|
The difficulty arises from Christ's words, "I and the
Father are one." The reply nevertheless is that the
Son is other than the Father but not another being.
This is an article of faith according to the Fourth
Lateran Council: "That being (the divine nature)
does not beget, nor is it begotten, nor does it proceed,
but it is the Father who begets, the Son who is
begotten, and the Holy Ghost who proceeds, because the
distinctions are in the persons and the unity is in the
nature. Although the Father is another, the Son
another, and the Holy Ghost another, each is not
another being but that which is the Father is the Son and
the Holy Ghost, entirely the same, "[330] that
is, they are one according to nature and are
consubstantial.
This statement of the Council was taken from the writings
of St. Gregory Nazianzen.[331] St.
Fulgentius, quoted by St. Thomas in his argument sed
contra, used the same language. In this way the words of
our Lord are safeguarded: "I and the Father are
one." The Son and the Father are one; the Son is not
another being, although He is other than the Father
because He was begotten by the Father.
In the body of the article St. Thomas explains this
point by comparing the masculine pronoun, which signifies
a person, with the neuter pronoun, which signifies the
nature. The reader is referred to the reply to the fourth
difficulty, "The neuter gender is unformed, and so
conveniently signifies the common essence, whereas the
masculine gender signifies a determined person." In the
body of the article St. Thomas determines the vocabulary
to be used in order to avoid the dangers of Arianism and
Sabellianism. To avoid any confusion with Arianism, in
speaking of the divine persons we do not use the terms
diversity and difference but distinction, because
diversity implies a distinction in genus and difference
implies a distinction in species. Thus we do not say,
the nature is divided into three persons, the person of
the Father is separated from the person of the Son, a
disparity exists between the persons, nor that the Son is
alien to the Father, because the Son is perfectly
similar and united to the Father but distinct from Him.
To avoid Sabellianism, we do not say that God is
unique, but one in three persons, nor do we say that God
is singular or that He is solitary.
|
|