Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Catholic
Education and Religion
Modalism And The Last Supper

Modalism And The Last Supper

Last updated on: October 26, 2025 at 12:21 pm by David Schloss

0 Comments

Modalism And The Last Supper 2025-10-26T12:21:18-04:00 David Schloss

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Last Supper Discourse

Theology is the science of God. More accurately, it is man’s effort to study the divine. One of the more compelling subjects within this divine science is the nature of the trinitarian God.

In this paper, I will explore one such effort to understand the relationship of the Holy Trinity, known as modalism, by couching it in the Last Supper Discourse as depicted in John’s Gospel.

The Last Supper Discourse

The Gospel of John is unique for its theological richness and its use of literary and symbolic language. It is, perhaps, most famous for its prologue, which states many of the major themes and motifs of the Gospel, much as an overture does for a musical work. By proclaiming Jesus as the preexistent and incarnate Word of God, the prologue sets forth the major themes and motifs of John’s Gospel.

Contained within John’s Gospel is what is called the Last Supper Discourse. The text seeks to interpret and explain the meaning of the passion, death, and resurrection narratives that are to follow. The discussion commences with Christ explaining to His apostles the events that are about to occur and their meaning.

“Do not let your hearts be troubled. In my Father’s house, there are many dwelling places. If there were not, would I have told you that I am going to prepare a place for you? And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come back again and take you to myself, so that where I am, you also may be. Where I am going, you know the way.”

“Thomas said to him, ‘Master, we do not know where you are going; how can we know the way?’ Jesus said to him, ‘I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. If you know me, then you will also know my Father. From now on, you do know him and have seen him.”

“Philip said to him, ‘Master, show us the Father, and that will be enough for us.’ Jesus said to him, ‘Have I been with you for so long a time and you still do not know me, Philip? Whoever has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me?” (John 14:1-10).

The challenge posed by Thomas and Philip—how can the Son be one with the Father—highlights the core theological problem addressed by early heresies, specifically modalism.

Three Or The Same?

The existence of the Holy Trinity is knowable only through divine revelation. That is, it is known only to human beings because God has revealed Himself in human history. Nevertheless, the nature of the Trinity has been the subject of theological debate for centuries. The results of these debates and controversies have led to various theories about the nature of God as Trinity.

One such theory is modalism, also called Sabellianism, named after its most prominent early proponent, Sabellius. Sabellius was a third-century priest and theologian who taught that God was single and indivisible, with Father, Son, and Holy Spirit being three modes or manifestations of one divine Person. In one sense, modalism is similar to unitarianism in its denial of a trinitarian God.

In returning to the Last Supper Discourse, it does appear that Christ’s words support the view that God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit are simply one divine Person appearing in three different modes (hence the name modalism).

Analogies to explain modalism may be helpful. God could be seen as an actor who plays different roles in the same play, each wearing a different mask. Another analogy is to imagine God as a man with three distinct positions. He can be the son of one person, the husband of another, and the father of a third. All of these analogies seem to be suggested by Christ’s words (Whoever has seen me has seen the Father*).*

Nevertheless, Sabellianism was not well received by the Catholic Church, and it would not be long before it was deemed heretical.

Sabellianism As Heresy

Pope Callistus 1 would excommunicate Sabellius, and the early ecumenical councils of Nicaea, Constantinople, Ephesus, and Chalcedon rejected Sabellianism. In rejecting modalism, these councils affirmed that God is one. However, they made the distinction between person and nature, teaching that the Son and the Holy Spirit are separate persons who share one divine nature with the Father.

In 382, the Council of Rome condemned the heresy, stating, “We anathematize those also who follow the error of Sabellius in saying that the same one is both Father and Son” (Tome of Pope Damasus, 2).

Tertullian (Against Praxeas) and Hippolytus (Against Noetus and Philosophumena) wrote important responses to Sabellianism. These authors pointed out absurdities implied by Sabellianism, such as that the Son must be his own Father.

Additional problems with modalism involve key tenets of Catholic theology, such as the Incarnation. If modalism is true, how can we interpret statements like John 3:16, “For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him might not perish but might have eternal life.”

How can the Father give His Son if the Father and Son are not distinct persons, but just different modes of one person? Another consequence of modalism in this context is that it requires that God the Father also suffer in His divine essence. To suffer is to undergo change; however, the divine nature is necessarily impassible, making this interpretation of the Crucifixion illogical.

Of course, it is insufficient to simply refute modalism without providing a counter-argument.

Explaining The Last Supper Discourse

So, how can we explain Christ’s words indicating that whoever sees Him sees the Father (and, presumably, the Holy Spirit)?

The answer lies in distinguishing between essence and existence. Essence or nature is what a thing is. This distinction allows us to recognize characteristics associated with anything that possesses that essence. For example, human beings have a human (and thus, rational) nature. We can speak of this rational nature abstractly and free from any particular human being.

Existence, on the other hand, is the actualization of an essence. A human person, therefore, is the actualization of a rational nature. Similarly, we can speak of God’s nature being actualized or existing in three persons.

In conclusion, we can explain the Last Supper Discourse without resorting to modalism by realizing that Christ was referring to His divine nature. To see Christ (the Son) is to see the nature of God the Father and God the Holy Spirit: one God (essence), three divine persons (actualized).

Education and Religion

History and Religion

Previous Post

October 19, 2025

A Catholic Perspective On Humanism

Next Post

November 2, 2025 Henri de Lubac: From Surnaturel to Vatican Two

What does "Apocalypse" mean in Greek?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Revelation or unveiling End of world Wrath Redemption