SECOND ARTICLE [I, Q. 27, Art. 2]

Whether Any Procession in God Can Be Called Generation?

Objection 1: It would seem that no procession in God can be called

generation. For generation is change from non-existence to existence,

and is opposed to corruption; while matter is the subject of both.

Nothing of all this belongs to God. Therefore generation cannot exist

in God.

Obj. 2: Further, procession exists in God, 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 God.

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 God.

_On the contrary,_ It is said (Ps. 2:7): "This day have I begotten

Thee."

_I answer that,_ The procession of the Word in God 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 God

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 God the act of understanding and His

existence are the same, as shown above (Q. 14, A. 4). Hence the

procession of the Word in God 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 God.

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 identity 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 God, since there is no subject that could

receive the whole substance. So, then, what is generated in God

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).

_______________________

Summa Theologica, Part I (Prima Pars) From the Complete American Edition · 第 207 / 722 题