|
IN the beginning we treat of the persons in common, then
of the individual persons, and finally of the persons in
comparison with the essence and each other. This is the
content of the treatise.
Concerning the three persons in common there are four
questions:
|
1. The meaning of the word "person."
2. The plurality of persons.
3. Their differences and similarities.
4. How they can be known by us.
|
|
The first question has four divisions: 1. the
definition of person; 2. the comparison of person with
essence and subsistence; here person is identified with
the Greek "hypostasis"; 3. whether the word
"person" is used with reference to God; 4. whether in
God person signifies relation. The reply will be in the
affirmative: person signifies a subsisting relation
opposed and incommunicable to others. In the appendix we
shall see what is to be said about the absolute subsistence
common to the three persons.
In this question it will be made clear that the general
idea of person is to be applied to God analogically, not
metaphorically but properly, without any distinction or
multiplication in the divine nature itself. A great deal
of effort was required to make this point clear. In the
third century the Latins, like Tertullian,
spontaneously declared that there are three persons in God
and one substance because the names Father and Son and
Holy Ghost are personal. This statement, however, was
the source of much difficulty for the Greeks, who used
the words ousia and "hypostasis" promiscuously to
designate essence, substance, and nature. On other
occasions the term prosopon a translation of the Latin
persona, designated the mask or theatrical costume which
actors donned to impersonate famous personages, and this
term was not considered definite enough to express the real
distinction between the divine persons. At the time of
Origen and St. Dionysius of Alexandria, however, the
term "hypostasis" designated a divine person and
ousia the divine nature. St. Athanasius also used these
terms in this manner.
|
|