Revelation, Revolution, and Relation

It's good to have a little metaphysical back-up from a heavy hitter, in this case, Robert Barron. I'm reading a book about his theology that highlights areas of convergence with my own metaphysical preoccupations and theological tics, for example, relationality as an absolutely primal and irreducible term that is woven into our Cosmos and ourselves. 

As far as I know, nothing he says is unorthodox or controversial, but how come -- despite going to Sunday school and more generally being immersed in Christian civilization -- I didn't get the memo until encountering the works of Norris Clarke in 2012? It's like a metaphysical revolution happened right under my nous. 

Speaking of back-up and revolutions, Ratzinger, in his Introduction (!) to Christianity, wrote of how

In the relational notion of person developed within the theology of the Trinity lies concealed a revolution in man's view of the world: the undivided sway of thinking in terms of substance is ended; relation is discovered as an equally valid primordial mode of reality

 Moreover, "person must be understood as relation":

the three persons that exist in God are in their nature relations. They are, therefore, not substances that stand next to each other, but they are real existing relations, and nothing besides. In God, person means relation. Relation, being related, is not something superadded to the person, but it is the person itself. In its nature, the person exists only as relation.

Similarly if not identically,  

Barron describes a twofold revolution in theology brought about by the doctrine of the Trinity. First, relationality gains a much stronger place in the doctrine of God. 

He states, "Whereas the classical philosophers tended to make self-subsistence the quality of ultimate reality, and relationality a quality of created being, the doctrine of the Trinity compels us to say that ultimate reality is itself characterized by relationship.... Something like 'being toward another' belongs to the very essence of God."

Which is a big deal, and while it's not something we could have arrived at by unaided natural reason, once given to us by revelation, it sure enough makes more sense than any other metaphysic on offer. 

Ultimately it is why we can do metaphysics at all, which is to say, why being speaks to us and we can understand it. In short, the intellect is intrinsically related to intelligible being, and there's not a damn thing we can do about it. Except to just crudely deny it and pretend we are absolutely sealed in ignorance and tenure.

A second consequence of this revolution is that "the division between unity (God) and plurality (creatures) is radically reworked" (which reminds me that the first book I read by Norris Clarke is called The One and the Many). This (the one and many, unity and plurality)) is one of the fundamental and enduring Problems of philosophy. Well, problem solved:

The Trinitarian God has room for plurality without in any way negating divine unity.... the revelation of the Trinity shows that "something like plurality obtains within absolute being. The creative ground of all existence is, in its innermost nature, a looking toward, a being toward another."

[I]n the living (Trinitarian) God, "something like speaking to, communicating with, belongs to the ground of reality."

Which solves the mystery of language, while not making it any less mysterious. For

It follows that divine communication or communication with creatures is not the beginning of divine communion and communication.

Rather, the yada yada has been going on forever: God himselves never stops partaking in the joy of communication. It explains why we ourselves enjoy communicating and being understood.  

Now, it is possible to think of relation in exterior terms only, like billiard balls bouncing off one another. 

But with the Trinitarian God we're talking about interior relations -- about irreducible intersubjectivity and co-inherence. And -- surprise surprise -- the co-inherence goes all the way down, at least with the Incarnation, "the coming together in one Person, without confusion but inseparably, of God and man."

So now, with our metaphysical revolution, the problem of persons is also solved, but again, without being any less mysterious. I mean, I remain a mystery to myself, but now I at least know why: because I co-inhere with the Absolute and Infinite Person. Indeed,

In his utter transcendence, God can be and is more intimately present than any creature could be even to itself.

And again, it explains all this endless intelligibility packed into being and just waiting to be understood by us:

"Because all things are made through the Logos, which is itself nothing but a subsistent relation to the other, coinherence, and not substance or individuality, must be the basic truth of things." 

Because intellect and being are not externally related, but rather, coinhere, we have the great privilege of potentially understanding all there is to know about all there is. The bottom line is that "For Christians, ontology is not ultimately monadic but rather involves relationality at its core," and why not? Viva la revelation!