.

According to Catechism paragraph 254, "The three divine persons are distinct from one another in their relations of origin. The Father is from no one. The Father generates the Son and the Son eternally comes forth from the Father and the Father and the Son spirate or breathe forth the Holy Spirit and the Holy Spirit eternally proceeds from the Father and the Son." These relations of origin are how the divine persons are distinct. The person who originates from another cannot be the person from whom he comes from. To come from someone indicates that you are distinct from that person by your relationship of coming from them. Thus, the Son is really distinct from the Father because he comes from him or eternally originates from him. And the Holy Spirit is really distinct from the Father and the Son because he comes from him or eternally originates from the Father and the Son.

Procession in God simply means the origin of one from the other. In God, there are two divine processions: the procession of the Son and the Holy Spirit. The Son eternally originates or proceeds from the Father and is co-eternal with the Father. The Holy Spirit eternally originates or proceeds from the Father and the Son and is co-eternal with the Father and the Son. We see the procession of the Son in the Bible. John 8:42 says, "Jesus said to them, 'If God were your Father, you would love me, for I proceeded and came forth from God.'" And we see the procession of the Holy Spirit in John 15:26, "But when the counselor comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the Father." And we see the spirit proceeds or receives from the Son in John 16:14, "He, the Holy Spirit, will glorify me, for he will take what is mine or receive from me and declare to you."

Given that the Son and the Holy Spirit proceed eternally, they are co-eternal with the Father. There is no priority or posteriority of the divine persons in time. Catechism paragraph 255 says, "The divine persons are relative to one another because it does not divide the divine unity. The real distinction of the persons from one another resides solely in the relationships which relate them to one another." What is relation? Relation is an ordering of one to the other. The Father relates to the Son by generating him. The Son relates to the Father by being generated by him. The Father and the Son relate to the Holy Spirit by spirating or breathing him forth. The Holy Spirit relates to the Father and Son by proceeding from him. So the persons are only distinct by their relations to each other. They possess and have in common each of the same absolute attributes such as wisdom, power, goodness. However, they are distinct by their relations of origin to each other.

The next part is from my video, the best analogy for the Holy Trinity. If you've already watched it, feel free to skip the next 9 minutes. You are free to rewatch, but if you want, skip to the timestamp shown right now, which is also linked in the pinned comment under the title. Skip to here.

Now, let's use the psychological analogy to better understand the mystery of the Holy Trinity. Before we use a psychological analogy, let's address a common critique. If you've seen the Lutheran satire video, they criticize trinitarian analogies by saying they lead to heresies. This is one of the worst videos on YouTube. This critique comes from a fundamental misunderstanding of the doctrine of analogy. Analogies all have an aspect of similarity and dissimilarity. The point of an analogy is to highlight the aspect of similarity while purifying our minds of the dissimilarities. All analogies will have some dissimilarities. However, the point is to highlight what is similar and to remove away what is not similar so that we can better grasp the mysteries. We come to know spiritual truths through sensible truths. This is why Christ constantly used visual images to convey spiritual truths in his parables. All of the Church Fathers and Doctors of the Church use analogies when explaining the Holy Trinity. If you criticize the use of analogies in general, you are saying all the great saints erred. You are wrong, impious, and need to repent.

Now, let's move on to the best trinitarian analogy, the psychological analogy, which was perfected by St. Thomas Aquinas. Whenever we know something, we generate a concept or a word that issues forth from our active intellect. When I think of myself, I produce or generate a concept or a word that resembles myself. The more perfect my active intellect, the more perfect my word resembles who I actually am. Now, this concept remains in me and is not exterior to me. This concept captures my being, although imperfectly, as it is not exactly identical in being to me. This concept of me comes and goes based on whether I'm thinking or not and inheres in me and is what is called an accident. It is not my very substance or being. Rather, it is an accident and exists in hearing in me. Additionally, this concept of myself only has mental existence, not real existence. Finally, the production of this concept involves a movement from potentially having the concept to actually having the concept.

Now, God the Father perfectly knows himself. And in perfectly knowing himself, he generates a perfect word. His intellect, untouched by imperfection, births a word that embodies his entire being, capturing all that he is and has. Scripture says, "The word reflects the glory of God and bears the very stamp of his nature." Hebrews 1:3. The word is a perfect, infinite reflection of the Father. The word possesses the fullness of the divine being and thus has all the same essential attributes. He's all-knowing, all-powerful, perfect, good, infinite, immaterial, eternal, etc. Now, just like the human concept, the word of God remains in God and is not external. Now, unlike the human concept or word that comes and goes, the Father eternally knows himself and in eternally knowing himself, he generates a word that is co-eternal with him. Now, this word is not an accident like the human word. Rather, it is substantial and is identical to the very being of God, as it is the perfect self-concept that captures the very being of God. According to divine simplicity, everything in God is God. Thus, the word is God and is communicated the planitude of the divine being from the Father and exists in reality just as the divine being is truly real. Unlike the human word, the eternal word is communicated pure act and thus there is no transition of potency to act. John 1:1 says, "In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God." Here we see the word was co-eternal with the Father and is God, but is distinct from the Father since he was with him.

Now, since the word is a subject of the intellectual divine nature, he's the divine person. However, the word is a distinct divine person from the Father by his relation of eternally coming forth from the Father. Since the word comes forth from the Father, he cannot be identical to the person of the Father. There's an irreducible directness of one toward the other. So they cannot collapse into the same subject. Yet both the Father and the word are identical to the divine being. Thus, the Father and the Son are one God, consubstantial or one in being. The Son says, "I and the Father are one." John 10:30, showing their consubstantiality. However, they are distinct by their relations to each other. The Father is the principle of the Son, and the Son is eternally generated or born from the Father by an intellectual emanation. We see that scripture says that the Son emanates from the Father as his image and reflection in Wisdom 7:25-26, which says, "For she, wisdom, is a breath of the power of God and a pure emanation of the Almighty. For she is a reflection of eternal light, a spotless mirror of the working of God and an image of his goodness." So we see that scripture matches with this analogy.

Now, similar to knowing, love is an action that remains in the lover. When we love, the beloved is drawn into us. Our will impulses toward the object of love, leaving behind a certain imprint or impression in the heart. St. Thomas Aquinas, in Compendium Theologiae, Book 1, Chapter 45, says, "As the object known is in the knower, in so far as it is known, so the beloved must be in the lover in so far as it is loved. The lover is in some way moved by the beloved with a certain intrinsic motion. Therefore, since a mover is in contact with the object moved, the beloved must be intrinsic to the lover. But God, just as he understands himself, must likewise love himself. For a good understood is in itself lovable. Consequently, God is in himself as a beloved in the lover." For example, if I love someone deeply, that person becomes present in my heart and my will is drawn toward them, leaving a mark of love upon me. The intensity of that love determines the depth and reality of the impression it leaves within the will. The more profound the love, the more vividly the beloved is present within the lover.

Now, the Father and the Son eternally perfectly love each other and their numerically one divine essence, and they possess each other and their essence for all eternity. So their fruitful love produces a real personal impression of love that proceeds from both in the very heart of God. Remember that love is unitive and makes the two one. Just as love unites, the procession of love flowing forth from both the Father and the Son binds them together in an eternal unity. This impulse of love proceeds from both as one principle. This imprint of love that proceeds from both remains inside God himself. Remember that everything in God is God. Thus, this love proceeding or impression of love is God and possesses the fullness of the divine being, possessing the planitude of the divinity. This love impression must have all the divine attributes. Meaning, this imprint of love is all-knowing, all-powerful, perfect, good, immaterial, simple, eternal, etc. So this impression of love possesses intellect and will and thus is a divine person. Yet this love proceeding comes forth eternally from the Father and the Son and is thus a distinct person from them by his relation of origin from them. There's a relation of producer to produced between the Father and the Word and their impulse of love. Therefore, they cannot collapse into the same person as there is an irreducible mutual reference of one toward the other.

Thus, we see in God that there are three really distinct persons: the Father, the Word, and the love proceeding, which scripture calls the Holy Spirit. These persons are distinguished by their relations of origin, which are grounded in the two interior processions of knowing and loving. The Father is the fount source of life. The Son is generated from the Father by way of intellect, and the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son by way of love. However, there is only one God, one divine being or essence. The divine persons each have the same one goodness, love, perfections, intellect, and will since there is one substance, essence, and nature. Thus, they are one in being and one God. Yet they are distinct persons by relative opposition, the relation of producer to produced. There's an incommunicable directness of one toward the other such that they are mutually referential and cannot collapse into the same subject, even though they are one in being and each identical to the one divine being.

So we see that the psychological analogy helps explain how there is a trinity and how the Son and the Holy Spirit are both the one God that the Father is, yet they are really distinct persons.

Now, how can the Son and the Spirit eternally originate and not be creatures? The Son and the Spirit are not creatures because generation and procession are distinct from the act of creation. Creation is the bringing about of something out of nothing. Generation and procession are the communication of the divine substance. Someone coming forth from someone, not something from nothing. Creation has a beginning in time, whereas generation and procession are eternal. Creation occurs outside of God, whereas generation and procession are intrinsic or imminent in God. Created products have an essence distinct from their existences and thus require an extrinsic explanation for their existence. The divine persons have an essence identical to their existence. So they are all self-subsistent existence itself and require no extrinsic explanation. Thus, creation and the divine processions are completely distinct. So the Son is "begotten, not made," as the Nicene Creed teaches. And the Holy Spirit is "neither made nor created nor begotten but proceeding," as the Nicene Creed teaches. We see that scripture confirms that the divine processions are distinct from the act of creation in John 5:26, which says, "For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself." Here Jesus is saying that just as the Father has life in himself or exists by his own essence, the Father has given the Son the divine essence such that the Son exists by his own essence since the Father and Son's essence is identical. So all three divine persons have essentiality, which means they are each the self-sufficient being itself. Therefore, we see that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are each the one God. And the Son is eternally born of the Father and begotten, not made. And the Holy Spirit eternally proceeds from the Father and Son and is not created nor made. And this is explained by the psychological analogy.

This psychological analogy makes sense of man's soul. Genesis 1:26 says, "Then God said, 'Let us make man in our image, after our likeness.'" Here we see God uses the plural term "us" and "our," showing that he is a trinity. Now, this makes sense of man being made in the image and likeness of God. Since God has two internal processions, that by intellect and will, which are self-communicative and eternally produce the Word and the Spirit, man is patterned off of that such that we have intellect and will and can generate concepts and have an impulse of love within ourselves. However, we are imperfect images of God since we are limited and finite, and therefore our intellects and wills do not produce consubstantial persons.

This psychological analogy also proves a filioque, or the fact that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son. We cannot love what we don't know. So our love proceeds from our word, which we conceive. Thus, this is a mere image of the Holy Spirit proceeding from the Word, the love being breathed forth from the Word. Remember that loving and knowing are essential to God. All three persons know and love with the same exact act of knowing and loving because they are one in being. Intellect and will are faculties of nature. And since there is numerically one divine nature, there's one intellect and will in the Trinity. Now, the Son is the Word that proceeds by way of intellect. He is not essential intellect. Rather, he is the term produced by the procession by reason of intellect. The Holy Spirit is the person that proceeds by way of love. He is not essential love. Rather, he is the term produced by the procession by reason of love.

Now, given that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit understand and love with the same understanding and loving, you might wonder why don't the Son and the Holy Spirit generate another word? And why doesn't the Holy Spirit spirate another spirit? This can be answered by a modified version of the psychological analogy. Let us take the psychological analogy from the aspect of fecundity, or fruitfulness, or self-communicability of intellect and will. The Father has intellect and will, and these two imminent operations have an infinite fruitfulness and self-communicability to them. The Father is the unbegotten source of the divinity who possesses an infinitely fruitful intellect and will. The Father, through the imminent intellect, generates a perfect word through the generation of the Son. The infinite fecundity of the imminent intellect leads to the production of an infinite word who is communicated all things of the Father, save for what is excluded by relative opposition, the relation of producer to produced. Thus, the Son receives all except for paternity. The infinite fruitfulness of the imminent intellect is exhausted and terminates in the production of the Son, so to speak, in our limited human language. Do not think of this as a generative power being lost and running out. Rather, conceive this as an infinite power completely and eternally producing an infinite adequate product that is fully expressive of the power, such that there need not be any other word spoken. The Word realizes the fullness of the infinite fruitfulness of the imminent intellect.

Now, the infinite fruitfulness of the imminent will is not exhausted, as the Word's generation is due to the infinite fruitfulness of the intellect alone. Therefore, the Father communicates this infinite fecundity of the imminent will to the Son, as it is not excluded by relative opposition. Therefore, the Father and the Son, who are one in being, possess the numerically identical infinite fruitfulness of the imminent will, also known as a spirit of power, and thus spirate or breathe forth the Holy Spirit as one principle. The Holy Spirit is then communicated all things of the Father and the Son, save for what is excluded by relative opposition. Thus, the Holy Spirit receives the divine being with the infinite fecundity of intellect and will exhausted or terminating in the Word and the Spirit. So he produces no further persons.

This analogy explains why there are only three divine persons: the Father as a fount source, the Son as the infinite product of the imminent intellect, the Holy Spirit as the infinite product of the imminent love. Additionally, this explains a filioque, or the fact that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son, since the Father and the Son have the same identical spirit of power or fecund imminent will. The Holy Spirit proceeds from both as from one principle.

Now, we must recognize that the Son receives the fecund will from the Father. Thus, we can say that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father through the Son. This maintains the monarchy, or sole source, of the Father, as all fecundity comes from the Father, who is the unbegotten source and font of all divinity. Father Jill Emory says, "In affirming that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son, one emphasizes the unity of the Father and the Son as one spirit of principle of the Holy Spirit. In holding that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father through the Son, one emphasizes the personal distinction of the Father and the Son. That is to say, the fact that the Father is principle of the Son and the only principle without principle in the Trinity. The Holy Spirit takes his origin from the Father in a principal manner."

Now let's move on to proper names. According to Catholic theology, the psychological analogy is not a mere metaphor. Rather, it actually tells us something real about the inner life of the Trinity. Let's see how the psychological analogy explains and illuminates scripture, which affirms the fact that this analogy is not merely a metaphor but confirmed to apply to God's inner life by divine revelation itself.

Because the Son proceeds by an intellectual emanation, he is properly called Word. John 1:1 says, "In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God." This is because the Son is the Word or self-concept of the Father. He's also called the Wisdom of God. First Corinthians 1:24 says, "Christ the wisdom of God." We also see this in Proverbs 8. This is because he proceeds by intellect, and wisdom is associated with intellect. The Son is also called the brightness or splendor of the Father. Hebrews 1:3 says, "Who being the brightness of his glory and the figure of his substance?" This is because our concepts illuminate our minds, and there's a certain brightness that corresponds to the intelligibility of our concepts. For example, in cartoons, when something makes sense intellectually and clicks in their head, this is signified by a light bulb turning on in the character's mind. However, we must remember that the Word is not that by which the Father knows, but he precedes his Word because the Father knows.

Additionally, the Son is called the image, reflection, and mirror of the Father. Colossians 1:15 says, "Who is the image of the invisible God?" Wisdom 7:26 says, "For she, wisdom, is a reflection of eternal light, a spotless mirror of the working of God and an image of his goodness." This is because our concepts capture the being of the object understood. And thus, they are likenesses, images, reflections, and mirrors of the object understood. So, we see that the names that scripture applies to the Son are actually explained by his intellectual procession.

St. Thomas says, "To show that he is of the same nature as the Father, he is called the Son. To show that he is co-eternal, he's called the splendor. To show that he's altogether alike, he is called the image. To show that he is begotten immaterially, he's called the Word. All these truths cannot be expressed by only one name." St. Bonaventure in Breoquium says, "The Son is properly the image, the Word, and the Son as such. Likewise, therefore, image designates him as the express likeness, Word as the expressing likeness, and Son as a personal likeness. Again, image designates him as a likeness in the order of form, Word as a likeness in the order of reason, and Son as a likeness in the order of nature."

In John's Gospel, we see that the Son is first introduced as the Word in John 1:1, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." Then in John 1:14, the Word is revealed to be the only Son of the Father, "and the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth. We have beheld his glory, glories of the only Son from the Father." This is actually the order we come to know the proper names of the Son. According to St. Thomas Aquinas, the Son is first known as the Word, and from this we come to know him as the Son.

In short, the Son's procession by way of intellect as the eternal Word actually explains why he is called the Son. To explain this, we must know that sons are generated or born of their fathers. Now, generation or birth is defined as "the origin of a living being from a living being from a connected principle in a likeness of nature." Living human sons originate from their living human fathers and are born according to the mode of likeness or similarity of nature. Using the psychological analogy, we see that the Son is a self-concept or Word issuing forth from the Father's act of knowing. Now, this intellectual procession is called generation because it fits the definition of generation. The first requirement is that generation is the origin of a living being from a conjoined living principle. Now, the Son is living and originates from the living Father as from a conjoined living principle. Now, the second requirement for generation is that the origin must be by likeness of nature. Now, concepts formed by the intellect proceed by likeness to the thing understood. Concepts and mental words issue forth as intending to capture a likeness of the thing understood. Thus, the Word, who proceeds by mode of capturing the likeness of the Father through an intellectual procession, is eternally generated or born of the Father, as it is the origin of a living being from a living being from a connected principle in a likeness of nature. This is why he is named Son. So his procession by way of intellect as a Word explains why he is called Son. St. John implicitly reveals this by first describing the second person of the Trinity as Word, then revealing he is a Son. We must remember that the Son is called Son not just due to the Incarnation, but he's eternally the Son of the Father.

Now, the name Holy Spirit is fitting due to his procession by way of love. In the Summa Theologiae, St. Thomas Aquinas says, "As Augustine says, because the Holy Ghost is common to both the Father and the Son, he himself is called that properly which both are called in common; for the Father also is a Spirit, and the Son is a Spirit, and the Father is holy, and the Son is holy." Shaban in Mysteries of Christianity also says, "In thus applying the name Holy Spirit to the Spirit of the Father and the Son, we behold him as it were in the guise of an infinitely precious diamond of unshadowable compactness and the most limpid or transparent purity, crystallized out of the breath of their love and life, a diamond in which, in an inexpressibly sublime manner, the Father and the Son pledge their love and secure seal and crown their bond of union." St. Thomas also explains the name Holy Spirit by saying, "The name spirit in things corporeal or bodily seems to signify impulse in motion; for we call the breath and the wind by the term spirit. Now, it is a property of love to move and impel the will of the lover towards the object of love. Further, holiness is attributed to whatever is ordered to God. Therefore, because the divine person proceeds by way of love, whereby God is loved, that person is most properly named the Holy Spirit."

So here we see that the term "spirit" indicates impulse, which corresponds to the Holy Spirit's procession by way of impulse of love. Additionally, holiness means its order to God, and the Holy Spirit proceeds by way of love where God is loved. Thus, he is properly called Holy Spirit. So the name Holy Spirit confirms the psychological analogy.

Now, in Acts 2:38, we see it says, "you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." The Holy Spirit is properly given the name "gift" by the Church Fathers because he is the eternal gift. Gifts manifest one's love. Thus, love is the first gift. Now, since the Holy Spirit proceeds by way of love, he is properly called the eternal gift. Now, the Spirit's procession by way of love actually explains why he is not begotten and therefore not a Son. The Holy Spirit proceeds by reason of love from the Father and the Son. Procession is distinct from generation because essential to generation is that the origin must be according to the mode of likeness of nature. Remember, the Son proceeding as a self-concept of the Father originates by mode of capturing the likeness of the Father. On the other hand, willing or loving is an inclination toward the thing you love. The will is made actual not by likeness of the object willed within itself, but by having a certain inclination. Producing a likeness of something is not part of the very notion of love itself. Thus, the procession of the Holy Spirit by way of love is not called generation since it is not an origin by likeness of nature. Yet the Holy Spirit has a perfect likeness of nature, since the imminent procession is the communication of the numerically one divine essence. However, the mode of procession by way of love does not connote communication of essence by likeness and similitude. Therefore, the Spirit is not generated nor born. This is why the Holy Spirit is not called the Son. Therefore, the psychological analogy also confirms the distinction of divine persons' names.

Now, the Father is properly called Father because he generates a perfect Son who has numerically the same essence as him. All paternity is based on the Fatherhood of God the Father. Ephesians 3:15 says, "For this cause I bow my knees to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, of whom all paternity in heaven on earth is named." So paternity is principally based on God the Father. The Father is not named Father because he resembles a human father. Rather, human fatherhood is named after God the Father, as it is an imperfect reflection of God the Father's paternity. Let's see why human fatherhood is an imperfect reflection of God the Father's fatherhood. Human fathers generate offspring which are the same species, but their sons have numerically distinct essences. For example, the son and dad are both of the human species, but they are numerically two distinct beings and thus have numerically distinct human essences. A human father's act of generation is imperfect. It involves a movement of potency to act. The human father potentially has a son, then he conducts the marital act, then he actually has a son. Finally, in human generation, the sons have to mature to better resemble their fathers. The baby boy does not perfectly capture and reflect what the father looks like. The more he matures, the more he will resemble his father.

On the other hand, God the Father's act of generation is perfect. The Father perfectly communicates the full planitude of his being such that the Son has numerically the same one essence. The Father and the Son do not just have the same specific nature as human fathers and sons do. Rather, God the Father and God the Son have exactly the same numerically one essence as they are one in being. Additionally, the divine generation is a communication of pure act that involves no transition of potency to act. The Father never potentially had the Son. He always actually has a Son. The Son is co-eternal with the Father. The Son always existed with the Father. Finally, unlike human sons, the Son is the perfect reflection of the Father from all eternity. The Son does not need to mature to better resemble the Father. Rather, he is the perfect image, reflection, and radiance of the Father. Thus, the paternity of God the Father is the truest and fullest meaning of fatherhood.

Continuing along, the psychological analogy explains the divine persons' actions in the economy of salvation. First, let's define the distinction between the economy of salvation and theology, or God's inner life. Catechism paragraph 236 says, "The Fathers of the Church distinguish between theology, theologia, and economy, economia. Theology refers to the mystery of God's inmost life within the Blessed Trinity. So this basically is in reference to the essence, relations, processions, and persons in God. An economy to all the works by which God reveals himself and communicates his life. So this refers to the divine persons' actions in time and space. Through the economia, the theologia is revealed to us. But conversely, the theologia illuminates the whole economia. God's works reveal who he is in himself. The mystery of his inmost being enlightens our understanding of all his works. So it is analogously among human persons. A person discloses himself in his actions, and the better we know a person, the better we understand his actions."

This distinction is also known as the imminent trinity versus the economic trinity. The imminent trinity is a theologia, whereas the economic trinity is God at extra. So God in himself, the theology, helps explain and illustrates what God does in the economy, or outside of himself. And the actions of God in the economy help us to come to understand the theology of God. Remember the maxim: action manifests being. What I do manifests who I am. You know me better through my actions, such as speaking to you. At the same time, my nature is the principle of my actions. I can think, love, reason abstractly, be creative because I have a human nature, not a dog nature. The more you know my inner being, the more intelligible my actions are. So my inner being explains my actions, and my actions reveal my inner being. Likewise, the divine actions in salvation history manifest the inner being of God, and the trinitarian relations and the inner life of God illuminates the divine persons' actions. So the psychological analogy of the trinity helps reveal the actions of the divine persons in the economy of salvation, and their actions in the economy reveals their inner life, which confirms the psychological analogy.

If you've already seen my video "Why Did the Son Become Incarnate?" feel free to skip to the timestamp on the screen. Let's illustrate this principle by asking a question you might have had. Now, have you ever wondered why it was the Son of God who became man? According to St. Thomas Aquinas, the Father or the Holy Spirit could have become incarnate. But we see that it was only the Son who became incarnate. Why did the Son assume a human nature and not the Father nor the Holy Spirit? This is because it was supremely fitting that the Son became man. To explain why this is fitting, let us remember the psychological analogy. The psychological analogy tells us that the Son proceeds as a Word, or the eternal self-concept of the Father. The Father, in eternally knowing himself, generates a perfect self-concept that captures all that he is and expresses all that he has. This self-concept is a Word which issues forth from the Father's active intellect. Now, this psychological analogy actually helps explain why the Son became man. We shall present three reasons given by St. Thomas Aquinas and then provide three additional reasons for why the Son became man.

Reason number one: Just as a builder creates a house through his intellectual principle, which is his conception or blueprints, God made all things through his Word. Now, if the house of the builder was destroyed, he would repair the house by recreating it according to his conception or blueprints. The builder would restore the broken building through his original concept or through his Word. Now, humanity is a creation of God, and through the Fall, the order of creation was destroyed. Thus, it was fitting to restore fallen humanity through a recreation by the Word, through whom all things were made. Therefore, the Word would restore humanity by assuming it.

Reason number two: Father Jill Emory says, "On the other hand, the Word of God has a special affinity with human nature because he's a concept of the eternal wisdom from which all human wisdom comes." And so, it was fitting that the Word of God personally united himself to a human nature in the Incarnation.

Reason number three: Father Emory says, "The Word of God came in his own person that, as he was the image of the Father, he might be able to recreate man after the image." We can recall this beautiful explanation of St. Thomas Aquinas with regard to the Incarnation of the Son. "In as far as he is the image, the Son has a special kinship with that which he must restore. That is to say, with a man who is created to the image of God." Genesis 1:27. This is why it is fitting that the image assumes the image. That is to say, the uncreated image assumes a created image. So the perfect image of God, the Word, assumed the fallen, imperfect image to restore and elevate it.

Reason number four: The Son is the eternal Word that expresses all that the Father is and the entirety of God himself. Now, it is fitting that the expressive Word, the Son, would become man and express or communicate the Word of God, divine revelation, to humanity. God clothed himself with human words in the Old Covenant. And thus, it was fitting that the divine Word clothe himself with a human nature in the New Covenant.

Reason number five: God is Father of creation because he is a common source and principle of all things. He's the Father of humanity in a unique way because we are endowed with his image. God the Father is also uniquely the Father because he has an eternal consubstantial Son. Now, it is fitting that the natural Son of God would become man to, quote unquote, "diffuse this hypostatic property of sonship onto us and make us adoptive sons of God by sanctifying grace." Thus, we are elevated to a higher status of sonship through the eternal Son sharing our humanity. The eternal Son became man so that men can become adoptive sons of God. From our conformity to the Son of God, Jesus Christ, the Father can see his perfect image stamped in us, and therefore God can

delight in us as his own sons. Reason number six, the son is the middle person in the trinity. The father is the first person, as he's from no one. The son is the second person, since he's from the father. And the Holy Spirit is a third person, since he's from the father and the son. While all three persons are co-eternal, there's a logical ordering of the persons based on origination.

Now the father is a principle without principle. The son is a principle from the principle, and the Holy Spirit is he who is from a principle. Thus, the trinity forms a golden chain. The first link being the father, fully giving the divine essence. The second link being the son, receiving the divine essence and giving it to the Holy Spirit. And the third link being the Holy Spirit, fully receiving the divine essence.

Now it is fitting that the son, as a middle link or the mediator in the golden chain, assumes humanity and becomes a mediator between God and man. The middle link and mediator in God is a mediator and link between God and man. In conclusion, it was supremely fitting that the son of God became man to restore humanity. These reasons connect with the psychological analogy and the inner trinitarian life.

So we see the incarnation of the son, an action in the economy, is explained by his procession by way of intellect, a truth about the theology of the trinity. So we see that the psychological analogy actually explains salvation history. Before we move on to show how the psychological analogy of the trinity illuminates scripture even more, let us consult what Father Emory says. He says:

"Quote: We should distinguish and reunite three complimentary aspects in our knowledge of the action of the trinity. One, the common action of the three divine persons in virtue of their one power and their one nature. Two, the proper mode of acting of each person. Three, the appropriation of certain actions and of certain effects to one person in particular. End quote."

Let's cover the first point. The divine persons act as one principle when they create and cause things outside of the inner life of God. This is known as the doctrine of inseparable ad extra, or external operations. This is because nature is the principle of action. And since there is numerically one divine nature, the divine persons are numerically one principle of creation. This means all three divine persons have one singular, identical divine action for all that occurs outside of God. We see the son affirm this when he says, "For whatever he, the Father, does, that the Son does likewise." (John 5:19) The divine persons have the exact same divine actions.

On a side note, the inseparable ad extra operations is actually why we cannot prove the Holy Trinity from reason. We come to know the invisible God through creatures, namely through arguments from causation. We see creatures, the effects, and reason to a first cause, God. Given that all creatures are caused by the Holy Trinity as from one principle of creation, we could only deduce a singular first principle from our arguments from causation. We cannot deduce a plurality of persons since the action of creation is numerically singular, even though it's three divine persons acting. Thus, logical argumentation for God can only get you to an uncreated first cause without letting you know there's a trinity of persons. This is why we need divine revelation to know about the Holy Trinity.

Going back on topic, while the divine persons have one singular, numerically identical action, they have their own proper modes of acting. This gets us to the second point. Father Jill Emory says:

"Quote: Just as each divine person is characterized by a distinct mode of existence, each person possesses likewise a distinct mode of action. This mode of action is strictly conformed to the mode of existence of the divine person. As one is, so one acts. It is therefore necessary to recognize that the proper mode of action concerns the eternal relations of divine persons to divine person. When he acts in the world, the son does not cease to receive himself from the father by generation. The son is turned toward the father who begets him. The proper mode of existence of divine persons does not disappear when these persons act in the world. Rather, this proper mode remains present as a constitutive feature of each person's action. The father works through the son and in the spirit, to whom he eternally communicates the divine fullness. The father did not create the world by necessity imposed on him, nor does he act in the world in an arbitrary manner. He acts through his son, who is his word, full of wisdom. And the father did not create the world in order to increase his happiness, but purely through the superabundance of his generosity. He creates and gives life through his Holy Spirit, who is love and person. The son acts in so far as he is the personal expression of the wisdom of the father. That is to say, in so far as he is God, the word from whom burst forth love. And the Holy Spirit acts in so far as he is a communion and the love of the father and the son. His personal mode of action is to work in so far as he is the love and the gift proceeding from the father and the son. One can summarize this teaching with the following affirmation: The father does all things through the word in the Holy Spirit. There is therefore a single power and one action of the Holy Trinity, within which each person acts according to what distinctly characterizes him. That is to say, in the relative mode that is proper to him. Each person acts in virtue of the common nature and according to the mode of his personal property. End quote."

So there is numerically one divine action outside of God himself. Yet these divine persons act according to their distinct mode of existing.

Now let us move on to the adoption of appropriation. The third point. Appropriation is the doctrine where there's a common title, a central attribute, action, or created effect common to all three divine persons. But it especially gets attributed to an individual divine person since there is some correspondence between that person's personal property with that title, essential attribute, action, or created effect. For example, all three divine persons are God and creator. But we specially call the father God and creator because the titles God and creator indicate that one is a source of life of creatures. This analogously matches the trinity where the father is a source of life of the other divine persons, as he's the unbegotten principle without principle that communicates the divinity to the son and the spirit. So there is a special affinity between these titles and the father's personal property. This is why scripture constantly calls the father God more than it calls the son and the Holy Spirit God. This is why the Nicene Creed only calls the father God and creator of heaven and earth, whereas it only says the son and the Holy Spirit are Lord. While all three divine persons are God and creator, there's a fittingness between these titles and the father's personal property.

Alongside this, we appropriate the essential attribute of power to the father. We say, "I believe in one God, the Father Almighty." This is because there's an affinity between power and the property of the father as principle without principle. Because power also signifies a principle. Power is a principle of action. Thus, we attribute power to the father, even though all three persons are equally powerful.

Let's move on to more appropriations that the church fathers and scholastic theologians used. St. Bonaventure, in Breviloquium, says:

"Quote: Hilarion indicates another series of appropriations based on this. Eternity belongs to the father, splendor to the likeness, and fruition to the gift. End quote."

To explain this, we must realize that eternity captures the idea of having no beginning, which corresponds to the father, who has no hypothetic origin. Splendor corresponds to the son because he proceeds as a perfect image and self-concept of the father. Fruition corresponds to the spirit, since he is a fruit of the father and the son's love.

St. Bonaventure continues, saying:

"Quote: In the father is the efficient principle, in the son the exemplary principle, and in the Holy Spirit the final principle. End quote."

This is because the father is the source of life, which is similar to an efficient principle which brings about being. The son, as a word reflecting the father and containing the blueprints of all creatures, corresponds to being the exemplar or model cause of reality. The Holy Spirit, as he who proceeds as love and gift, corresponds to the final cause of reality, as creation's goal is that it is a gift to creatures that is meant to manifest God's love and perfections. We also see this in Romans 11:36, which says, "For from him and through him and to him are all things."

Following along, St. Bonaventure says:

"Quote: Omnipotence to the Father, of omniscience to the Son, and of supreme will or benevolence to the Holy Spirit. End quote."

The father is associated with omnipotence since he is a principle of life. Omniscience corresponds to the son because he proceeds by way of intellect. Supreme will and benevolence corresponds to the Holy Spirit, since he proceeds by way of will or love.

St. Bonaventure goes on to say:

"Quote: Thus, supreme oneness is attributed to the father, who is the origin of persons. Supreme truth to the son, who proceeds from the father as a word. Supreme goodness to the Holy Spirit, who proceeds from both as the love and the gift. All of these appropriations can be explained by the psychological analogy, where we see the father is the unbegotten source and mind that generates a co-eternal word by way of intellect, and together with the word, breathes forth the Holy Spirit by way of love. End quote."

Now, the Holy Spirit's procession by way of will or love explains his actions in the economy. We must remember that the ad extra actions of giving grace, gifts, conversion, sanctification are common to all three divine persons, due to their unity of nature. However, these are especially attributed to the Holy Spirit because: one, he proceeds by way of will or love, and these actions and effects correspond to the will and love. Remember that conversion has to do with the movement of the will toward God, which corresponds to the spirit's procession by way of will. Secondly, these actions correspond to our holiness, and this has a special affinity to the Holy Spirit. We see in Romans 5:5 that love is associated with the Holy Spirit: "God's love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit." This is because the Holy Spirit proceeds by way of love. Thus, he carries out actions of love and is named love by the church fathers.

Father Jill Emory says:

"Quote: Being love, the spirit is also gift in person. On the one hand, all the spiritual gifts come from the Holy Spirit. In particular, charity, which is the greatest gift, and which St. Paul describes as the first fruit of the spirit, with joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control. Sins are forgiven by the gift of the Holy Spirit because pardon comes from charity. Love covers a multitude of sins. On the other hand, the Holy Spirit procures not only certain particular gifts, but he himself is given. The spirit is in person the gift of God most high, as the church chants in 'Veni Creator Spiritus'. The Holy Spirit is a gift of the father and of the son, in the same manner that he is a love of the father and the son. The first gift of God is love itself. End quote."

The Holy Spirit is appropriated the action of creation and breathing forth life. We see this in Psalm 104:30, which says, "When thou sendest forth thy spirit, they are created." This appropriation is because the Holy Spirit proceeds by way of will and love, and creation is a gift of love, and life is a vital impulse that corresponds to the will. This is why the Nicene Creed says the Holy Spirit is Lord, the giver of life.

Additionally, the effecting of the incarnation, or the creation of the humanity of Christ and the act of uniting it with the divinity in the person of the son, is an act common to all three divine persons. Yet, it is appropriated to the Holy Spirit. We say that Christ was conceived by the Holy Spirit. This is because the incarnation is the greatest act of love, and the Holy Spirit proceeds by way of love. This point is even made in the Catechism of the Council of Trent, showing that the Catholic Church actually upholds the psychological analogy.

Now, we must be sure to understand that the incarnation, or the assumption of a human nature, is proper to the son alone. The father and the Holy Spirit did not become incarnate. Once again, the father and the Holy Spirit did not become incarnate. So the effecting of the incarnation, or the creation of the humanity of Christ, an act of uniting the human nature to the divine nature in the person of the son, was carried out by all three divine persons. But the subject who assumed the human nature was the son of God alone. So the son alone possesses a human nature, and his human actions are unique to the second person of the trinity, while his divine actions are common to the father and the Holy Spirit.

Now that we have covered the doctrine of appropriations, let us cover the teaching of the visible and invisible missions. Visible missions are when there is a visible manifestation of a divine person who is sent. Invisible mission refers to the indwelling of the divine persons who are sent in the souls of the just and holy angels.

St. Thomas, in the Summa Theologia, says:

"Quote: Thus, the mission of a divine person is a fitting thing, as meaning in one way the procession of origin from the sender, and as meaning a new way of existing in another. Thus, a son is said to be sent by the father into the world, in as much as he began to exist visibly in the world by taking our nature. End quote."

So, the missions have a two-fold aspect: the eternal relationship of the one sent as proceeding from the sender, and the new way of the person sent being present in a definite place. The father sends the son. We see this in John 3:17, 5:36-38, 6:29, 6:57, 7:16, 7:29, 8:42, 10:36, and so forth. This is to show that the son eternally proceeds from the father. The visible mission results in the son taking on flesh in creation, a new way of the son being present in a definite place.

The Holy Spirit is said to be sent by the father and the son (John 14:16, 14:26, 15:26, 16:7; Luke 24:49). And this is to show that he eternally proceeds from the father and the son. Pope St. Gregory the Great makes this very argument in Homily on the Gospel, Book 2, Homily 26, paragraph 2, found in Patrologia Latina, volume 76, column 1,198 C. He says:

"Quote: However, being sent can further be understood in accordance with the nature of the Godhead. The son is said to be sent (mitti) by the father in the same sense that he is begotten by the father (a patre genitus). Now, when he says, 'When the Holy Spirit comes, whom I will send to you from the Father,' the son shows that he himself sends (mittere) the Holy Spirit, who is equal to the father and the son, and yet was not made man. If, then, to be sent is only to be understood as to be made man, then surely the Holy Spirit could in no way be referred to as sent, since he was never made man. But his mission is the very procession by which he proceeds from the father and the son (procedit a filio). Therefore, just as the spirit is said to be sent (mitti) in as much as he proceeds (procedit), so also the son may not unfittingly be said to be sent (mitti) in as much as he is begotten (genitus). End quote."

Pope St. Gregory says that the son is said to be sent by the father in the same sense that he is begotten by the father. So the economic sendings are an extension of the divine processions. Now, Pope St. Gregory applies this exact same logic to the Holy Spirit as well. He says, "But his mission is the very procession by which he proceeds from the father and the son." So the Holy Spirit being economically sent by the father and the son indicates that he divinely proceeds from the father and the son. A clear affirmation of the hypostatic filioque.

Let's examine some scriptural verses about the sending of the Holy Spirit to show how it reflects the inner trinitarian life. John 20:22 says, "And when he, the son, had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, 'Receive the Holy Spirit.'" Notice that the spirit is said to be breathed forth by the son in the economy, showing that the son spirates the spirit in eternity. Furthermore, the image of breath shows that the spirit proceeds as the father and the son's sigh of love. St. Augustine makes this point in On the Trinity, Book 4, Chapter 20, paragraph 29, found in Patrologia Latina, volume 42, column 98, when he says:

"Quote: Nor do I see what else he intended to signify when he breathed on the face of the disciples and said, 'Receive the Holy Ghost,' for that bodily breathing, proceeding from the body with the feeling of bodily touching, was not the substance of the Holy Spirit, but a declaration by a fitting sign that the Holy Spirit proceeds not only from the Father, but also from the Son. End quote."

Now let's move on. Titus 3:5-6 says, "He saved us, not because of deeds done by us in righteousness, but in virtue of his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal in the Holy Spirit, which he poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ, our Savior." The spirit is said to be poured forth from the father through the son in the economy, showing that the spirit hypothetically proceeds from the father through the son.

Acts 2:33 says, "Being therefore exalted at the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he has poured out this which you see and hear." The son is said to receive the Holy Spirit and pour him forth in the economy, showing that the son receives the spirit of power from the father and then spirates the spirit with the father. This can also be seen in Revelation 22:1, which says, "Then he showed me the river of water of life, bright as crystal, proceeding from the throne of God and of the Lamb." So the river of water of life is the Holy Spirit, and the Lamb of God is Jesus. According to Revelation 22:1, the river of water of life proceeds from the throne of God and of the Lamb. Therefore, this shows that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the father and from the son as from one principle.

Now, let's move on. The father is never said to be sent in scripture because it shows that he proceeds from no one; he's unbegotten. Yet, the father sends the son and the spirit, showing that they proceed from him. Occasionally, the son is said to be sent by the Holy Spirit, such as Isaiah 48:16, Luke 4:1, and Luke 4:18. But this is according to his human nature, which is sent by all three divine persons.

Father Jill Emery says:

"Quote: The visible mission of the son designates his sending in the flesh. That is to say, the incarnation, that is unfolded in the mysteries of the life of the son and his humanity. The visible mission of the son is unique; there's only one incarnation. But the New Testament bears witness to several visible missions of the Holy Spirit. By the expression 'visible missions of the Holy Spirit,' one designates the sending of the Holy Spirit in abundance with sensible signs. These signs show the fullness of salvation in Christ, particularly at the baptism of Christ, and the gift of the Holy Spirit to the apostles in order to establish the church in faith and charity, Pentecost. The visible missions relate to historical events, foundations for salvation, from Christmas to Pentecost. One calls an invisible mission the sending of the Son and of the Holy Spirit into human hearts. 'If a man loves me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him.' (John 14:23) 'God has sent the spirit of his son into our hearts, crying, "Abba, Father."' (Galatians 4:6) These missions are called invisible because although their fruits are manifested exteriorly in the practice of holy life, they are accomplished interiorly in the soul of the just. We focus our attention first on the visible missions in order them to show their relation with the invisible missions. Taking our inspiration from the teaching of St. Thomas Aquinas. End quote."

Matias Shaban explains how the Holy Spirit's procession by way of love explains his visible mission. He says:

"Quote: But in the production of the Holy Ghost, they, the father and the son, commune with each other, move and live in each other. There is an eternal surrendering and accepting, in the most literal sense, an infinitely powerful living breath which emanates from one to the other, and from both the mighty pulsation of an infinite heart which surges with the supreme order of affection, the blazing flame of an infinite fire of love. There is, in brief, the intensity, the activity, the effusion, and the torrent of love in which father and son fuse and pour forth their nature into the Holy Ghost. This is why the Holy Ghost is symbolized in the roaring wind that shook the house of the apostles on Pentecost, and in the darting, flaming tongues that hovered over the heads of the apostles. This is why the savior compares them to a brimming stream of living water. End quote."

So, basically, the vital impulse of the blazing flame of love in God, by which the Holy Spirit proceeds, corresponds to the vital impulse of the wind, the living waters, and the flaming tongues. So we see that the visible missions and images of the Holy Spirit verify the psychological analogy. The spirit also appears as a bright cloud at the transfiguration and as a dove in the baptismal theophany to show his purity and holiness, which corresponds to his procession by way of will or love. Pseudo-Chrysostom says, "The Holy Spirit took the likeness of a dove, as being more than other animals susceptible of love." Thus, the dove corresponds to the spirit's procession by way of love.

Now, at the transfiguration and the baptismal theophany, we hear the father speak. In Matthew 3:17 and 17:5, we hear the father say, "This is my beloved son, with whom I am well pleased." The father speaking about the son shows that the father speaks the word from all eternity. His voice comes from the transcendent heavens to show that he transcends any source and is unbegotten. When he says, "This is my beloved son," this also shows that the son is a beloved, and the father is a lover, and the Holy Spirit is their mutual love.

Now let's focus on the invisible missions in the giving of sanctifying grace. All three divine persons abide in the soul of the just. We see this in John 14:23, where it says, "Jesus answered him, 'Those who love me will keep my word, and my Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them.'" Here we see that those who possess sanctifying grace have the father and the son in their soul. John 14:17 tells us that the Holy Spirit will dwell with us as well. It says, "even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him. You know him, for he dwells with you and will be in you." And Galatians 4:6, which says, "God has sent the spirit of his son into our hearts, crying, 'Abba, Father.'" Thus, all three persons will be in the soul in grace. This is because the persons are inseparable. Where one is, the other two are as well, as they are one in being.

Now, the spirit and the son are said to be sent into the souls of the just because it shows that they eternally proceed from another. The son is appropriated grace that corresponds to the intellect, like faith. Whereas the spirit is appropriated grace that corresponds to the will and love, like charity. While the father is given and present in the soul of the just, scripture and the church fathers do not say that the father is sent into their heart, since this would imply that he proceeds from another.

Father Jill Emory explains how the invisible missions allow us to participate in the divine person's hypostatic property. In the Trinitarian theology of St. Thomas Aquinas, Father Emory says:

"Quote: The divine person is sent to transmit a participation in his eternal property. The son conveys a likeness or resemblance to the modality through which he is referred to the father. The Holy Spirit communicates a resemblance to the mode through which he proceeds. This resemblance is the imprint with which the son and the Holy Spirit mark the saints. For the union to God will come about through being integrated into the personal relations which son and Holy Spirit have with the father. Reflecting the way in which the Holy Spirit proceeds as love, the spirit impels our return to the father through the love which he makes over to us when he makes himself our own. And just as the son proceeds as a person who is the word of the father, so he gives us to return to the father through the wisdom which he gives us in the coming to be in us. The father himself is not sent, but the missions of the son and the Holy Spirit culminate in him. And thus the missions of the son and the Holy Spirit present and disclose the father. End quote."

Matias Shaban explains how the Trinitarian processions make sense of adoptive sonship and the entire process of deification. He says:

"Quote: The natural affiliation of the son of God, which is the exemplar, is at the same time God's motive for making us his adoptive children. Only because God has a son in whom he takes infinite pleasure and whom he loves with an infinite love can he have reason to multiply outside of himself the image which he bears in his bosom, and thereby to glorify the more his infinite generative power, as well as his son himself, who is reborn in every one of his brethren. He can embrace his creatures with fatherly love, and his only begotten son alone. Only the love which he bears for his son can become so fruitful for creatures that it raises him up to his bosom and forms them to his supernatural likeness. We perceive in the son a communication of the divine nature by way of natural necessity through real generation, whereas we, as adopted children, participate in the nature not by generation, but through sheer love and grace. We find the basis for this kind of communication only in that internal divine procession which communicates the divine nature by way of pure, though also necessary, love and liberality. The Holy Spirit, as the first, all-perfect, and innermost fruit of the self-communicating divine love, is a seed and root of all other fruits which God puts forth by way of his love. In the procession of the Holy Spirit, we perceive, according to an aspect different from the generation of the son, the basis for the possibility of a further communication of the divine nature through gracious love. And this is the perfect exemplar for the external outpouring of love in finite booklets, and at the same time the motive for still further revealing to creatures, beyond the inner life of the Godhead, that love of the father for the son which has already shown itself to be so fruitful and beatifying in the Holy Spirit. End quote."

To summarize and explain what Father Shaban says, the father infinitely delights in his perfect image, his son. Because his perfect image captures all of the father's perfections, and the father is supremely lovable and good. Because the father infinitely delights in his perfect image, he wants to reproduce the image of the son outside of himself, namely in rational creatures. He loves his son so much, he wants to make imprints of his son, or stamp his son everywhere outside of himself. It's similar to how when I love this girl, I just wanted to share how great she is with everyone I knew. Out of love, I stamped her image on my phone's lock screen and wished to see her wherever I went. In a similar way, the father, infinitely delighting in the son, wants to share and stamp his image all over mankind. Thus, the son is the archetype of adoptive sonship, and we become sons of God by having the image of Christ stamped in us. Since the father sees the son in us, he can delight in us and claim us as his own sons.

Now, adoptive sonship of human beings comes out of pure, gratuitous love of God, as partaking of the divine life is not due to our nature. Now, the spirit's procession as a pure, gratuitous gift of love is a basis for the pure, gratuitous gift of grace. Thus, the giving of sanctifying grace, and therefore the gratuitousness of stamping the image of the son in the souls of the just, finds its model in the Holy Spirit's procession by way of love. Thus, our path of deification and adopted sonship is based on the inner Trinitarian life, namely the procession of the son by way of intellect as being the perfect image of the father, and the Holy Spirit's procession by way of gratuitous love. So even the process of deification makes sense in light of the psychological analogy.

Father Shaban also explains how the Holy Spirit's indwelling makes us intimately united to the entire trinity. He says:

"Quote: But just as a soul, as child of God, is sealed and is united to God the Father through the Holy Spirit, and as the Holy Spirit is the 'oculum' or kiss of the Father, whereby the Father takes the soul to himself as his child and unites it to himself, so he is likewise the 'oculum' or kiss of the Son, by which the soul becomes the latter's bride. As bride of the Son, the soul in grace prays, 'Let him kiss me with the kiss of his mouth,' so that by his spiritual kiss it may become one with him in one spirit. The soul becomes one with the Son as one spirit in the Holy Spirit, whom he breathes forth into the soul, and with whom the soul merges through the breath of love aroused by him, like a flame which, after it has been enkindled from another flame, meets, infuses with the latter, and unites with it to form a single flame. The real indwelling of the Spirit of the bridegroom in his bride is to the spiritual marriage of the Son of God with the soul. What corporal union is in corporal marriage, a union to which bride and bridegroom aspire in their reciprocal love. Hence, it could be regarded as a consummation and sealing of the affectional union between the Son of God and the soul. Thus, the soul, joined by the Holy Spirit to the Son as sister and bride, and to the Father as child, is taken up by the same Holy Spirit into the intimate communion, into the fellowship and company of both, into the wonderful fellowship of the Father and of the Son, which St. John depicts as a purpose of the incarnation. The Holy Spirit is the bond uniting the Father with the Son in his procession from both, and is likewise the bond uniting the Father and the Son with the creature by his coming to lodge in the latter. End quote."

Now let us cover how the divine processions are the pattern for the processions of creatures outside of God, and how the sending of the son and the spirit draw us back through a cyclical return to God the father. Father Thomas Joseph White, in The Trinity: On the Nature and Mystery of the One God, explains this by saying:

"Quote: As we have already established, all Trinitarian life proceeds from the Father. Both the Son and the Spirit proceed, albeit in diverse ways, i.e., the one by generation, the other by common inspiration, from the impassible Father. And yet the preceding persons are also always turned toward the Father; they are for him and, in general, are oriented to him as their term. The Son, being eternally begotten, eternally knows and loves the Father, such that the Father is, in a certain sense, the Son's own personal term or finality. Out of this love for the Father, the Son spirates the Spirit with the Father. The Spirit, in turn, is from the Father and the Son as their mutual love, an eternal term or fruit of their goodness. Yet the Spirit, in turn, eternally knows and loves both the Father and the Son from whom he proceeds, and in so doing, rejoices in them as his term, enjoying the fullness of divine being. He receives an eternal happiness in the perfect life of the Trinity. Then all things imminent communion come from the Father, but they also, in a certain sense, return to him, in virtue of the interpersonal communion of the three persons. This is true in so far as the Son and the Spirit know and love the Father from whom they receive all things. When thinking about this eternal communion of persons, then one can speak in a nuanced sense of both the paternal origin and the paternal term of all Trinitarian life. Significantly, then, this movement of procession and return, and thus the exitus and reditus schema common in medieval theology, also finds an echo in creatures. All things proceed from God by way of creation and are subsequently called back to God in a return movement, expressed in the teleological ordering of their natures to God, each in its own way. This implies that creation not only comes forth from the Father by his Word and in his Spirit of love. It also returns by grace toward the Father through the Son in the Holy Spirit. The sending of the Son and the Spirit into the world. The divine missions culminate in the incarnation, the Paschal Mystery, and the outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost. This great movement from the Father out to the world through the sending of the Son and the Spirit is complemented in turn by a return to the Father. All things come from the Father and return to the Father as a summit of their existence. (John 16:28) 'I came from the Father and have come into the world; again, I am leaving the world and going to the Father.' The Spirit awakens in us a sense of the mystery of the Son, who in turn invites us to live as adoptive sons and daughters of God, so as to return to the Father. (Galatians 4:6) 'All things are from him and all things are for him.' (Romans 11:36) And (Ephesians 4:6) 'As the New Testament clearly indicates, the eternal planitude of the Father, from whom all things are derived, is also that fullness of eternal life toward which we are invited to return in Christ.' (1 Corinthians 15:28) End quote."

So we see all things proceeded from the father as a source, through the son who is wisdom, in the spirit who is love, and through the missions of the son and the spirit. We return back to the father through the son and in the spirit.

Father Shaban explains the exitus-reditus structure and says:

"Quote: According to the Fathers, a return to movement corresponds to the processive movement of the divine persons. That is, by his coming, his sojourn, and his activity in our soul, the Holy Spirit raises up to a union with the Son, and through the Son, with the Father. We are made partakers of the divine nature by the mission and the communication of the Holy Spirit. Thereby we attain to fellowship with the Son of God, who is born anew in us. With him, we enter into relationship with his Father, who thereupon becomes likewise our own Father. And when the Son is sent by the rebirth in us, the Holy Spirit also is sent in him. Both conduct us to the Father, who, ascending but not sent, is the first principle and the last end. And both unite us to the Father as his children. Our full entrance into the bosom of the Father, our complete union with the Father, in which we behold him face to face and have our beatitude in him and with him, the Son who dwells by nature in his bosom, take place only when the Son of God is reborn in us in his entire glory in eternity. In eternity, in the eternal repose in God's bosom, the ultimate term of all movement is at length reached, but especially the term of the temporal missions and processions of the divine persons. There they will dwell in us no longer that they may lead us to union with him who has sent them, but to communicate in fellowship with the Father as the object of our utmost beatific fruition, the divine peace of their unity. End quote."

Now, the following is speculative and based on my own contemplation. Take what I'm about to say with a grain of salt, as I have not seen this confirmed by any church authorities. If any of this is erroneous, I submit myself to the mind of the church. Given the exitus-reditus structure of salvation history, we return to the father through the son in the Holy Spirit. Now, when we return to the father, we find our ultimate term of rest: his unbegottenness. Negatively considered, the father's unbegottenness signifies complete rest, as he comes from no source; he refers back to no prior person. So we find our complete rest in him. Now, according to St. Bonaventure, unbegottenness is not just a mere negation. Rather, positively considered, unbegottenness refers to the fontal planitude and infinite fecundity of the father. Thus, when we find rest in his unbegottenness, we also are in the infinite fruitfulness of the father, which flows forth in the generation of the son and finds completion in the blossoming of the Holy Spirit.

Now, the Holy Spirit returns his love back to the father through the son, as Father Thomas Joseph White explained how the preceding persons have their term and finality in their source. Thus, the beatific vision will be partaking in Trinitarian processions, such as there's a vital circulation of love and goodness which flows from the father through the son to the spirit, and returns back to the father through the son in the spirit, and so forth. There's an infinite circular motion of love. This is the dynamism of all dynamisms, yet it is infinitely present, such that it is devoid of all motion and progression. This is why Wisdom 7:24 says, "For wisdom is more mobile than any motion." The Trinitarian processions are infinitely dynamic but have no motion, as it is infinitely actual. Love is pure dynamism. We see this when two lovers gaze into each other's eyes. Time itself seems to slow down, granting a glimpse of eternity. In the depths of each other's gaze, the world around them dissolves, leaving only the lover and the beloved, united in their ecstatic embrace. In this exchange, there is peace that settles between them, a perfect harmony where no longing remains. They are whole, complete, possessing all that they desire. And so the Holy Trinity, as perfect love itself, is infinitely dynamic and eternal, ever present and motionless, where the lover, the beloved, and their divine embrace are bound in complete, blissful rest. Yet within this stillness flows the most vibrant and unceasing circulation of love, pure and endless. So in the beatific vision, we shall have a unique relationship with each divine person and know and experience the Trinitarian processions and their hypostatic properties. This is just a human way of describing the experience of heaven, which infinitely transcends words. This is completely speculative on my part, and I'm open to being corrected, but I thought this was pretty cool and worth sharing.

In short, we have shown that the psychological analogy of the trinity truly explains holy scripture and illuminates the inner life of the trinity and the divine persons' actions in the economy. This is super abundant evidence that the psychological analogy is the best analogy for the Holy Trinity. I had some commenters in my previous video say that the psychological analogy was not the best analogy. One guy even said that a three-headed dog was the best analogy for the trinity. As you see, these people are completely wrong and have no clue what they're talking about. It is abundantly clear that the psychological analogy is the best Trinitarian analogy, and that it is not a mere metaphor.

Now that we have discussed how the psychological analogy illuminates the actions in the economy and the exitus-reditus structure of salvation history, let us cover the doctrine of paracoresis. Paracoresis, or circumincession, is the dynamic mutual indwelling of the divine persons in each other. Each divine person is in the other. This is because of three reasons: consubstantiality, relations, and procession.

One, by consubstantiality, each of the divine persons are in each other since they are each identical to the numerically one divine being. They each abide in each other by being identical to the divine essence.

Two, the divine persons abide in each other by relations. Due to their relations of opposition, each person simultaneously refers to the other in considering themselves. One cannot consider father or paternity without considering the co-relative term, the son. One cannot consider the son without considering his co-relative term, the father. One cannot consider the father and the son without considering their bond of love, the Holy Spirit. One cannot consider the Holy Spirit without considering the lover and the beloved from whom he proceeds. Therefore, the divine persons abide in each other due to their relations.

Three, finally, according to Father Thomas Joseph White, the third foundation for paracorectic communion has to do with origin. The processions are from the father, but also within the father. As the father's generated word and spiration of love remain eternally within their principle of origin. So even when the son is generated as one who is wholly distinct from the father, he still dwells within the father. And even when the Holy Spirit is spirated as one who is wholly distinct from the father and the son, he still dwells within the father and the son. By the same measure, we also can think about who the principle of origin is in the one who originates. The father, who begets the son, by this very measure dwells forever within the son, and the father and the son, who spirate the spirit, dwell forever within the spirit. Thus, we see paracoresis in three modes: consubstantiality, relations, and processions.

Connected with this is an argument for the filioque. The Catholic filioque model of the Holy Trinity has perfect paracoresis (circummincession) by consubstantiality, relations, and procession. Now, the Eastern Orthodox model of the trinity would lack perfect paracoresis. According to the Eastern Orthodox, the divine persons would mutually indwell each other by consubstantiality and relations only, as eternal manifestation establishes an eternal relation between the son and the spirit. However, there would not be perfect paracoresis by procession. The son would not abide in the spirit by being his principle, and the Holy Spirit would not abide in the son by being produced by him. Thus, the Catholic model with the filioque maintains perfect paracoresis and complete immediate kinship between the divine persons, whereas the Eastern Orthodox model does not.

Now let's show how the psychological analogy and the Catholic filioque model of the Holy Trinity also illuminates other truths of the faith. The following is speculation from my own prayer and studies. Take any of this with a grain of salt. In the filioque psychological analogy model of the Holy Trinity, we have word bursting forth into love, or the son spirating the Holy Spirit. This truth is reflected in Christian prayer. As man is in the image of God, man's prayers to God are fully effective when they reflect God himself. In mental prayer, the intellect makes considerations to bring about acts of love toward God. Thus, prayer is effective when it is intellect bursting forth into love, which mirrors the word breathing forth the Holy Spirit. If one only makes intellectual considerations without acts of love springing forth, this would not be prayer. Rather, it would be a dry intellectual activity. Thus, even effective prayer makes sense in light of the psychological analogy of the Holy Trinity.

Filioque and the first human family. The original human family is an icon of the Holy Trinity. From this icon, we see that there is a parallel to the Trinitarian model that includes the filioque. Adam is the first human person, and he proceeded from no prior human person. This is an icon of the father, who is the first divine person and proceeded from no other. Eve is a second human person who originated from the side of Adam. This is an icon of the son, who is a second divine person that originated from the bosom of the father. Cain is a third human person who's a product of the love of the first two human persons. Note that some church fathers use Seth instead. Now, this is an icon of the Holy Spirit, who is a third person who's a product of the love of the father and the son. Note that some church fathers use the procession of Eve from the rib of Adam as an image of the procession of the Holy Spirit, and the procession of Seth from Adam as an image of the generation of the son. Now, this does not contradict our analogy, as this other analogy from the church fathers is with regards to the distinct modes of processions, while our analogy is with regards to the hypostatic derivation, considering the number of persons from whom one originates. All analogies of the trinity have an element of similarity and dissimilarity. So this analogy we employ is not with respect to the modes of procession.

Filioque and the human family. The human family is an

image of the holy trinity. In the human family, the husband and wife love each other. But their love comes to true fruition when the husband and wife love each other in a third, their child, the product of their love. Similar to how the husband and wife love each other in the child, we say the father and the son love each other in the holy spirit. Their product of love, which makes sense with the filioquay.

Note that we are not asserting that the holy spirit is a product of carnal generation. Rather, we are asserting that the Holy Spirit perfects the trinity as a product of love from the father and the son. Now, when a husband and wife produce a child, the husband actively communicates a seed which he possesses from no other to the wife and the wife receives numerically one seed of the husband and then together they both actively produce the child as one principle. So while there is numerically one seed power from the husband, both husband and wife actively produce the child. This is an icon of the production of the Holy Spirit in the trinity. The father possesses the spirit of power from no other. Yet he communicates his numerically one spirit of power to the son who receives it and they both actively spirate or produce the holy spirit as one principle. You might object and say that St. Augustine rejected this analogy in track 899 on John. What he rejected was a temporal movement in the procession in the carnal generation. Once again we are not asserting that the holy spirit is a product of carnal generation or that he changed. Rather we are illuminating the production of the child in light of the human family being an icon of the holy trinity.

the filioquay and the golden chain. According to Catholic trinitarian theology, the father is fully active in communicating the divine essence to the son and to the holy spirit. So he's fully giving. The son is active in communicating the divine essence to the holy spirit and receptive in receiving the divine essence from the father. So the son is giving and receiving. The holy spirit receives the divine essence from the father and the son and produces no further person. So he's fully receiving. So the holy trinity enumerates all possibilities of giving and receiving. As the father is fully giving, the son is giving and receiving and the holy spirit is fully receiving. So we see that god who is a self-defuse of good stretches to all possibilities of giving and receiving. There is perfect harmony in the trinity and we realize that even if there could have been another divine production which there can't it would lead to a redundant product either a fully receptive person or an active and receptive person both which we already have. So the filioquay model of the trinity leads to a golden chain of giving and receiving. Whereas the monopatric eastern orthodox model of the holy trinity does not as there would only be the father fully giving and the son and the spirit fully receiving. The eastern orthodox would not have a divine person who both gives and receives.

Active and receptive structure mirrored in the human family. The active receptive structure of the holy trinity based on the filioquay model is seen in the human family. The father as head of the household is fully active in communicating instructions to the family. The father of the family having full active authority is a reflection of how God the father is fully active in communicating the divine essence to the son and to the holy spirit in the family. Wives are to be receptive to their husbands but they have active authority over their children. This is a mirror of the son being receptive from the father but being active in communicating the divine essence to the spirit in the family. Children are fully receptive and obedient to their parents. This is an image of the spirit being fully receptive of the divine essence receiving from the father and the son. Notice that while the active receptive structure in the trinity is mirrored in the human family, there are no grades of authority in the trinity like there are in the human family since all three divine persons have equal authority due to consubstantiality. So the active receptive structure based on the filioquay is seen in the human family showing that the family is an icon of the trinity. Remember according to the eastern orthodox monopatrist view of the holy trinity there would be no divine person who's active and receptive. Therefore, the mother's role would not be an image of the son. Since the family is patterned off of the triune God, there's a fittingness when the members of the family fulfill their role. Hence, the Bible advocates for wives to submit to their husbands and children to listen to their parents. In fact, the fourth commandment makes sense because children obeying their parents analogously imitates the receptivity of the Holy Spirit. This shows how the moral law is grounded in the inner life of the godhead and is not arbitrary or subjective, but is a reflection of the triune God himself.

the solution to the euthor dilemma. Theosis. In theosis or the process of becoming a partaker of the divine nature, we see a reflection of the filioquay model of the trinity. When we receive the Holy Spirit at baptism, we become conformed to the image of the son. Romans 8:29. The Holy Spirit being the image of Christ makes us resemble Christ. As we resemble Christ, we resemble the father. As the son is the perfect image of the father. The spirit being the image of the son makes sense in so far as he deres the divine being from the son. And therefore, he shows forth a resemblance to the son. Even in justification, we are not justified by faith alone. Rather, it's faith working through love or charity which resembles the word breathing forth love. Thus, even the process of theosis points toward the filioquin.

The psychological analogy shows us that the good is self-deusive or self-communicative. Goodness likes to spread itself out. When you are filled with charity, you want to spread the love everywhere. In reality, we see beings like to communicate their goodness and make images. Rocks leave an impression on the ground. This is an exterior communication of their being and a form of image making. Plants leave imprints, reproduce and spread out. This is the communication of self but more interior than what rocks do. Animals leave imprints, reproduce and make sense images in their animal souls which is image making in a more interior way. Humans leave imprints, reproduce, spread out, have sense images and make intellectual concepts and images of themselves and they love the images they produce. This is a more interior communication of self and spreading out of their goodness. God himself has infinite self-communication in the production of the word and the spirit and this is most interior and self-deusive as it is the whole communication of the numerically one divinity and goodness by way of intellect and love. Thus goodness is supremely self-deusive in God who is goodness given that God is wholly self-deusive in his interior life to a perfect degree. The self-communication of his goodness to creation is wholly voluntary and not at all necessary. The neoplatonics believe that the good had to diffuse himself necessarily through the emanation of creation. Trinitarian theology says that God adequately and perfectly diffuses his goodness interiorly such that any exterior communication of goodness is wholly gratuitous and voluntary. Therefore, creation is wholly voluntary. We already said that man is made in the image of God and therefore has intellect and will. Now, God has also left the vests or footprints of the Holy Trinity all throughout creation. For example, we see triadic structures everywhere. We see the three-fold division of beginning, middle, end, breakfast, lunch, dinner, rising action, climax, falling action, the three laws of logic, the law of non-contradiction, the law of identity, and the law of excluded middle. Newton's three laws, the three states of matter, nouns, verbs, adjectives, letters, numbers, symbols, charters, pierces, three-fold structure of signs, evil, neutral, good, thesis, antsises, synthesis. It's no coincidence that the equilateral triangle, the shape that most reflects the holy trinity, is the strongest and most firm shape. Just as the triune God is our strongest and most firm foundation, there are definitely plenty more messages, but this should be sufficient for making our point. The triune God has left traces or footprints of himself all throughout creation.

Before we move on, let's be real. Without a doubt, this is the best video on the Holy Trinity you've ever seen. You have never seen a Protestant, Eastern Orthodox, Assyrian, or Oriental Orthodox ever make a video on the Holy Trinity this good that synthesizes all the teachings of Holy Scripture. This is because Roman Catholicism alone possesses the fullness of the truth. And this is why we have the best trinitarian theology, specifically that expressed by the toistic tradition. Since we are bearsers of the truth, we penetrate the mysteries of the faith far deeper and in a much more rich contemplative way than any of our separated brethren. But the main reason this is the best video you've ever seen on the Holy Trinity, is because I've given literally everything to the Blessed Virgin Mary, Queen of the entire universe, daughter of the Father, mother of the Son, and spouse of the Holy Spirit. Since I have given everything to her, this video and this channel is completely hers. I have no merits. It's all hers. So, anything good in this video is due to the glories of Mary. Anything bad or false in this video is due to Brian Dwong. Mother Mary has guided me and I'm here to live entirely for her and this video is entirely for her. If you think this video is the best explanation of the Holy Trinity you have ever watched, praise Mother Mary. I highly recommend that you pray the rosary every day. Make an act of total consecration to her and you will find out just how great she is. She is the shest, safest, easiest, most effective way to unite yourself to our Lord Jesus. According to all the Catholic saints, true devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary is a sign of predestination. If you're doubting anything I'm saying, think for a moment why this is the best video on the Holy Trinity in all of Christian YouTube. The Holy Trinity is a central mystery of the Christian faith. Yet, no other video on the Trinity has ever connected and synthesized all these doctrines in such a beautiful manner. This is the best video on the topic purely due to Mother Mary. If you enjoyed this video, please pray a rosary for me and also for a private intention. Also consider donating to my Venmo or giving me a YouTube super. Thanks. I spent a lot of time researching and making these videos to share with you all and I spent a lot of money on the books. I would appreciate your financial support as my material is completely free. I see all of you donating your money to Christian B. Wagner. Share some money with the homie Dong.

Now let's resume the program. Now that we have discussed the psychological analogy and how it illuminates the entirety of scripture, let's go through a more technical discussion of the Holy Trinity. This following section is for a more advanced audience. The previous section was more accessible and contemplative. This section is more technical and dry. We shall follow St. Thomas's order of explaining the trinity. First he explains processions. Then he explains relations as grounded in the processions. And finally he describes the persons as subsisting relations. So the order of explanation is procession relation and then persons. So let's define procession. Procession refers to some term that comes forth from an action. Now there are two types of actions and therefore two types of processions. One, transitive actions are actions that go out into some external matter. For example, me punching you. The punch goes outside the agent acting and terminates into some external matter like your face. So the first type of procession is a transitive or external procession. Two, imminent actions are actions that remain in the agent. For example, knowing and loving. These actions remain in the agent. When I think a thought, the thought remains in the agent thinking. So the second type of procession is an imminent or internal procession. Now in God processions are not from transitive actions as an action that comes outside of God to external matter would produce a created product as anything outside God is a creature. This is the error of Aras who thought the sun proceeded externally from God making him a creature. Thus processions in God are founded upon imminent actions or actions that remain in the agent. The product of an imminent action in God will simply be God as anything in God is God according to divine simplicity. Now in spiritual natures there are only two imminent actions knowing and willing. Therefore in God there are only two imminent processions knowing and willing. Let's define our terms procession or production. Procession taken generically denotes the eternal origin of one divine person from another or others. The divine processions are imminent actions. So they're not transient and are the perfect communication of the numerically one divine nature. A communication of the divine nature is eternal, does not posit any change, and is free from any causality or dependence in the proper sense. For divine processions, the Latins use the term principle, and the Greeks use the term cause. But this is not to be confused with cause and effect, as each divine person is uncreated. According to Dalmu, production in God is not transition from potency to act, but the communication of pure act. And it does not introduce a transition from non-being to being or something that becomes in the order of time as is clear, nor in the order of nature because there is no causality or dependence nor in the order of reason because the being of the preceding persons is the divine being itself. And moreover, the persons are constituted by relations which are logically simultaneous. The divine processions ground a real distinction between the two correlative terms, the principal producing and the produced term. The two divine processions in God are generation and procession. Now the procession of intellect is called generation. This refers to the type of divine procession that eternally produces the sun. It is the origin of a living being from a living being from a connected principle in a likeness of nature. Catholics affirm that generation is by wife intellect or knowing. So the sun is a concept or word issuing forth from the father's act of knowing. Now this intellectual procession is called generation because generation means the origin of a living thing from a conjoined living principle by likeness of nature. The conception of the intellect proceeds by likeness to the thing understood and the living father is the principle of the living word from a conjoined principle. Thus the word is generated or born of the father eternally which is why he's named son. Now procession taken narrowly refers to the divine procession that eternally produces the holy spirit as contrasted with the son's generation. According to Catholic trinitarian theology, this procession is by way of love, valition or will. This procession is also called spiration or breathing forth. The holy spirit proceeds by reason of the love of the father and the son. Procession is distinct from generation because essential to generation is that origin must be according to the likeness of nature. Now willing or loving is an inclination toward the things you love. The will is made actual not by likeness of the object world within itself but by having a certain inclination. Producing a likeness of something is not part of the very notion of love itself. Thus, a procession of the Holy Spirit is not called generation. Yet, the Holy Spirit has a perfect likeness of nature since the imminent procession is a communication of the numerically one divine essence. However, the mode of procession by way of love does not conote communication by likeness and similitude. Therefore, the spirit is not generated nor born. This is why the holy spirit is not called the son. So, to summarize, there are two imminent processions in God. The son is generated or born eternally by an imminent procession by way of knowing. The Holy Spirit is eternally spirated by the father and the son by an imminent procession by way of love.

Now processions are the foundations for the relations in God. So what is relation? Relation is an ordering of one to another. A pure reference of one to another. For example, fatherhood is a relationship of a father to a son. Sunship is a relationship of a son to a father. Now there are two aspects of a relation. One the being in or sain. The sin in refers to the inherence of a relation in its subject. It's the foundation or basis of the relation as it exists in the subject. For example, the relation of fatherhood exists as an accident in a human father. Two, the essay odd or being toward is the formal and defining characteristic of a relation. It's the torness or reference to another. The essay odd of fatherhood is a reference or pointing to a child or the father. Relations are unidirectional. Thus the relation of father to son is one relation and the relation of son to father is another relation. Now there are two types of relations. One logical relations a relation that exists only in our way of thinking. For example when you think of London London is not actually affected. The relation of your head to London is only in your mind. And two real relations a relation that exists in reality. Fatherhood is a real relation that exists in a father. Real relations can be founded on quantity quality or action. For example, double and half is a real relation founded on quantity. Warm and hotter is a real relation founded on quality. And father and son is a real relation founded on the action of beginning. Now, the divine persons are not only related in the mind as they actually differ in reality. If the divine persons were only related in our minds, we would fall into the heresy of seellionism or modalism. There would only be one divine person in God. So, the persons are really related to each other in reality and thus really distinct from each other. These real relations can be founded on quantity, quality or action. The real relations cannot be founded on quantity since there is no extension or matter in God. The real relations cannot be founded on quality as each person is identical to the simple divine being and possesses the numerically identical absolute divine perfections. Thus, the real relations in God are founded on action. Now, the real relations cannot be founded on transient action as this would mean that two of the divine persons would not be divine since anything outside of God is a creature. Thus the only foundation for the real divine relations are imminent actions. The two imminent actions in God are knowing and willing or generation inspiration. Thus given each action there are two mutually referential relations from each action. Generation is the foundation for the two relations of active generation and affiliation. The father is related to the son as father of the son and the son is related to the father as son of the father. Since these relations mutually refer and oppose each other, as fatherhood points towards sunship and sunship points to fatherhood, they cannot be identical to each other. There's an irreducible directness of one toward the other such that they are incommunicable and cannot collapse into the same subject in reality. Thus, the father is really distinct from the son and the son is really distinct from the father. Spiration or procession is the foundation for the two relations of active spiration and passive spiration. The father and the son are related to the holy spirit by actively spirating him. The holy spirit is related to the father and son by proceeding from them. Since active spiration is opposed and mutually refers to passive spiration, these relations cannot be really identified with each other. Thus, the father and the son are really distinct from the holy spirit and the holy spirit is really distinct from the son. As father jily says, quote, a real relation possesses two aspects. On the one hand, the real relation exists. It is not only thought by our mind but rather it possesses a standing in the reality of things. On the other hand, the relation consists in a pure relation to another. This is the very definition of relation. As regards their standing in being, these relations are identical to the very being of God. They identified with the essence of God which is his pure existence. These relations subsist. The divine person is not the result of a composition of the divine being with another thing. God is simple as regards relation to another and a relation is defined precisely through reference to another. these relations distinguish the divine persons. End quote. Thus, the essay in or being in of the relation is that it subsists in the divine substance and is identical to the divine substance in reality as anything in God is God. Relations in here in creatures as accidents. God, however, has no accidents. Thus, the relations are substantial and identical to the divine substance. However, the concept of relation and essence are distinct, which will be important later when we're talking about the so-called logical problem of the trinity. The essay odd or being toward the relation is a pure reference to another. The father is related to the son. The son is related to the father. The father and the son are related to the holy spirit. And the holy spirit is related to the father and the son. So given the two imminent actions of knowing and willing, there are four real relations in God. Two resulting from each action. Paternity or active generation, affiliation, active spiration and passpiration. Now only three of these real relations relatively oppose each other in a producer to produced relationship. Paternity, affiliation, and procession are mutually opposed to each other as producer to produced. And because of this irreducible directness toward each other, they cannot collapse into the same subject. Now, active spiration does not relatively oppose paternity, nor does it relatively oppose affiliation. So, it is not really distinct from either. They are only virtually distinct. So, from these three mutually opposed relations, we shall get three divine persons.

Now that we've covered the processions and the real relations from them, let us cover the divine persons. Let us first define what a person is. According to St. Botheus, a person is an individual substance of rational nature. Father Jill Emery says, quote, according to St. Thomas, the person is defined by the integration of the following three elements. One, individuality. Two, substance. Three, a nature endowed with the faculties of intelligence and will. The individual signifies that which is undivided in itself, and that is also distinct from others. The substance designates that which is apt to exist through itself in itself and not in another. Substance is distinguished from accident. The individual substance signifies the individual whose special mode of existence is to subsist through himself and in himself. Defined as individual substance, the person is reality that possesses its proper being in a complete manner in himself and through himself and which exercises on his own the act of existing. Rationality implies will and freedom. It characterizes the mode of being and of acting proper to those beings who direct themselves freely toward an end that they know by their intelligence. End quote. St. Thomas argues that a divine person is a subsistent relation. Persons are distinct subsistence of intellectual nature. Subsist simply means that which is to be in itself and not in another. Let's cover the first part of the definition of person. Individuality or distinction by relative opposition or the relations mutually referring and pointing towards each other. There are three really distinct relations. The father being paternity, the son being affiliation, and the holy spirit being pastiration. Now, active aspiration does not oppose paternity, nor does it oppose affiliation. Thus, it is not a really distinct subsistent relation from them. They are only virtually distinct. The council of Florence teaches all is one where there is no opposition of relation. This is due to divine simplicity. Only relative opposition allows for real distinction. Therefore, there are three really distinct subsistent relations. This is because the relations are incommunicable or individuated from each other as they are not really identified. Let's cover the second part of the definition of person substance or subsistent. The relations are subsistent and identical to the divine substance and thus exists in themselves and through themselves making them an individual substance. Let's cover the last part of the definition of person being of rational or more precisely an intellectual nature. The subsistent relations are identical to the divine being and therefore have intellect and will. Thus the three really distinct subsistent relations are characterized as persons. An individual substance of rational nature or distinct subsistence of an intellectual nature. Note that when St. Bioius says a person is an individual substance of rational nature, we do not believe in three substances. Rather there is one single divine substance and each of these divine persons is an incommunicable subsistence of an intellectual nature. Thus there are three persons in God. The father who is paternity, the son whoseiliation and the holy spirit who is pastiration. The subsisting relations that constitute the divine persons are the hypothatic properties and are the persons. Thus the relational model of the trinity and the hypothatic property model of the trinity are synthesized in the toistic model.

Now notion is a word or concept that enables one to have knowledge of a divine person or persons. Notions are something not shared by all three divine persons. The notions are known by the relations of origin. As we know the divine persons by their relations of origin. As we've already stated, there are four real relations from the two divine processions. Paternity, affiliation, active aspiration, and past aspiration. Now, the father is also known as not being from another. This is known as inascability or unbegottenness. Thus, there are five notions to identify the divine persons. Incability, paternity, affiliation, active spiration, and passive spiration. While the Holy Spirit is not begotten, we do not call him unbegotten like we do to the father because the notion of unbegottenness also carries a connotation of being from no source which is unique to the father. Thus the father is known by three notions incability, paternity and act aspiration. The son is known by two notions affiliation and act aspiration and the holy spirit is known by one notion passperation. Yet the divine persons are only constituted by only one notion and these constituent relations are called hypothatic or personal properties. The father is constituted as father by being father of the son. In other words, the father is constituted by paternity. The son is constituted as being son of the father. In other words, the son is constituted by affiliation. The holy spirit is constituted as proceeding from the father and the son. In other words, the holy spirit is constituted by past disparation.

Now let's move on to the notional acts. Father Ludvid Aut says quote notional acts are internal divine activities which characterize the persons and distinguish them as contrasted with essential acts which are common to the three divine persons. In God there are two notional acts. Notional knowing through which the father generates the son and notional willing or love through which the father and the son breathe the holy spirit. Notional and essential acts are factually identical. They are only virtually different. When speaking of notional acts we think of the divine nature from the point of view of its relations. When speaking of essential acts, we think of the divine nature in an absolute way. End quote. In summary, we can know the Holy Trinity by counting from 1 to 5. One, there's one divine being, essence, nature, and substance. Two, there are two imminent processions, generation by way of intellect, inspiration by way of love. These are the two notional acts. Three, there are three divine persons, three mutually opposed subsistent relations or three hypothatic properties. The father who is paternity, the son who is filiation, and the holy spirit who is procession or passpiration. Four, there are four real relations in God. Two founded on each imminent procession. Active generation and affiliation are grounded in generation. And act aspiration and passperation are founded in procession. Five. There are five notions. Inescapability, paternity, affiliation, actspiration, and passperation. So now you can remember the doctrine of the holy trinity by counting from 1 to 5.

Let's cover some objections to the Holy Trinity. Now, people object to the doctrine of the Holy Trinity by using facious reasoning. No argument against the Holy Trinity is logically demonstrative. Father Bernard Longhan says, quote, "Therefore, it is illegitimate in a syllogism to argue from what is notional to what is notional using what is essential as a middle term. The reason for this is that syllogisms are based upon the principles of identity and non-contradiction. These principles regard the same in every respect. That is to say, what is the same both really and conceptually, but the notional and the essential, although really the same are not the same conceptually. Hence, to use what is essential as a middle term between notional extremes, very easily leads to facious conclusions. Here's an example. The son is God. God generates. The one who generates is the father. The one who is the father is not the son. Therefore, the son is not the son. The contradiction arises from the fact that between the notional extremes, both of which are son and a central middle term god is introduced. So that in different premises they're signified not what is the same in every respect but the same in different respects. For it is the same God in reality who is both the father and the son. But it is in one respect that one premise states that the son is God and in another respect that the other premise states that God generates or is the father. End quote. We see this type of fallacy in the so-called logical problem of the trinity. The argument goes as follows. One, if two things A and B are identical to a third, let's call it C, then A and B must be identical to each other according to the law of transitive identity. A equals C, B= C, therefore A equals B. Two, the dogma of the Holy Trinity says that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are each identical to the divine substance. Therefore, the Father is God and the Son is God. Three, thus by transitive identity, the Father is the son. Four, but the dogma of the Holy Trinity says the Father is not the son. Five. Therefore, the Holy Trinity is logically incoherent. How do we address this critique? Father Bernard Lteran states, quote, as far as the logical aspect is concerned, the formality of the principle of identity is the same as that of the principle of contradiction. For the principle of identity is simply the positive statement of that whose opposite is negated by the principle of contradiction. Now, all agree that it is illegitimate to apply the principle of contradiction whenever the question is about either different things or about the same thing under different aspects. Therefore, the only thing denied by the principle of contradiction is that the same thing in the same way, the same both really and conceptually, both is and is not. It is similarly illegitimate to apply the principle of identity whenever the question is about different things or about the same thing under different aspects. Therefore, the only thing that falls under the principle of identity is the same thing under the same aspect, the same thing both really and conceptually. End quote. What does he mean by this? Well, the principle of non-contradiction states that something cannot both be and not be at the same time in the same respect. This principle only holds for the same thing in the same respect or in other words to the same thing both really and conceptually. For example, your head cannot both be hot and not hot at the same time in the same respect. However, it is not a contradiction if your head is hot and cold at the same time in different respects. For example, your head namely the front side of your head is hot because it is near a fire but your head namely the back side of your head is cold because it's away from the fire. The term head is used in two different respects in the statement. Conceptually, one use of the phrase head refers to the front side. The other use of the phrase head conceptually refers to the back side. Both sides are really your head in reality. But since the phrase head is used in a conceptually distinct way, there's no strict contradiction in saying that your head is both hot and cold at the same time. Thus, the law of non-contradiction only holds for something that is both really and conceptually the same. For example, the exact same part of your head cannot both be 100° hot and not 100° hot at the same time in the same respect. This would be a strict contradiction. The same is true for the principle of transitive identity. It could be illegitimate to apply it to the same thing under different respects. What is guaranteed by the principle of transitive identity is when it compares the same thing under the same aspect or the same thing both really and conceptually. In other words, if A equals C both really and conceptually and B equals C both really and conceptually, then A equals B both really and conceptually. However, if A equals C in reality but not conceptually and B equals C in reality but not conceptually, A does not necessarily equal B. Father Bernard Loneran states, quote, to begin then, if an absolute A is really the same as an absolute C, and an absolute B is likewise really the same as an absolute C, then the distinction between A and C and between B and C can be only verbal. For example, A is this vestment, B is this garment, and C is this tunic. Where vestment, garment, and tunic are but different nouns for a thing that is entirely the same. This is so because if two absolutes are really the same, there's no intelligibility in one that is not identical with the intelligibility of the other. And when they are the same both in reality and in intelligibility, they can be distinct only verbally. For this reason, if only absolutes are being considered, the distinction we have made between really and conceptually and really but not conceptually is quite meaningless. Next, if a relative A is really identical with an absolute C and a relative B is really identical with the same absolute C, the distinction between A and C or between B and C cannot be merely verbal. For an absolute is such that it contains and encloses its essential meaning within its own reality. Whereas a relative is such that by reason of its essential meaning, it goes beyond its own reality to look towards another. Therefore, an absolute and a relative are not only verbally distinct but are also necessarily distinct in intelligibility since it is impossible that the same meaning be both totally contained within its own reality and at the same time look towards another reality beyond its own. This is why when two relatives are related to the same absolute are distinction between really and conceptually and really but not conceptually necessarily signifies not only different words for the same reality but also different intelligibilities of the same reality. The classic example of this is the real identity that Aristotle affirmed between motion and action and between motion and passion. He defines action as the act of a thing considered as being from this thing. That is an act of an agent considered as proceeding from the agent. And passion he defines as the act of a thing considered as being in this thing. That is the act of a recipient considered as being received in the recipient. And since the act that proceeds from the agent is the same as that which is received in the recipient, namely the motion produced by the agent and received in the recipient. It follows that both action and passion are really identical with motion. One can see from this example why this theorem is apparently so difficult for so many. For action and passion add to motion the relations as from this and as in this. But this added intelligibility is far different from the intelligibility of the motion of an absolute. And therefore to many it seems extremely difficult to see that such diverse intelligibilities of the absolute and of relatives are present in one in the same reality. Finally when two relatives are really identical with the same absolute not only must they be distinct in intelligibility from the absolute but also they can be really distinct from each other. For as we demonstrated above relations that are both real and mutually opposed are necessarily really distinct from one another. But relations that are really identical with the same absolute or real relations. Therefore, if their intelligible conceptions are opposed to one another, such relations are really distinct from one another. End quote. So, while all the divine relations and the divine persons are identical to the absolute divine essence in reality, the divine relations and persons are virtually distinct from the divine essence. So, the use of transitive identity fails since the terms are not both really and conceptually the same. Given that the divine relations mutually oppose each other, they are really distinct to each other despite each being identical to the same divine being. The father mutually refers and opposes the son and the son mutually refers and opposes the father. Thus they must be really distinct despite the father and the son both being identical to the divine being. Father Bernard Longhan states quote in response we grant that what are identical with one-third thing both really and conceptually are identical with one another but what are identical with one-ird thing in reality but not conceptually are not identical with one another. And we deny that the father and the son are identical with the one god both in reality and conceptually. We do concede that they identical with the one God in reality but not conceptually. End quote. Therefore, the so-called logical problem of the Holy Trinity is facious and does not succeed. So, this argument and any argument that follows this family of arguments is facious. Thus, the Holy Trinity reigns supreme over all and is not overcome.

Let's address another argument presented by a Muslim interlocutor. The objection goes as follow. One, any distinctive characteristic between two realities will be through existence or non-existence. Law of excluded middle. Two, the persons of the trinity are distinct in reality. Three, thus the persons can only be distinguishable through existence or non-existence. Four, the persons cannot be distinguished through non-existence as non-existence has no features and they are both pure existence. Five, therefore the divine persons are distinguished through existence. Six, thus the divine persons have different existences. Seven, therefore the divine persons cannot each be identical to Ipsum essay subsistence or pure subsistence existence itself. Eight, therefore the trinity is logically incoherent. The response to this objection is to object to premises five and conclusions six and seven. So premise five said therefore the divine persons are distinguished through existence and conclusion six and seven said thus the divine persons have different existences and therefore the divine persons cannot each be identical to Ipsum essay subsistence. So the divine persons can either be distinguished through existence according to what is absolute or what is relative. The divine persons are not distinct through absolute existence as they are each Ipsum essay subsistence. Therefore, the divine persons are distinct through relative modes of existence. Therefore, conclusions six and seven does not imply that the divine persons have different absolute existences but they have distinct relative modes of existence each identified with the one absolute existence that is ipsom essay subsistence. St. Thomas Aquinus in Dave Patencia says quote though the same nature's in the father son and holy spirit. It has not the same mode of existence in each one of the three. And when I say mode of existence I mean in respect of the relations in the father it is as not received from another. In the son as received from the father. Consequently we must not infer that whatsoever belongs to the father by virtue of his nature belongs also to the son or the holy spirit. End quote. Again he says quote although the divinity is holy and perfectly in each of the three persons according to its proper mode of existence yet it pertains to the perfection of the divinity that there be several modes of existing in the divine namely such that there be one from whom himself from no one and one who is from another for there would not be absolute perfection in the divine unless a procession of word and love were there end quote. This means that the father is distinct from the son according to relative existence or existence according to siad or his relation to the son. The son is distinct from the father according to his relation to the father. The father and son are distinct from the holy spirit according to their relation to the holy spirit. The holy spirit is distinct from the father and the son according to his relation to the father and the son. Therefore, the divine persons are each identical to the absolute divine existence that is ipsom essay subsistence while they are distinguished through relative modes of existence or the manner in which they possess the absolute divine existence. The father's mode of existence is unbegotten or possessing the divinity from no other. The son's mode of existence is possessing the divine existence from the father and the holy spirit's mode of existence is possessing the divine existence from the father and the son. Thus, the divine persons are distinguished through relative modes of existence and not absolute existence. utterly refuting this argument. Even the church fathers made this distinction between absolute existence and modes of existence. St. Gregory of Nissa in on not three gods says quote but in speaking of cause and of the cause we do not by these words denote nature for no one would give the same definition of cause and of nature but we indicate the difference in manner of existence end quote. St. Baso in on the Holy Spirit chapter 18 paragraph 46 says quote thus the close relation is made plain while the mode of the ineffable existence is safeguarded end quote St. John Damosine in an exposition of the Orthodox faith book 1 chapter 8 says quote for though the holy spirit proceeds from the father yet this is not generative in character but processional this is a different mode of existence end quote.

Let's address a final argument presented by a Muslim apologist one the father opposes the son two the father and the son are identical to pure existence three therefore pure existence opposes pure existence four thus there are multiplicity of pure existences five thus The trinity leads to polytheism. Response: Father Longhan already addressed this error as we previously saw. The error is that one substituted a notional relative term father and son with an essential absolute term pure existence. And they use substitution of terms faciously where there is identity in reality but not formality. What is notional is identical to the divine essence in reality but not in formality. Thus, a substitution of a notional term with an essential term is an improper use of substitution. Thus this argument commits a logical fallacy and fails. The father opposing the son does not mean pure existence opposes pure existence according to what is absolute. Rather it is existence according to siad or relative existence opposing relative existence or siad. That is just to say that the relations which are identical to the divine existence are opposed according to their siod. The divine person's manner of existence are opposed according to their relations of origin which is simply Catholic teaching. Thus we see all arguments against the holy trinity fail.

Now, let me list resources you should consult to better learn about the mystery of the holy trinity. Firstly, I recommend Father Jill Emmery's The Trinity. Then, Father Paul's the divine trinity. Then, Father Thomas Joseph Whites the Trinity on the nature and mystery of the one God. Then, St. Thomas Aquinus's compendium Theologia book 1 chapter 37-67. Then, Father Jill Emory's the trinitarian Theology of St. Thomas Aquinus. Then, St. Thomas Aquinus's Suma Theologia first part questions 27 to 43. Then, Father Matias Shabins, the mysteries of Christianity. Then father Matias Shaban's handbook of Catholic dogmatics volume 2. Then follow Delm's sacro theologia suma 2a on the one and triune god. And finally father bernard lteran's two books triune doctrines and triune systematics volumes 11 to 12.

If you enjoyed this video praise mother Mary. Anything good in this video came through her maternal intercession. She is queen of the entire universe and queen of my heart. Anything bad in this video was due to me. May God the Holy Trinity forgive me for any of my faults. Please consider donating to my ministry if you have benefited from my video. My Venmo is linked below or you can give me a YouTube super thanks. That would be much appreciated. Also, pray a rosary for me to become a saint, for my family's conversion, and for three private intentions. Please, let us close in a memory. Remember, oh most gracious Virgin Mary, that never was it known that anyone who fled to thy protection, implored thy help, or sought thy intercession was left unaded. Inspired by this confidence, we fly into thee, O virgins of virgins, my mother. To thee do we come. Before thee we stand, sinful and sorrowful, oh mother of the word incarnate, despise not our petitions, but in thy mercy hear and answer them. Amen. Glory be to the father and to the son and to the holy spirit. As it was in the beginning, is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.