The Holy Trinity, Explained
Why one of A Severe Mercy's most surprising insights wasn't on grief, but on why a Triune God makes sense.
The Holy Trinity—the concept of how one God could also be a Father, a Son, and a Holy Spirit—is often regarded as a Whole Mysterious Thing which our feeble minds could never fully wrap around, at least not within this finite reality. And, for sure, the Trinity is tricky to define. Here’s my haphazard attempt: a monotheistic God exists as three distinct Beings, all of which are fully God, and unique, yet singular in purpose. Not super clear, right?
Well, a few years back I read a description of the Holy Trinity which was clear, and remains the clearest I’ve seen. I don’t mean to dismiss the mystery of God at all—and perhaps I just like that this metaphor fits my field of work—but one point of Jesus’ parables is that vast and unfathomable concepts like the Kingdom of God can be described in shockingly simple terms. Like a farmer sowing, or fishing nets, or a seed becoming a forest, or a treasure hidden in a field.
This brings me to A Severe Mercy by Sheldon Vanauken, a legendary book among people of faith grieving the loss of a partner. The memoir spans Vanauken’s relationship with Davy, his wife, detailing their early days together in Kentucky, Davy’s conversion from pagan beliefs to Christianity which Sheldon reluctantly follows, their time spent studying abroad at Oxford University, and Davy’s early death. The book is a beautiful work of mourning, and includes powerful correspondence with C.S. Lewis. But it’s Davy and Van’s explanation of the Trinity which rings loudest years later, which helped me appreciate God in new ways. As the Great Storyteller, I suppose.
So that’s what I’d like to share with you today.
(Excerpt from A Severe Mercy, pp. 115-117)
One afternoon Davy and I walked in the University Parks and Mesopotamia, talking of some day writing a novel, catching something of the extraordinary variety of Oxford life, including the Studio, a novel that we would put ourselves in as characters. Then, saying ‘Some day, maybe’, we went to the Copper Kettle on the High for tea. That night, as usual, a couple of friends came by. One was Julian and the other was a non-Christian friend from Corpus Christi College named Richard, and it was Richard who wanted to talk about Christianity. After considerable talk, he said: "‘The thing that stumps me is the Trinity. The Trinity and, above all, the Incarnation. You all seem to believe Jesus was, at the same time, completely a man—and completely God. In the name of common sense how could he be? You Christians always take refuge in mysteries.’
‘Not at all,’ I said. ‘We aren’t hiding behind a mystery in this, at least.’
‘Well,’ said Richard. ‘Explain it in some way that makes sense.’
Julian began to say something about the Persons of God and I could see that Richard wasn’t finding it very helpful. Then I thought of the novel Davy and I had been talking about and murmured to Davy, ‘I’ve got it!’
‘It’s still no good,’ said Richard when Julian had done.
‘Look, Richard,’ I said. ‘This afternoon Davy and I were talking about writing a novel of Oxford with the Studio in it, and us, and everybody. Now, assuming we could do it—’
‘Assuming you could do it,’ said Richard, ‘I’d buy a copy. Not more than five shillings, though.’
‘Listen,’ I said. ‘We’re talking about the Incarnation. Okay, suppose I write it—it’s too complicated with two authors—and I put myself in it. There I am, walking down the High, wearing a Jesus tie—in the book. And let’s say I make up a lot of characters, not using real people for fear of hurting their feelings. But I am in it, and I, the character, say whatever I would say in the various situations that occur in my plot.’
‘What about the Incarnation?’ said Richard.
‘That’s what I’m telling you, stupid fellow,’ I said with a grin. ‘Don’t you see? I am incarnate in my book. I am out here writing it, so I’m like God the Father. But it’s really me in the book, too, isn’t it? So that’s Jesus, the Son, right? The me in the book speaks my words—and yet they are speeches that I’ve probably never made in real life, not being in those situations. And yet can’t you see that it’s really me?’
‘Um,’ said Richard. ‘Yes, right. I see. Go on.’
‘Well,’ I said, ‘All right. I’m out here, being “the Author of all things” and I’m in the book, taking part in scenes of “drammer”. Incarnate in my book. Now, the me in the book: he’s all me, isn’t he? And he’s all character, too, isn’t he? Like the doctrine: All God and All man. It makes sense, doesn’t it? And one more thing: suppose the characters run away with the story—authors are always saying that happens. It might be necessary, whatever I had originally intended, for me to get killed—um, crucified…Anyhow—you see?’
‘You win,’ said Richard. ‘It does make sense that way. I’ll have to think about it.’
‘There’s something else, though,’ said Davy. ‘ The other characters—made-up ones. Invented ones. If Van invents characters, they’ll all, even the bad ones, have something of Van in them, won’t they? So, you see? We all have something of God in us—God’s spirit—but only the One, Jesus, is God Incarnate. But God’s Spirit in us… Well, that makes the Trinity, doesn’t it?” God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. Actually, I’ve never seen it so clearly myself. More tea?’