Nothing of all this belongs to G.o.d. Therefore generation cannot exist in G.o.d.
Obj. 2: Further, procession exists in G.o.d, according to an intelligible mode, as above explained (A. 1). But such a process is not called generation in us; therefore neither is it to be so called in G.o.d.
Obj. 3: Further, anything that is generated derives existence from its generator. Therefore such existence is a derived existence. But no derived existence can be a self-subsistence. Therefore, since the divine existence is self-subsisting (Q. 3, A. 4), it follows that no generated existence can be the divine existence. Therefore there is no generation in G.o.d.
_On the contrary,_ It is said (Ps. 2:7): "This day have I begotten Thee."
_I answer that,_ The procession of the Word in G.o.d is called generation. In proof whereof we must observe that generation has a twofold meaning: one common to everything subject to generation and corruption; in which sense generation is nothing but change from non-existence to existence. In another sense it is proper and belongs to living things; in which sense it signifies the origin of a living being from a conjoined living principle; and this is properly called birth. Not everything of that kind, however, is called begotten; but, strictly speaking, only what proceeds by way of similitude. Hence a hair has not the aspect of generation and sonship, but only that has which proceeds by way of a similitude. Nor will any likeness suffice; for a worm which is generated from animals has not the aspect of generation and sonship, although it has a generic similitude; for this kind of generation requires that there should be a procession by way of similitude in the same specific nature; as a man proceeds from a man, and a horse from a horse. So in living things, which proceed from potential to actual life, such as men and animals, generation includes both these kinds of generation. But if there is a being whose life does not proceed from potentiality to act, procession (if found in such a being) excludes entirely the first kind of generation; whereas it may have that kind of generation which belongs to living things. So in this manner the procession of the Word in G.o.d is generation; for He proceeds by way of intelligible action, which is a vital operation:--from a conjoined principle (as above described):--by way of similitude, inasmuch as the concept of the intellect is a likeness of the object conceived:--and exists in the same nature, because in G.o.d the act of understanding and His existence are the same, as shown above (Q. 14, A. 4). Hence the procession of the Word in G.o.d is called generation; and the Word Himself proceeding is called the Son.
Reply Obj. 1: This objection is based on the idea of generation in the first sense, importing the issuing forth from potentiality to act; in which sense it is not found in G.o.d.
Reply Obj. 2: The act of human understanding in ourselves is not the substance itself of the intellect; hence the word which proceeds within us by intelligible operation is not of the same nature as the source whence it proceeds; so the idea of generation cannot be properly and fully applied to it. But the divine act of intelligence is the very substance itself of the one who understands (Q. 14, A.
4). The Word proceeding therefore proceeds as subsisting in the same nature; and so is properly called begotten, and Son. Hence Scripture employs terms which denote generation of living things in order to signify the procession of the divine Wisdom, namely, conception and birth; as is declared in the person of the divine Wisdom, "The depths were not as yet, and I was already conceived; before the hills, I was brought forth." (Prov. 8:24). In our way of understanding we use the word "conception" in order to signify that in the word of our intellect is found the likeness of the thing understood, although there be no ident.i.ty of nature.
Reply Obj. 3: Not everything derived from another has existence in another subject; otherwise we could not say that the whole substance of created being comes from G.o.d, since there is no subject that could receive the whole substance. So, then, what is generated in G.o.d receives its existence from the generator, not as though that existence were received into matter or into a subject (which would conflict with the divine self-subsistence); but when we speak of His existence as received, we mean that He Who proceeds receives divine existence from another; not, however, as if He were other from the divine nature. For in the perfection itself of the divine existence are contained both the Word intelligibly proceeding and the principle of the Word, with whatever belongs to His perfection (Q. 4, A. 2).
_______________________
THIRD ARTICLE [I, Q. 27, Art. 3]
Whether Any Other Procession Exists in G.o.d Besides That of the Word?
Objection 1: It would seem that no other procession exists in G.o.d besides the generation of the Word. Because, for whatever reason we admit another procession, we should be led to admit yet another, and so on to infinitude; which cannot be. Therefore we must stop at the first, and hold that there exists only one procession in G.o.d.
Obj. 2: Further, every nature possesses but one mode of self-communication; because operations derive unity and diversity from their terms. But procession in G.o.d is only by way of communication of the divine nature. Therefore, as there is only one divine nature (Q. 11, A. 4), it follows that only one procession exists in G.o.d.
Obj. 3: Further, if any other procession but the intelligible procession of the Word existed in G.o.d, it could only be the procession of love, which is by the operation of the will. But such a procession is identified with the intelligible procession of the intellect, inasmuch as the will in G.o.d is the same as His intellect (Q. 19, A. 1). Therefore in G.o.d there is no other procession but the procession of the Word.
_On the contrary,_ The Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father (John 15:26); and He is distinct from the Son, according to the words, "I will ask My Father, and He will give you another Paraclete" (John 14:16). Therefore in G.o.d another procession exists besides the procession of the Word.
_I answer that,_ There are two processions in G.o.d; the procession of the Word, and another.
In evidence whereof we must observe that procession exists in G.o.d, only according to an action which does not tend to anything external, but remains in the agent itself. Such an action in an intellectual nature is that of the intellect, and of the will. The procession of the Word is by way of an intelligible operation. The operation of the will within ourselves involves also another procession, that of love, whereby the object loved is in the lover; as, by the conception of the word, the object spoken of or understood is in the intelligent agent.
Hence, besides the procession of the Word in G.o.d, there exists in Him another procession called the procession of love.
Reply Obj. 1: There is no need to go on to infinitude in the divine processions; for the procession which is accomplished within the agent in an intellectual nature terminates in the procession of the will.
Reply Obj. 2: All that exists in G.o.d, is G.o.d (Q. 3, AA. 3, 4); whereas the same does not apply to others. Therefore the divine nature is communicated by every procession which is not outward, and this does not apply to other natures.
Reply Obj. 3: Though will and intellect are not diverse in G.o.d, nevertheless the nature of will and intellect requires the processions belonging to each of them to exist in a certain order.
For the procession of love occurs in due order as regards the procession of the Word; since nothing can be loved by the will unless it is conceived in the intellect. So as there exists a certain order of the Word to the principle whence He proceeds, although in G.o.d the substance of the intellect and its concept are the same; so, although in G.o.d the will and the intellect are the same, still, inasmuch as love requires by its very nature that it proceed only from the concept of the intellect, there is a distinction of order between the procession of love and the procession of the Word in G.o.d.
_______________________
FOURTH ARTICLE [I, Q. 27, Art. 4]
Whether the Procession of Love in G.o.d Is Generation?
Objection 1: It would seem that the procession of love in G.o.d is generation. For what proceeds by way of likeness of nature among living things is said to be generated and born. But what proceeds in G.o.d by way of love proceeds in the likeness of nature; otherwise it would be extraneous to the divine nature, and would be an external procession. Therefore what proceeds in G.o.d by way of love, proceeds as generated and born.
Obj. 2: Further, as similitude is of the nature of the word, so does it belong to love. Hence it is said, that "every beast loves its like" (Ecclus. 13:19). Therefore if the Word is begotten and born by way of likeness, it seems becoming that love should proceed by way of generation.
Obj. 3: Further, what is not in any species is not in the genus. So if there is a procession of love in G.o.d, there ought to be some special name besides this common name of procession. But no other name is applicable but generation. Therefore the procession of love in G.o.d is generation.
_On the contrary,_ Were this true, it would follow that the Holy Ghost Who proceeds as love, would proceed as begotten; which is against the statement of Athanasius: "The Holy Ghost is from the Father and the Son, not made, nor begotten, but proceeding."
_I answer that,_ The procession of love in G.o.d ought not to be called generation. In evidence whereof we must consider that the intellect and the will differ in this respect, that the intellect is made actual by the object understood residing according to its own likeness in the intellect; whereas the will is made actual, not by any similitude of the object willed within it, but by its having a certain inclination to the thing willed. Thus the procession of the intellect is by way of similitude, and is called generation, because every generator begets its own like; whereas the procession of the will is not by way of similitude, but rather by way of impulse and movement towards an object.
So what proceeds in G.o.d by way of love, does not proceed as begotten, or as son, but proceeds rather as spirit; which name expresses a certain vital movement and impulse, accordingly as anyone is described as moved or impelled by love to perform an action.
Reply Obj. 1: All that exists in G.o.d is one with the divine nature.
Hence the proper notion of this or that procession, by which one procession is distinguished from another, cannot be on the part of this unity: but the proper notion of this or that procession must be taken from the order of one procession to another; which order is derived from the nature of the will and intellect. Hence, each procession in G.o.d takes its name from the proper notion of will and intellect; the name being imposed to signify what its nature really is; and so it is that the Person proceeding as love receives the divine nature, but is not said to be born.
Reply Obj. 2: Likeness belongs in a different way to the word and to love. It belongs to the word as being the likeness of the object understood, as the thing generated is the likeness of the generator; but it belongs to love, not as though love itself were a likeness, but because likeness is the principle of loving. Thus it does not follow that love is begotten, but that the one begotten is the principle of love.
Reply Obj. 3: We can name G.o.d only from creatures (Q. 13, A. 1). As in creatures generation is the only principle of communication of nature, procession in G.o.d has no proper or special name, except that of generation. Hence the procession which is not generation has remained without a special name; but it can be called spiration, as it is the procession of the Spirit.
_______________________
FIFTH ARTICLE [I, Q. 27, Art. 5]
Whether There Are More Than Two Processions in G.o.d?
Objection 1: It would seem that there are more than two processions in G.o.d. As knowledge and will are attributed to G.o.d, so is power.
Therefore, if two processions exist in G.o.d, of intellect and will, it seems that there must also be a third procession of power.
Obj. 2: Further, goodness seems to be the greatest principle of procession, since goodness is diffusive of itself. Therefore there must be a procession of goodness in G.o.d.
Obj. 3: Further, in G.o.d there is greater power of fecundity than in us. But in us there is not only one procession of the word, but there are many: for in us from one word proceeds another; and also from one love proceeds another. Therefore in G.o.d there are more than two processions.
_On the contrary,_ In G.o.d there are not more than two who proceed--the Son and the Holy Ghost. Therefore there are in Him but two processions.
_I answer that,_ The divine processions can be derived only from the actions which remain within the agent. In a nature which is intellectual, and in the divine nature these actions are two, the acts of intelligence and of will. The act of sensation, which also appears to be an operation within the agent, takes place outside the intellectual nature, nor can it be reckoned as wholly removed from the sphere of external actions; for the act of sensation is perfected by the action of the sensible object upon sense. It follows that no other procession is possible in G.o.d but the procession of the Word, and of Love.
Reply Obj. 1: Power is the principle whereby one thing acts on another. Hence it is that external action points to power. Thus the divine power does not imply the procession of a divine person; but is indicated by the procession therefrom of creatures.
Reply Obj. 2: As Boethius says (De Hebdom.), goodness belongs to the essence and not to the operation, unless considered as the object of the will.
Thus, as the divine processions must be denominated from certain actions; no other processions can be understood in G.o.d according to goodness and the like attributes except those of the Word and of love, according as G.o.d understands and loves His own essence, truth and goodness.
Reply Obj. 3: As above explained (Q. 14, A. 5; Q. 19, A. 5), G.o.d understands all things by one simple act; and by one act also He wills all things. Hence there cannot exist in Him a procession of Word from Word, nor of Love from Love: for there is in Him only one perfect Word, and one perfect Love; thereby being manifested His perfect fecundity.
_______________________
QUESTION 28
THE DIVINE RELATIONS (In Four Articles)
The divine relations are next to be considered, in four points of inquiry:
(1) Whether there are real relations in G.o.d?
(2) Whether those relations are the divine essence itself, or are extrinsic to it?