THIRD ARTICLE [I, Q. 39, Art. 3]

Whether Essential Names Should Be Predicated in the Singular of the

Three Persons?

Objection 1: It would seem that essential names, as the name "God,"

should not be predicated in the singular of the three persons, but in

the plural. For as "man" signifies "one that has humanity," so God

signifies "one that has Godhead." But the three persons are three who

have Godhead. Therefore the three persons are "three Gods."

Obj. 2: Further, Gen. 1:1, where it is said, "In the beginning God

created heaven and earth," the Hebrew original has "Elohim," which may

be rendered "Gods" or "Judges": and this word is used on account of

the plurality of persons. Therefore the three persons are "several

Gods," and not "one" God.

Obj. 3: Further, this word "thing" when it is said absolutely,

seems to belong to substance. But it is predicated of the three

persons in the plural. For Augustine says (De Doctr. Christ. i, 5):

"The things that are the objects of our future glory are the Father,

Son and Holy Ghost." Therefore other essential names can be

predicated in the plural of the three persons.

Obj. 4: Further, as this word "God" signifies "a being who has

Deity," so also this word "person" signifies a being subsisting in

an intellectual nature. But we say there are three persons. So for

the same reason we can say there are "three Gods."

_On the contrary,_ It is said (Deut. 6:4): "Hear, O Israel, the Lord thy

God is one God."

_I answer that,_ Some essential names signify the essence after the

manner of substantives; while others signify it after the manner of

adjectives. Those which signify it as substantives are predicated of

the three persons in the singular only, and not in the plural. Those

which signify the essence as adjectives are predicated of the three

persons in the plural. The reason of this is that substantives

signify something by way of substance, while adjectives signify

something by way of accident, which adheres to a subject. Now just as

substance has existence of itself, so also it has of itself unity or

multitude; wherefore the singularity or plurality of a substantive

name depends upon the form signified by the name. But as accidents

have their existence in a subject, so they have unity or plurality

from their subject; and therefore the singularity and plurality of

adjectives depends upon their _supposita._ In creatures, one form

does not exist in several _supposita_ except by unity of order, as

the form of an ordered multitude. So if the names signifying such a

form are substantives, they are predicated of many in the singular,

but otherwise if they adjectives. For we say that many men are a

college, or an army, or a people; but we say that many men are

collegians. Now in God the divine essence is signified by way of a

form, as above explained (A. 2), which, indeed, is simple and

supremely one, as shown above (Q. 3, A. 7; Q. 11, A. 4). So, names

which signify the divine essence in a substantive manner are

predicated of the three persons in the singular, and not in the

plural. This, then, is the reason why we say that Socrates, Plato and

Cicero are "three men"; whereas we do not say the Father, Son and

Holy Ghost are "three Gods," but "one God"; forasmuch as in the three

_supposita_ of human nature there are three humanities, whereas in

the three divine Persons there is but one divine essence. On the

other hand, the names which signify essence in an adjectival manner

are predicated of the three persons plurally, by reason of the

plurality of _supposita._ For we say there are three "existent" or

three "wise" beings, or three "eternal," "uncreated," and "immense"

beings, if these terms are understood in an adjectival sense. But if

taken in a substantive sense, we say "one uncreated, immense, eternal

being," as Athanasius declares.

Reply Obj. 1: Though the name "God" signifies a being having Godhead,

nevertheless the mode of signification is different. For the name

"God" is used substantively; whereas "having Godhead" is used

adjectively. Consequently, although there are "three having Godhead,"

it does not follow that there are three Gods.

Reply Obj. 2: Various languages have diverse modes of expression. So

as by reason of the plurality of _supposita_ the Greeks said "three

hypostases," so also in Hebrew "Elohim" is in the plural. We,

however, do not apply the plural either to "God" or to "substance,"

lest plurality be referred to the substance.

Reply Obj. 3: This word "thing" is one of the transcendentals.

Whence, so far as it is referred to relation, it is predicated of God

in the plural; whereas, so far as it is referred to the substance, it

is predicated in the singular. So Augustine says, in the passage

quoted, that "the same Trinity is a thing supreme."

Reply Obj. 4: The form signified by the word "person" is not essence

or nature, but personality. So, as there are three

personalities--that is, three personal properties in the Father, Son

and Holy Ghost--it is predicated of the three, not in the singular,

but in the plural.

_______________________

Summa Theologica, Part I (Prima Pars) From the Complete American Edition · 第 263 / 722 题