|
State of the question. This question is concerned with
the application of the theory of appropriation and the
solution of certain special difficulties.
1. St. Hilary appropriates eternity to the Father;
the reason is not apparent, for the three persons are
co-eternal.
2. St. Augustine appropriates unity to the Father,
equality to the Son, and concord or harmony to the Holy
Ghost, whereas the three persons are co-equal.
3. St. Augustine also appropriates power to the
Father; St. Paul appropriates it to the Son when he
says, "Christ, the power of God."[545]
4. St. Augustine appropriates the following words to
the three persons: "For of Him, and by Him, and in
Him, are all things,"[546] in this way: of the
Father, by the Son, in the Holy Ghost. The reason
for this attribution is not apparent.
5. Truth is appropriated to the Son but it seems to be
proper to the Son.
Reply. To solve these difficulties and to show the
fitness of these appropriations of the doctors, St.
Thomas invokes this principle: God as known from
creatures, just as creatures themselves, can be.
considered in four ways: 1. as He is a being; 2. as
He is one; 3. as He has the power of operation; 4.
as He has a relationship to His effects.
This principle presents no difficulties, and St.
Thomas shows that the appropriations made by Scripture
and the Fathers were made according to these various
considerations.
1. When God is regarded as the supreme being, eternity
is appropriated to the Father, brightness to the Son,
and use or fruition to the Holy Ghost. Thus St.
Hilary. Why? Because the eternal is not from a
principle, brightness or beauty belongs to the Son as the
perfect image and splendor of the Father, and, use in
the broad sense includes fruition and belongs to the Holy
Ghost since the Father and the Son love each other and
mutually enjoy the Holy Ghost. Such is the explanation
of the appropriations made by St. Hilary.
2. When God is regarded as One, according to St.
Augustine, unity is appropriated to the Father,
equality to the Son, and concord to the Holy Ghost.
Why? Because these three concepts imply unity in
different ways. For unity absolutely speaking does not
presuppose anything else and is therefore appropriated to
the Father; equality implies unity with reference to
another and thus is appropriated to the Son; and concord
implies the unity of two according to the heart and is
therefore appropriated to the Holy Ghost.
3. When God is regarded as having the power for
operation, according to St. Augustine and others,
power is appropriated to the Father, wisdom to the Son,
and goodness to the Holy Ghost. Why? Because power
has the nature of a principle and thus has a likeness to
the Father, who is the principle without principle.
Wisdom has a similarity to the heavenly Son inasmuch as
the Son is the Word or the concept of wisdom.
Goodness, finally, is the basis and object of love and
thus has a similarity with the Holy Ghost, who is
personal love since He proceeds after the manner of love.
This appropriation, then, more commonly accepted by the
Latin theologians than others, is based on the concept
proposed by St. Augustine, according to which the Son
proceeds after the manner of intellection or enunciation,
and the Holy Ghost proceeds after the manner of love. A
second reason of lesser importance is also given, based on
dissimilarity, for as the earthly father as an old man is
weak, the earthly son as young is not yet wise, and the
earthly spirit is often evil and implies violence.
First corollary. The divine operations especially marked
by power, as the creation of the world, are appropriated
to the Father. Thus we read in the most ancient form of
the Apostles, Creed, "I believe in God the Father
almighty, "[547] and in the Nicene Creed, "I
believe in one God, the Father almighty, maker... of
all things visible and invisible."[548]
Second corollary. The operations which are particularly
marked by wisdom are appropriated to the Son. Thus the
Nicene Creed says, "My whom all things were made, "
since they were made according to God's wisdom, which
orders the world. Besides this, the visible mission of
the Son in the redemptive Incarnation is attributed to
the Son properly and not by appropriation.
Third corollary. The operations which are especially
marked by goodness are appropriated to the Holy Ghost,
as the conferring of grace. Thus we read in the
Constantinopolitan Creed, "And in the Holy Ghost,
the Lord and vivifier... who was spoken of by the
prophets."[549]
The Greek Fathers had little need for this theory of
appropriation because in their exposition of the doctrine
of the Trinity, as we have said, they began with the
three persons, who are clearly distinguished in the New
Testament, rather than with the unity of nature, which
incidentally they had difficulty in safeguarding. On the
other hand, the Latin Fathers, especially after the
time of St. Augustine, since they began with the unity
of nature had difficulty in showing the distinction between
the persons. In order to explain this distinction between
the persons they used the theory of appropriation,
especially the appropriations of power, wisdom, and
goodness, which have a valid foundation in the Apostles'
Creed even in its primitive form.
It is interesting to observe that the Greek Fathers,
without any explicit theory of appropriation, explain how
the creative omnipotence is attributed to the Father and
sanctification is attributed to the Holy Ghost, although
they were certain that in the operations ad extra the three
persons act as one principle because they act by the divine
intellect, will, and omnipotence, which are essential
attributes and common to the three persons. In the
introduction to this treatise, comparing the two
theories, we said that among the advantages of the Latin
theory was its ability to explain how the three divine
persons are one principle of the operations ad extra,
namely, creation, conservation, motion, providence,
and divine governance. One of the difficulties of the
Greek theory is that it does not clearly explain this
point. This is not surprising for, when this latter
theory starts out with the three persons rather than with
the unity of nature, we expect that the difficulties would
be the opposite of those in the Latin theory. The
Greeks had difficulty in explaining the unity of nature,
while the Latins had difficulty in explaining the real
distinction of the persons. The mystery is simply
infinite and impenetrable.
Finally St. Thomas presents a fourth appropriation
based on St. Paul's words, "If Him, and by Him,
and in Him, are all things."[550] The "of"
(ex) denotes the condition of an efficient cause, which
belongs to the Father by reason of His omnipotence. The
preposition "by" (per) designates the form by which the
agent acts, as when the artist is said to work by his
art, and this meaning is appropriated to the Son. The
"in" denotes the condition of a container; God contains
things inasmuch as He conserves them in His goodness and
therefore this meaning is appropriated to the Holy Ghost
as goodness is.
At the end of the article St. Thomas explains why truth
and the "book of life" are appropriated to the Son, and
also why the name "Who am." This last is appropriated
to the Son because when God spoke to Moses he prefigured
the liberation of the human race, which was accomplished
by the Son.
We will return again to the theory of appropriation in
question 43, when we treat of the indwelling of the
Holy Trinity, which is appropriated to the Holy Ghost
because this indwelling takes place by charity. By
charity we are more closely assimilated to the Holy Ghost
than we are assimilated by faith to the Son; we are not
perfectly assimilated to the Son except by the light of
glory, and then the Son will assimilate us to the
Father.[551]
|
|