122. Person in Divine Things: Signification and Subsistence

Subscribe in Podcast App | Download Transcript

Lecture Notes

Main Topics #

The Signification of ‘Person’ in Divine Things #

• Person in general: signifies an individual substance of a rational nature; something distinct from other things in that nature
• Divine person: signifies something additional—what distinguishes one divine person from another in the divine nature
• The distinction between what a name is “taken from” (etymology) versus what it signifies (meaning)
• How heretical challenges forced the Church to develop more precise theological language

Two Competing Positions on Person #

1. First position: Person signifies essence directly in divine things, merely “accommodated” to stand for something relative through use
2. Second position (closer to truth): Person signifies both essence and relation together, with some saying:
   • Essence directly, relation obliquely (because person comes from per se una—unity pertains to essence)
   • Relation directly, essence obliquely (because nature appears in the oblique case in the definition)

Signification Per Modum Substantiae #

• Relations in God are not accidents (as in creatures) but subsist as the divine essence itself
• Divine person signifies “a relation as something subsisting” (per modum substantiae)
• This explains how person can signify relation while maintaining that person refers to something substantial
• Unlike the abstract name “health” versus the concrete “healthy,” person signifies relation in the manner of substance

The Problem of Equivocation #

• Objection: If person in God signifies relation but person in creatures and angels signifies something absolute, is the term equivocal?
• Response: A diverse definition of the less common (divine person) does not make equivocation in the more common (person)
• Example: animal means the same thing when applied to dog and cat, even though dog and cat have different definitions
• Similarly, person retains its basic meaning (something distinct from others in that nature) across applications, even though the divine person is further specified by relation
• The application is neither entirely univocal nor entirely equivocal

Augustine’s Formulation Clarified #

• Augustine: “When we say person of the Father, we do not say something other than substance of the Father”
• This appears contradictory if person signifies relation
• Resolution: Person signifies relation per modum substantiae (as something substantial); since in God essence and hypostasis are identical, the statement is correct
• The Father is distinct from the Son by relation, yet the Father IS the divine substance

The Role of Heresy in Theological Development #

• The meaning of “person” was not fully perceived before heretical attacks on trinitarian doctrine
• Heretics either denied something of the faith or set up false arguments and then knocked them down
• The Church was forced to make distinctions it would not otherwise have made
• Augustine’s works are often titles “contra” (against) specific heresies, showing how defense deepens understanding

Key Arguments #

Why Person Can Signify Relation in Divine Things #

1. Person in general signifies what distinguishes one being from another in a nature
2. In divine things, distinction between persons occurs only through relations of origin (fatherhood, sonship, etc.)
3. These relations in God are not accidents but subsist as the divine essence
4. Therefore, divine person must signify relation (what actually distinguishes persons) as something subsisting
5. This avoids the false position that person signifies essence purely, which would not explain the real distinction of persons

Against the First Position (Person = Essence Only) #

• If person signifies only essence from the power of the word itself, then saying “three persons” would not quiet the calumny of heretics but would give greater occasion for it
• This is because it would seem to imply three divine essences (three absolute things)
• The first position thus fails to solve the heretical problem it was meant to address

The Logic of Univocation with Diverse Definitions #

• Principle: A diverse definition of the less common does not create equivocation in the more common
• The common definition (what distinguishes in that nature) applies univocally to person in general, human person, angelic person, and divine person
• Each adds its own specification: human person adds flesh and bones; divine person adds relation
• Therefore, the term person is not equivocal across these uses, though it is not perfectly univocal either

Important Definitions #

Person (persona) #

• An individual substance of a rational nature
• Something distinct and undivided in itself yet distinct from other things
• In divine things specifically: what distinguishes one divine person from another

Signify Per Modum Substantiae #

• To signify something in the manner of substance, as something subsisting
• Unlike relations in creatures (which are accidents), relations in God subsist per modum substantiae
• The term captures that relation in God possesses the mode of subsistence characteristic of substance

Hypostasis (ὑπόστασις) #

• Individual substance or supposit
• In God, the essence and hypostasis are identical
• Distinguished from ousia (essence/nature) in Greek theological language

Accommodation (accommodatum) #

• A name’s meaning was not perceived or understood until circumstances (like heretical challenge) forced clarification
• Person was “accommodated” to stand for something relative not merely by use, but from its very meaning
• Distinct from calling something equivocal—the word’s ability to signify relation was always there, but not understood until needed

Examples & Illustrations #

Augustine and Earlier Church Fathers #

• Augustine wrote De Trinitate (discussed in the lecture) containing much about the Incarnation that doesn’t pertain to the Trinity
• Augustine’s style is more flowing, with alliteration and rhetorical flourish (the soul amat rather than animat)
• Augustine appeals to people more through style, but Thomas is bolder and more systematic in spelling things out
• Church Fathers often write as homilies—they flow along and apply the text to various things but don’t stick to the text the way Thomas does

Plato’s Dialogues vs. Aristotle’s Systematic Works #

• Plato’s dialogues move from one thing to another, easier on the imagination than the mind
• One must balance what is said in one dialogue with what is said in another about the same matter
• Aristotle gathers everything about a topic in one place for systematic treatment
• This parallels Augustine versus Thomas: Augustine’s appeal is broader and more imaginative; Thomas is more precise and systematic

Animal, Dog, and Cat #

• When we say “a dog is an animal” and “a cat is an animal,” we mean the same thing by ‘animal’
• The fact that dog and cat have different definitions does not make the term animal equivocal
• Similarly, even though divine person has a different definition than human person, the term person is not equivocal

Fingers and Thumbs #

• When asked “how many fingers do I have?” the answer is “four fingers and a thumb”
• The thumb gets its own name because of its unique function, yet it is still part of the general category of digits
• This shows how something can retain a common category while receiving its own specific name

Health and Healthy #

• “Health” (abstract noun) signifies an accident more per modum substanti, as if it subsists
• “Healthy” (concrete adjective) signifies an accident more per modum accidentis, in the manner of an accident
• Yet both signify the same accident; the difference is in the mode of signification
• This parallels how person can signify relation per modum substantiae in divine things

Notable Quotes #

“Heresy is necessary for theology to develop, because the heretics deny something of the faith and so the church fathers are forced to depend on that and to make certain distinctions and to see things that they would not have seen without this.”

“Divine person therefore signifies a relation as subsisting… signify per modum substantiae, which is in hypostasis, subsisting in the divine nature.”

“Augustine says that it signifies essence… insofar as in God, the very essence of God is the same with the hypostasis.”

“A diverse definition of the less common does not make equivocation the more common.”

“If this name person from the strength of its own meaning does not have, except that it signifies only the essence in God, from this, that it is said that there are three persons, there would not be quieted down the calumny of the heretics, but would occasion be given for an even greater calumny.”

Questions Addressed #

Q1: Should the Name ‘Person’ Be Used in Divine Things? #

• Objection anticipated: The word person is not found in Scripture; Dionysius says we should not speak of God except through sacred Scripture
• Response: The meaning of person (subsisting, distinct) is found throughout Scripture; new terms can be coined to defend faith against heretics

Q2: Does ‘Person’ Signify Essence or Relation? #

• Traditional answer: From the power of the word itself, person signifies essence
• Thomistic answer: In divine things, person signifies relation as something subsisting (per modum substantiae), not relation as an accident as in creatures
• Reconciliation: Person signifies relation directly and essence obliquely, because in God essence and hypostasis are identical; therefore saying “person of the Father” = “substance of the Father” is correct

Q3: Is ‘Person’ Equivocal When Applied to God and Creatures? #

• Objection: Person in men and angels signifies something absolute; in God it signifies relation; therefore it is equivocal
• Response: The common definition (what distinguishes in that nature) applies univocally; diverse definitions of the less common do not create equivocation in the more common
• Clarification: The term is neither entirely univocal nor equivocal, but applied analogously with a common core meaning