risen up in their own minds, and which have made them doubt about the
Trinity: and they say--I will not torment my soul, and perhaps
endanger my soul, by doubts. I will take the doctrine of the Trinity
for granted, because I am bidden to do so: but I leave what it means
to be explained by wiser men. If I begin thinking about it I shall
only confuse myself. So it is better for me not to think at all.

And one cannot deny that they are right, as far as they go. If they
cannot think about the Trinity without thinking wrongly, it is better
to take on trust what they are told about it. But they lose much by
so doing. They lose the solid and real comfort which they may get by
thinking of the Name of God. And, I believe, they lose it
unnecessarily. I cannot see why they must think wrongly of the
Trinity, if they think at all. I cannot see why they need confuse
themselves. The doctrine of the Trinity is not really an
unreasonable one. The doubts which come into men's minds concerning
it do not seem to me sound and reasonable doubts. For instance, some
say--How can there be three persons in one God? It is contrary to
reason. One cannot be many. Three cannot be one. That is
unreasonable.

I think, that if you will use your reason for yourselves, you will
see that it is those words which are unreasonable, and not the
doctrine of the Trinity.

First. A thing need not be unreasonable--that is, contrary to
reason--because it is above and beyond reason--or, at least, beyond
our human reason, which at best (as St. Paul says) sees as in a glass
darkly, and only knows in part.