154. Divine Power and Notional Acts in God

Subscribe in Podcast App | Download Transcript

Lecture Notes

Main Topics #

The Problem of Power in God #

• Central Question: Must we posit powers of generating and spirating in God, or does this contradict God’s pure actuality?
• The Objection: Every power is either active or passive; God can have neither (He is pure act, not passive; active power seems to make persons into artifacts)
• Thomas’s Solution: Power signifies simply ’the beginning of some act’; this does not require passivity or composition

Power as Beginning #

• Power fundamentally means: that by which an agent acts; the principle or source of action
• The Father is the beginning of the Son’s generation; the Father and Son together are the beginning of the Holy Spirit’s procession
• Where there is real distinction (Father/Son, God/creature), power can be properly attributed
• Where there is only conceptual distinction (God’s understanding and willing), power is attributed only according to our mode of understanding and signifying

Two Senses of Possibility #

• First Sense: Possible as opposed to necessary—something that is able to be and not be
  • This sense does not apply to God or divine persons
  • It follows from passive power (potentia passiva), which God lacks
• Second Sense: Possible as containing no contradiction in being
  • The Son’s generation is “possible” in this sense (no contradiction that it be)
  • Even necessary things can be called “possible” in this second sense
  • This distinction parallels the distinction between things necessarily so and things contingently so

The Axiom of Beginning #

• Principle: Nothing is the beginning of itself; a beginning always implies distinction from that which is begun
• Application: The Father is distinguished from the Son; therefore the Father can truly be called the beginning of the Son
• Limitation: This axiom applies only where real distinction exists
  • Between Father and Son: real personal distinction—power is properly attributed
  • Between God’s understanding and loving: only conceptual distinction—power is attributed only according to our mode of signifying

Acts of Understanding vs. Acts of Will #

• The Son proceeds as Word, which is a conception of understanding
• The Holy Spirit proceeds as Love, which pertains to the will
• Crucially: Power in God is traditionally compared to effects (creatures), not to understanding and willing
• Why: Understanding and willing in God do not designate possession of one thing from another as distinct (either essentially or personally)
• Therefore: With respect to acts of understanding and willing, power cannot be attributed to God except according to our way of understanding and signifying only

The Distinction of Distinctions #

• Secundum rem (in things): Real distinction in the things themselves
  • Example: Substance and quantity are really distinct
  • Example: The Father and Son are really distinct
• Secundum rationem (in reason/thought only): Distinction only in our thoughts about the same thing
  • Example: Being and one—really the same thing, but our thoughts differ
  • Example: God’s understanding and loving—identical in reality, but conceived distinctly by us
  • Example: Power, generation, and fatherhood in God—identical in reality, but signified differently

Key Arguments #

Against Passive Power in God #

• Passive power (potentia passiva) belongs to what can be acted upon, changed, or moved
• God is pure act (actus purus) and cannot be passive
• Therefore, no passive power in God
• This does not prevent active power: The Father’s power to generate is not passive

Against Active Power as Making #

• The first objection claims: If God has active power, then the Father makes the Son and the Father and Son make the Holy Spirit
• Response: Power with respect to notional acts is not the power to make (create)
  • Generation and spiration are not makings; they are processions
  • Making involves transformation of matter; generation does not
  • A person generated is not an artifact or creature, but a person equally divine
  • The power of generating is the power to generate, not to make

Against Power as Contrary to Necessity #

• Objection: Power is said with respect to what is possible (able to be and not be), but divine persons are necessary, not possible
• Response: Possible has multiple meanings
  • Possible in the first sense (opposed to necessary) does not apply to God
  • Possible in the second sense (containing no contradiction) does apply even to necessary things
  • Just as it is possible (no contradiction) for the Son to be generated, so it is possible for God to be
  • Necessity does not eliminate the second sense of possibility

Why Power Cannot Be Attributed to Understanding and Willing in God #

• Understanding and willing are not acts by which distinct things proceed from God as distinct (essentially or personally)
• They do not have the character of making or causing what is other
• The axiom of beginning requires distinction; but understanding and willing in God involve only conceptual distinction
• Therefore: Power with respect to understanding and willing is attributed to God only according to our mode of understanding and signifying, not in the proper notion of power
• Comparison to creatures: In us, ability to understand really precedes actual understanding; in God, there is no such real distinction

Important Definitions #

• Potentia (Power): The beginning or source by which an agent acts; that by which one generates or produces
• Notional Acts: Acts that designate the origin of one divine person from another (generation, spiration)
• Generatio (Generation): The procession of the Son by way of understanding; the way the Father produces the Son
• Spiratio (Spiration): The procession of the Holy Spirit by way of will/love; the way the Father and Son produce the Holy Spirit
• Secundum rem: According to things; a distinction in the things themselves
• Secundum rationem: According to reason or thought; a distinction only in our understanding, not in reality
• Actus purus (Pure Act): God’s nature as pure actuality, without any potentiality, passivity, or unrealized capacity
• Principium (Beginning/Principle): That from which something proceeds or originates; requires real distinction from that which originates

Examples & Illustrations #

The Nature of Power #

• In creatures: A doctor has the power to heal (active power) and passive power to be healed by another
• In creatures: Passive power exists because creatures can be acted upon and changed
• In God: Only active power can exist; passive power is impossible (God cannot be acted upon or changed)

The Distinction Between Generation and Making #

• Making (Creation): Transforms matter into an artifact; the artifact is not of the same nature as the maker
• Generation: One who is generated receives the nature of the generator; parent and offspring share the same nature
• Divine Generation: The Son is not made but generated; He is God of God, nature of nature, not creature of Creator

Aristotle on Motion and Possibility #

• Aristotle distinguishes power primarily in terms of motion (from the Physics, Book IX)
• Power as the source of change in another as other; passive power as being changed by another
• But Aristotle extends power beyond motion to other domains (understanding, willing, etc.)
• The word must be “moved” (applied analogously) to non-motional contexts

The Meaning of Possible #

• “Two is able to be half of four”: In one sense, no (it’s necessarily half of four, not contingently)
• “Two is able to be half of four”: In another sense, yes (there is no contradiction in saying it)
• Wood is able to be a chair: Yes, in the sense that it can be and not be a chair
• The two senses must not be confused or mixed

Understanding and Loving in Creatures vs. God #

• In us: Understanding something is the beginning or source of our loving it
  • I must understand what wisdom is before I can love it
  • My understanding causally precedes my loving
  • Faith must precede hope; hope must precede charity (Vatican Council I, via Augustine)
• In God: Understanding and loving are identical acts
  • But we can reason from God’s understanding to His loving (as from beginning to what is begun)
  • This order exists in reality but as an order of nature, not of causation
  • God’s understanding of Himself is naturally the beginning of His loving Himself, though they are one identical act

Questions Addressed #

Q1: Is Power Properly Attributed to God with Respect to Notional Acts? #

• Objection: Power is either active or passive; God has neither; therefore power is not in God
• Response: Power is the beginning of action; the Father is the beginning of the Son’s generation; therefore power must be attributed to the Father

Q2: Does Attribution of Power Imply Passivity or Contingency in God? #

• Objection: Power concerns what is possible (contingent); but divine persons are necessary
• Response: Possible has multiple senses; even necessary things can be called possible in the sense of involving no contradiction; power does not require contingency

Q3: Why Can Power Be Attributed to Generation but Not to Understanding? #

• Reason: Generation involves real distinction between Father and Son; understanding involves only conceptual distinction in God
• Principle: Power signifies beginning; beginning requires real distinction (or at least conceptual distinction capable of supporting the proper notion of power)
• Result: Power can be properly attributed to generation; power with respect to understanding is attributed only according to our mode of signifying

Q4: How Can God’s Understanding Be the Beginning of His Loving if They Are Identical? #

• Analogy: The center of a circle is one point but can be defined as the beginning of multiple lines to different points on the circumference
• Application: God’s understanding (one point) is the beginning of His loving, but understanding and loving are one identical act
• Distinction: There is a real order in God corresponding to this, but not a real distinction (as there is between Father and Son)
• Implication: We can reason from understanding to loving as from beginning to what is begun, even though in God they are one

Notable Quotes #

“Power signifies nothing other than the beginning of some act.” — Thomas Aquinas (defining power)

“Nothing is the beginning of itself.” — Aristotle, Physics I (the axiom of beginning)

“From words to sort of put forth heresy, heresy.” — Thomas Aquinas (on how easily one can stumble into heresy through imprecise language about divine generation vs. creation)

“Insofar as the essence of the Father communicated to the Son by generation subsists in him” — Thomas Aquinas (describing how generation involves communication of substance as formal principle)

“The divine nature is said to be created and generated—created because the Father is unchanged in generating the Son, and generated because the Son is of the same nature as the Father.” — Hilary of Poitiers (cited by Thomas on why two words are necessary to express one divine act)