133. The Word as Personal Name in God

Subscribe in Podcast App | Download Transcript

Lecture Notes

Main Topics #

The Four Senses of ‘Word’ (Verbum/Logos) #

Thomas distinguishes four senses of ‘word,’ three proper and one improper:

1. Exterior vocal sound: The sensible word that signifies an interior thought; named first because human knowledge begins with sensation
2. Imagined word: The imagination of the vocal sound before it is spoken; an interior echo preceding articulation
3. Interior thought (verbum cordis): The concept of the mind itself; this is the primary and proper sense, what the vocal sound and imagination both serve to express
4. Figurative sense (improperly): That which is signified by or accomplished through the word (e.g., “the word of the king” meaning the king’s command or its effects)

Berquist emphasizes that in translating Greek logos, English ‘word’ has not been extended to mean ’thought,’ creating a translation difficulty: the Greek term primarily means word but extends to thought, whereas English ‘word’ does not naturally carry the sense of interior concept.

Word as Personal, Not Essential #

Central thesis: Word (verbum) is said personally of God, not essentially.

• The interior thought has in its very definition that it proceeds from another—from the knowledge of the one conceiving
• Since divine persons are distinguished by relations of origin, and Word signifies such proceeding, it must be a personal name
• This contrasts with ‘understanding’ or ‘knowledge,’ which name the act or habit as such and are said essentially (common to all three persons)
• The proceeding constitutes the personal property, not the faculty from which it proceeds

The key distinction: When God understands Himself, there proceeds from that understanding a thought. Just as when I imagine something, an image proceeds from my imagining (the two are not identical), so the thought proceeds from understanding yet remains within the one understanding. This proceeding is what makes Word personal.

Word as the Son’s Proper Name #

• Word is the proper name of the Son because it signifies the emanation of understanding by which the Son proceeds from the Father
• This procession is called generation (generatio) because it produces one of the same nature
• The same personal property is expressed through multiple names emphasizing different perfections:
  • ‘Son’: emphasizes he is of the same nature as the Father
  • ‘Word’: emphasizes generation in an immaterial way (through understanding)
  • ‘Splendor’: emphasizes co-eternity
  • ‘Image’: emphasizes total similarity

Key Arguments #

Against the Arian Objection (First Objection) #

The problem: The Arians, whom Origen influenced, wished to deny that Word is a personal name properly said, lest they be forced to confess that the Son is not outside the Father’s substance—i.e., is consubstantial with the Father.

Thomas’s response:

• Something cannot be called a word metaphorically unless there is a proper sense of word by which it is made manifest
• If Word were said only figuratively of God, something would have to be manifested by this metaphorical word—but what? The interior concept itself
• Therefore, there must be a properly said Word (not merely figurative) in God
• The interior word proceeds from the one saying it while remaining in him; thus it cannot be a different substance

Conclusion: To deny Word as properly said is logically incoherent; some proper sense of Word must be admitted for any figurative use to make sense.

Against Word Being Essential (Second Objection) #

The Objection: Augustine and Anselm define word as knowledge, thinking, or insight. Since knowledge and understanding are said essentially in God (common to all three persons), Word should also be essential.

Thomas’s response:

• Knowledge (notitia) and understanding (intelligere) name the act or habit and are said essentially
• Word names what proceeds from understanding—the conception (conceptio)
• The distinction is critical: the form by which God understands (the divine substance) is essential; the thought that proceeds from understanding is personal
• Word = knowledge generated, not knowledge itself
• For God, being and understanding are identical; therefore if Word is the thought proceeding from God’s understanding, it must itself subsist—it is a person

Critical correction of language: Thomas gently corrects Augustine’s language. Calling Word simply ‘knowledge’ (notitia) is imprecise; it suggests the act of knowing rather than the thought that proceeds. Better to say Word is wisdom generated or knowledge generated—that is, the conception in which wisdom expresses itself.

Against Multiple Words/Speakers (Third Objection) #

The problem: If Word is personal, and each divine person understands, why doesn’t each person have a word or speak?

Thomas’s response (carefully distinguished):

• To speak/to say (dicere) in the strict sense means to bring forth a word, which is personal to the Father alone
• To be said (dici) belongs to each person in two ways:
  1. As what is understood/signified by the Word (the whole Trinity is expressed in the one Word)
  2. As creatures are said (expressed/manifested) through the Word
• To understand (intelligere) and to be understood differ from speaking:
  • To understand implies only a relation of the one understanding to the thing understood; no notion of origin
  • To speak implies a relation chiefly to the word brought forth (which itself implies origin)
• Therefore: only the Father speaks in the proper sense; but the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are all understood and thus said in the Word

Berquist’s clarification: This is why we must say ’the Father speaks’ (dicere), not ’the Father is spoken’ or ’the Son speaks.’ The Father is the sole speaker as the sole originator of the Word.

Against Word Implying Relation to Creatures (Fourth Objection) #

The problem: Psalm 148 speaks of creatures executing God’s word (fire, snow, winds). If Word is personal, does it imply essential relation to creatures?

Thomas’s response:

• In this text, Word is taken figuratively
• Creatures are said to ‘do the word of God’ insofar as they follow out an effect to which they are ordered from the Word conceived by divine wisdom
• Analogy: one is said to ‘do the word of the king’ when doing what is instigated by the king’s command
• The Word itself (as personal name) does not formally imply relation to creatures, only relation to the Father
• However, God in understanding Himself understands all creatures, so the divine nature included in Word does relate to creatures (but this is not part of the personal property)

Important Definitions #

Verbum (Word/Logos) #

• The interior thought or concept of the mind (conceptio)
• In Greek: logos—properly means word, extended to thought
• In God: the eternal thought proceeding from the Father’s self-understanding
• Signifies emanation of understanding from the one conceiving
• The only thought that is subsistent (a hypostasis, a person)
• Central to Johannine theology: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was toward God, and the Word was God” (John 1:1)—referring to interior thought, not vocal sound

Cogitatio (Thinking/Cogitation) #

• Properly consists in investigation of truth
• Implies movement and discursive process
• Has no place in God, who always actually understands and possesses perfect knowledge
• Distinguished from contemplation (contemplatio)—the resting in truth once attained
• Thomas corrects Anselm’s language: when Anselm says divine speaking is ‘cogitatio,’ he means it improperly, using the word in the broad sense of ’thinking’ or ‘intellection,’ not the strict sense of discursive investigation

Conceptio (Conception) #

• The very notion/idea expressed in thought
• Etymologically related to generatio (generation): to conceive is to bring forth
• In God: the Word is the conception of the Father’s understanding of Himself
• Because in God being and understanding are identical, this conception subsists as a person

Generatio (Generation) #

• The procession of the Son from the Father by way of understanding
• Differs from creation: generation produces one of the same nature; creation produces one of different nature
• In God, generation is immaterial and eternal, producing a person who is God
• The term emphasizes that the Son is not made or created but begotten

Examples & Illustrations #

Imagination vs. Understanding #

Berquist uses this pair repeatedly to illuminate the difference between interior thought and imagined word:

• One can imagine winning the lottery without reason (mental picturing without rational ground)
• One cannot truly think one will win without having reason (understanding requires rational foundation)
• Imagination can be arbitrary; understanding requires intelligibility
• This shows why ’thought’ better captures the divine Word than ‘imagination’: God’s Word is not arbitrary picturing but perfect intellectual comprehension

The Triangle Problem (Locke and Berkeley) #

Illustrates the confusion between imagined content and intellectual understanding:

• John Locke attempted to imagine a ‘general idea of triangle’
• Any triangle imagined must be isosceles, scalene, equilateral, right-angled, etc.
• Yet understanding what a triangle is in general transcends any particular image
• Berkeley wrongly concluded from this confusion that general ideas don’t exist
• In truth: the understanding grasps universals; imagination grasps particulars
• Application to theology: understanding the divine Word requires transcending sensible imagination

Imagining Before Speaking #

Berquist draws from his own experience as teacher:

• When preparing to explain something in class, one imagines the words one will use before speaking them
• This imagined word (imagination of vocal sound) is distinct from the thought itself
• Imagining the words is not yet thinking the content
• This illustrates the three senses: the imagined sound, the interior thought, and the exterior vocal sound that proceeds from both

God the Father as Speaker #

Berquist’s recurring metaphor from his poem:

• “God the Father said it all in one word”
• God the Father is the speaker (dicens) of creation
• The Son is the Word (verbum) eternally spoken
• The Holy Spirit is the Love binding speaker and spoken
• This captures the relational dynamics: only the Father speaks; the Father and Son are related in speaking

Notable Quotes #

“God the Father said it all in one word. No wonder when that word became a man, he spoke in words so few and said so much. He was the brevity and soul of wit.” — Berquist’s poem

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was toward God, and the Word was God.” — Gospel of John 1:1 (discussed as referring to interior thought, not vocal sound)

“To speak for the highest spirit is nothing other than to look upon something” — Anselm (cited by Augustine, On the Trinity, Book 15)

“Whoever can understand the word…not only before it sounds, but also before the images of the sounds are involved in our thinking, is able to see in some way a likeness of that divine Word.” — Augustine, On the Trinity, Book 15

“Word is wisdom generated.” — Augustine, On the Trinity, Book 7 (quoted by Thomas)

Questions Addressed #

Is Word Said Essentially or Personally in God? #

Resolution: Word is said personally, not essentially. It signifies something proceeding from another (the Father’s understanding). Since divine persons are distinguished by relations of origin, Word must be a personal name. Knowledge and understanding are essential (common to all three); Word is personal (proper to the Son).

Is Word the Son’s Proper Name? #

Resolution: Yes. Word properly signifies the emanation of understanding by which the Son proceeds from the Father. The same personal property (relation to the Father) is expressed through multiple names (‘Son,’ ‘Word,’ ‘Splendor,’ ‘Image’), each highlighting a different perfection of the Son.

Why Must Word Be Said Properly, Not Just Metaphorically? #

Resolution: Because something cannot be called a word metaphorically unless there is a proper sense of word to which it refers. To deny proper Word in God forces incoherence: what would the metaphorical word manifest if not a proper interior word? Therefore, logically, Word must be said properly in God.

How Can the Interior Thought Be a Person When Ours Is Not? #

Resolution: In us, to be and to understand are not identical; our thoughts are accidents inhering in the soul. In God, to be and to understand are completely identical; whatever pertains to God’s nature subsists as such. Therefore, God’s thought is not an accident but something subsisting in the divine nature—a person (hypostasis).

If Each Person Understands, Do All Three Speak? #

Resolution: Speaking (dicere) in the proper sense means bringing forth a word, which belongs only to the Father. Each person understands and is understood, but only the Father speaks as the one who brings forth the Word. The Son is the Word spoken; the Father is the speaker.

Theological Context #

This lecture addresses the foundational Trinitarian question: How is the Son eternally distinct from the Father yet of the same substance? The answer lies in the procession of understanding. Just as thought genuinely proceeds from a thinking mind yet remains within that mind and is not a different substance, so the Word genuinely proceeds from the Father yet is not separate from the Father’s divine nature. This is why the Arians, who denied consubstantiality, had to deny that Word is properly said in God—they grasped (correctly) that admitting proper procession of thought would logically entail consubstantiality, and they rejected that conclusion.

Thomas’s argument vindicates both the logical coherence of procession and the necessity of consubstantiality in light of what ‘Word’ properly means.