18. God's Simplicity: Matter, Form, and Divine Essence

Subscribe in Podcast App | Download Transcript

Lecture Notes

Main Topics #

God’s Non-Composition with Matter and Form (Article 2) #

Thomas argues that God cannot be composed of matter and form. This is essential because:

• Matter is pure potentiality (passive potentiality/ability)
• God is pure act with no potentiality whatsoever
• Therefore, God cannot be matter or composed of matter and form

Berquist emphasizes that understanding the principle of pure act (πῦρ act, actus purus) from Aristotle’s Ninth Book of the Physics is foundational to all of Aquinas’s theology.

The Three Arguments Against Matter-Form Composition #

First Argument: From Pure Act

• Matter exists in potency (ability to receive form)
• God is pure act (actuality without potentiality)
• Conclusion: God is not matter; therefore not composed of matter and form

Second Argument: From Essential Goodness

• Things composed of matter and form are good by participation (through their form)
• God is the first good and must be good essentially, not by participation
• What is good essentially must precede what is good by participation
• Conclusion: God is not composed of matter and form
• Example: Reasonable anger is not essentially reasonable; it participates in reason. Therefore, reason itself must exist essentially in something (God)

Third Argument: From Agency and Form

• Every agent acts through its form, not through its matter
• God is the first agent and first mover (causa prima)
• Therefore, God must be form alone, not composed of matter and form
• Boethius: “Divina Substantia Forma Est” (Divine substance is form)

The Identity of Essence and Existence in God (Article 3) #

Thomas establishes that God is not only His essence but is also His very existence (esse).

The Problem: In creatures, the individual substance (suppositum) differs from its nature/essence. Socrates is not identical to humanity; he has human nature.

The Solution:

• In composed things (matter and form), essence comprehends only what falls into the definition of the species
• Individual matter with its accidents does not fall into the definition
• Therefore, the individual differs from the nature
• But in simple things not composed of matter and form (where individuation is not through matter), the form itself is individuated through itself
• Since God is not composed of matter and form, God must be His own nature, His own deity, His own life

Individuation:

• Two circles of identical size differ only because they exist in different parts of matter
• Matter is subject to extension and divisibility
• Remove matter and extension, and each thing becomes individuated by its form alone
• God, being immaterial, is individuated by His form; hence God is the same as His essence

Key Arguments #

Why Human Language Distinguishes God’s Essence and His Attributes #

Berquist explains why we use both concrete and abstract language for God:

• Human reason’s proper object is the quiddity (whatness) of sensible or imagined things
• All such things are composed of matter and form
• Therefore, we cannot speak of simple things except through the manner of composed things
• We use abstract names (“wisdom”) to signify God’s simplicity
• We use concrete names (“wise”) to signify that God is perfect and subsisting
• Both are imperfect; Dionysius says both ways of speaking are deficient
• In the beatific vision, there will be one name signifying what God is

The Axiom: “Nothing is in Itself” #

Aristotle (in the Fourth Book of the Physics) distinguishes eight senses of “in” and “out” but establishes that in no sense is something said to be in itself. This is relevant to the objection that God’s essence is “in” God.

Important Definitions #

Matter (Materia) #

Potentia in the passive sense; that which is in ability and receives form. It is individuating in composed things because it is subject to quantity and extension.

Form (Forma) #

That which actualizes matter; that by which something is something. As Aristotle teaches, form is “God-like” and good in itself, while matter is good only insofar as it receives form.

Essence/Nature (Essentia/Natura) #

The definition of a thing; what makes something the kind of thing it is. In creatures, distinct from the individual substance. In God, identical to His individual substance.

Existence (Esse) #

The actuality of every form or nature; the principle by which something actually is. In creatures, distinct from essence. In God, identical to essence.

Individuation (Individuatio) #

The principle by which one particular thing differs from another of the same kind. In material things, through individual matter subject to extension. In immaterial things (angels, God), through the form itself.

Pure Act (Actus Purus) #

Being without any potentiality; having actuality in all respects. The distinctive characteristic of God alone.

Participation (Participatio) #

The mode by which creatures possess perfections; they have being and goodness not essentially but by receiving them from God.

Examples & Illustrations #

Individuation Through Matter and Extension #

• Two circles of the same size differ only because they occupy different parts of matter
• Matter is subject to extension and divisibility (the continuous)
• A baker makes multiple cookies from dough: the dough (matter subject to extension) is what allows many individuals of the same kind
• Remove extension and divisibility, and each thing becomes unique by its form

Concrete vs. Abstract Language for God #

• “God is wise” (concrete): emphasizes God as subsisting and perfect
• “God is wisdom” (abstract): emphasizes God’s simplicity
• “God has health” would falsely suggest health is something added to God
• We say instead: “God is not health but healthy” or better yet, we realize such language is inadequate

The Verb “To See” Moving from Metaphor to Proper Use #

• “Do you see what I mean?” - no longer metaphorical (properly carried over to understanding)
• “The eye of the soul” - metaphorical (remaining a metaphor because the likeness is maintained)
• The word’s meaning has shifted in the first case but maintained a likeness in the second
• This distinction matters when interpreting theological language

The Metaphor of Fire for God #

• Fire as substance = divine substance (Father)
• Light from fire = divine understanding (Son proceeding from Father by way of understanding)
• Warmth from fire = divine love (Holy Spirit)
• This is a beautiful and multivalent metaphor for understanding the Trinity

Divine “Passions” in Scripture #

• God’s “anger” = His justice (the effect, not the passion)
• Anger properly involves bodily passions (blood around the heart, etc.)
• When attributed to God, “anger” signifies the effect that anger produces (punishment)
• So God metaphorically is said to be angry when He punishes

Notable Quotes #

“Homo sedens fit sapiens” - The man sitting becomes wise (Latin from Thomas, via T.J. Gerseric)

“Divina Substantia Forma Est” - Divine substance is form (Boethius, cited by Thomas)

“Everything that manifests something is light” - St. Paul (cited to show how “light” can become properly (not metaphorically) applied to divine manifestation)

“God is whatever he has” - Thomas’s principle distinguishing God from creatures (“I have human nature, but I am not human nature”)

“You can never know the likeness between the creature and God without a greater unlikeness” - Fourth Vatican Council (cited by Berquist to address a student’s concern about reason being called “God-like”)

“The more intellectual you are, the more you love the common good” - Thomas, discussing why angels love each other more despite being of different kinds

Questions Addressed #

Why cannot God be composed of matter and form? #

Because matter is pure potentiality and God is pure act. Composed things are good by participation; God is essentially good. Composed things act through their form; God is the first agent and therefore must be form itself.

How can we speak of simple God using the language of composed things? #

Human knowledge derives from sensible and imagined things, all of which are composed of matter and form. We therefore cannot speak of simple things except through negation of composition. We use both concrete and abstract names, acknowledging both as imperfect, knowing that God transcends our manner of knowing.

Why is the individual in creatures different from its nature? #

Because essence comprehends only what falls into the definition of the species. Individual matter with its accidents does not fall into that definition. Therefore, Socrates has more in him than humanity alone—he has individual matter, individual flesh and bones, individual accidents.

Why is God identical to His essence and existence? #

Because God is not composed of matter and form. In simple things not composed of matter and form, the form itself is individuated through itself and does not differ from the individual substance. Therefore, God’s essence and His existence cannot be distinct.

What is the significance of the “rule of two and three”? #

The Nicene-Constantinople Creed divides articles of faith according to the Trinity (Father, Son, Holy Spirit). The Athanasian Creed and Fourth Lateran Council divide according to divinity and humanity of Christ. In the liturgy: the Gloria uses the three-fold division, while the Sanctus and Benedictus use the two-fold division. Theology follows the two-fold division (Prima Pars on divinity, Tertia Pars on humanity). Both divisions are valid; the context determines which is appropriate.