FOURTH ARTICLE [I, Q. 31, Art. 4]

Whether an Exclusive Diction Can Be Joined to the Personal Term?

Objection 1: It would seem that an exclusive diction can be joined to

the personal term, even though the predicate is common. For our Lord

speaking to the Father, said: "That they may know Thee, the only true

God" (John 17:3). Therefore the Father alone is true God.

Obj. 2: Further, He said: "No one knows the Son but the Father" (Matt.

11:27); which means that the Father alone knows the Son. But to know

the Son is common (to the persons). Therefore the same conclusion

follows.

Obj. 3: Further, an exclusive diction does not exclude what enters

into the concept of the term to which it is joined. Hence it does not

exclude the part, nor the universal; for it does not follow that if

we say "Socrates alone is white," that therefore "his hand is not

white," or that "man is not white." But one person is in the

concept of another; as the Father is in the concept of the Son; and

conversely. Therefore, when we say, The Father alone is God, we do

not exclude the Son, nor the Holy Ghost; so that such a mode of

speaking is true.

Obj. 4: Further, the Church sings: "Thou alone art Most High, O Jesus

Christ."

_On the contrary,_ This proposition "The Father alone is God" includes

two assertions--namely, that the Father is God, and that no other

besides the Father is God. But this second proposition is false, for

the Son is another from the Father, and He is God. Therefore this is

false, The Father alone is God; and the same of the like sayings.

_I answer that,_ When we say, "The Father alone is God," such a

proposition can be taken in several senses. If "alone" means solitude

in the Father, it is false in a categorematical sense; but if taken in

a syncategorematical sense it can again be understood in several ways.

For if it exclude (all others) from the form of the subject, it is

true, the sense being "the Father alone is God"--that is, "He who

with no other is the Father, is God." In this way Augustine expounds

when he says (De Trin. vi, 6): "We say the Father alone, not because

He is separate from the Son, or from the Holy Ghost, but because they

are not the Father together with Him." This, however, is not the usual

way of speaking, unless we understand another implication, as though

we said "He who alone is called the Father is God." But in the strict

sense the exclusion affects the predicate. And thus the proposition is

false if it excludes another in the masculine sense; but true if it

excludes it in the neuter sense; because the Son is another person

than the Father, but not another thing; and the same applies to the

Holy Ghost. But because this diction "alone," properly speaking,

refers to the subject, it tends to exclude another Person rather than

other things. Hence such a way of speaking is not to be taken too

literally, but it should be piously expounded, whenever we find it in

an authentic work.

Reply Obj. 1: When we say, "Thee the only true God," we do not

understand it as referring to the person of the Father, but to the

whole Trinity, as Augustine expounds (De Trin. vi, 9). Or, if

understood of the person of the Father, the other persons are not

excluded by reason of the unity of essence; in so far as the word

"only" excludes another thing, as above explained.

The same Reply can be given to Obj. 2. For an essential term applied

to the Father does not exclude the Son or the Holy Ghost, by reason of

the unity of essence. Hence we must understand that in the text quoted

the term "no one" [*Nemo = non-homo, i.e. no man] is not the same as

"no man," which the word itself would seem to signify (for the person

of the Father could not be excepted), but is taken according to the

usual way of speaking in a distributive sense, to mean any rational

nature.

Reply Obj. 3: The exclusive diction does not exclude what enters into

the concept of the term to which it is adjoined, if they do not

differ in _suppositum,_ as part and universal. But the Son differs in

_suppositum_ from the Father; and so there is no parity.

Reply Obj. 4: We do not say absolutely that the Son alone is Most

High; but that He alone is Most High "with the Holy Ghost, in the

glory of God the Father."

_______________________

Summa Theologica, Part I (Prima Pars) From the Complete American Edition · 第 231 / 722 题