I think one problem you have is that you are not thinking of God as Trinity as Father-Son-Holy Spirit; you're thinking of God as the Father and the Son and Holy Spirit as separate Beings.
In nomine Ieus I offer you continued peace Steve Dennehy,
Perhaps we have a misunderstanding between the unity
of the Divine Will and the unique actions each personhood plays in the execution
of that 'shared' Divine Will? Such might cause one to conclude that another might be claiming Tri-Theism (i.e. three Gods). Although I have never been accused of such before but there is always a first time for everything.
Knowing that we are about to enter into what I hope to be a very fruitful discussion on the Trinity in another thread I will focus our efforts their as to not further derail this very interesting dialogue on the Atonement but if you could point out exactly why you believe my articulation of the Atonement demands an error in my understanding of the Trinity it would be helpful to address your concerns about the Trinity more narrowly here.
God is LOVE ( 1 John 16); love is not just an attribute of God, it's His essence. We don't know Love; some have a tiny glimmering of understandinof love but no one on this earth really knows love. To gain any insight look at an image of Jesus (Love/God) crucified. Love became one of us and let us reject, condemn, torture and murder Him to atone for our evil (our hatred of Him and each other), to make it possible for us to share in His eternal life, love and joy forever if we accept Him and His sacrifice for our sins, His Resurrection for us, His ascensdion into father for us, His sending of Holy Spirit into us.
Let me say first that I understand what you are trying to say here but everything that we speak, in the affirmative, concerning the Almighty is an attribution on our part. The attributes or properties of God are perfections which, according to our analogical mode of thinking, proceed from the metaphysical substance of God and belong to it. Hence, we only know being of the absolutely simple Divine Substance "in part" (I Cor. 13:9), i.e. in a multiplicity of inadequate concepts, by which we know individual perfects of God truly but inadequately. By affirming an attribute, Catholics are not attempting to create complexities within the Godhead nor to affirm attributes which are outside of the Godhead of which He is composed.
The Divine Attributes are really identical among themselves and with the Divine Essense.
The reason lies in the absolute simplicity of God. The acceptence of a real distinction (distinctio realis) would lead to acceptance of a composition in God, and with that to a dissolution of the Godhead. In the year 1148, a Synod at Rhiems, in the presence of Pope Eugene III, condemned, on the instance of St. Bernard of Clairvaux, the doctine of Gilbert of Poitiers, who, according to the accusation of his opponents, posited a real distinction between God and Godhead (Deus-Divinitas), between the Divine Persons and Their properties (Pater-paternitas), and, according to the accounts of his opponents, also, between the Divine Essense and the Divine Attributes. This accusation can hardly be demonstrated from Gilbert's writings. Against this doctrine, they Synod asserted the factual identity of God with the Godhead, that is with the Divine Nature and the Persons, as well as of God and His Attributes: Credimus et confitemur simplicem naturam divinitatis esse Deum nec aliquo sensu catholico posse negari, quin divinitas sit Deus et Deus divinitas... credimus, nonisi ea sapientia, quae est ipse Deus, esapientem esse, nonisi ea magnitudine, quae est ipse Deus, magnum esse est.
(translated: We believe and confess with Catholic doctrine, can we deny that the divinity is God and God is the divinity... We believe that God is wise by that wisdom which is God Himself, that God is great by that greatness which is God Himself). D 389. The Union Council of Florence explained in the Decretum pro Jacobitis (1441): "(in God) all is one, where an opposition of relation does not exist." D 703.
Note it was these professions of the simplicity of God and the Godhead, of His Attributes and His Essense, in the West, which created such strife with the Greek Church, when in the 14th century the Hesychasts or Palamites taught a real
distinction between the Divine Essense and the Divine Efficacy or the Divine Attributes. While the former was claimed to be unknowable, the latter was claimed to be vouchsafed to humanity in a condition of contemplative prayer through an uncreated Divine light (aka: Taborlight). With this they distinguished a higher and a lower, an invisible and a visible side of the Godhead. Historically, the Western Church has chaffed at this claim of encountering the uncreated
Divine Attributes of God as a created
manifestation of these Divine Attributes within His creation. Gilbert's opponents summed up the ecclesiastical doctrine advanced agaisnt his error in the words attributed to St. Augustine: Quidquid in Deo est Deus est.
(Translated: What God has, that He is.)