• TrudeauCastroson [he/him]
    ·
    2 years ago

    I guess that's the issue for me, because that lay-explaination of the Trinity isn't really satisfying to me because I could probably give one too,

    but I'm also aware that there's competing explainations, and I don't know the exact one whose team I'm 'supposed' to be on as a Catholic.

    This is probably all moot because I don't think anyone converts from one Christianity to another based on their Holy Trinity explaination, but it is part of the many things that made me agnostic after going to state-funded Catholic school.

    • RonJeremyCorbyn [none/use name]
      ·
      2 years ago

      Was raised Catholic. Yes, Im not sure I could give a very nourishing description of the Trinity, other than God having three constitutive aspects, none being more essential than another.

      And i'm not well versed enough theologically to explain why that is seen as a more powerful explanation than alternatives, but generally my feeling is that any of these are attempts to speak upon what seemingly definitionally can't be spoken upon, so it's hard to read the statements themselves or the speakers as wedded to ontological commitments, but rather at gestures at something broadly valuable or true.

      But the particular idiom or specific language that attempts to describe that truth seems valuable to me (here the Catholic language of the Trinity). Fwiw, I find the redemption aspect of Christianity very attractive; Catholicism perhaps too, but maybe only because of cultural/traditional reasons.