Vatican 1 confusion

[fakename]

papalencyclicals.net/Councils/ecum20.htm

I was wondering what the link meant by this: If anyone says that God is a universal or indefinite being which by self determination establishes the totality of things distinct in genera, species and individuals:

let him be anathema.

But if God is definable (which he isn’t) then he would be called Being which is something that is indeterminate since it is a catch-all for everything existing. Is it okay to believe this in your interpretation or not? I don’t think it is good to believe that God=Being but I think the reasons for conditionally (that is, when I say the consequent after, “**If **God is definable…”) believing such to be so good, that I’m not sure if the Vatican wanted to restrict this understanding.

 

[AnthonyPadua001]

I believe this statement from Vatican I is referring to an issue addressed by Aquinas in his Summa Theologica (Part 1, Question 3, Article 5 - newadvent.org/summa/1003.htm#article5). While I’m not a Thomist and definitely don’t pretend to be, my understanding is that you cannot refer to God as “being” in the sense that He belongs to a genus or species.

On the more Biblical side of things, when God reveals His name to Moses (Ex 3:14), many have understood part of the rich meaning behind His name signifies that He in fact exists. What can we say about God? Perhaps the most accurate thing we can say is nothing at all (for the second we describe Him we limit Him to our language/understanding/knowledge/experience etc.) However, simply saying that God exists (the fullness of “Being” though not belonging to a particular group of beings - if that makes sense) is not a bad attempt.