What is name?

[billcu1]

What exactly is name when dealing with God? Thomism seems to say that Word is the proper name of the son and also a name of Son is image. The Holy spirit’s name is love.
What exactly is this saying.

 

[Ad_Orientem]

Those names specifically identify the divine persons by their unique relations.

The Father’s thought of himself is so perfect, it is a perfect copy of himself. For this reason this divine copy is called the Son, the Word, or the image of the Father. Theologians say the Son proceeds from the Father by “intellectual generation.”

The Holy Ghost, on the other hand, proceeds by “spiration,” which is associated with the divine will, i.e., the love between the Father and the Son. These are the only differences between the divine persons.

For these reasons, divine acts of power are generally attributed (in theology, “appropriated”) to the Father, acts of wisdom to the Son, and acts of love to the Holy Ghost.

 

[billcu1]

Those names specifically identify the divine persons by their unique relations.

The Father’s thought of himself is so perfect, it is a perfect copy of himself. For this reason this divine copy is called the Son, the Word, or the image of the Father. Theologians say the Son proceeds from the Father by “intellectual generation.”

The Holy Ghost, on the other hand, proceeds by “spiration,” which is associated with the divine will, i.e., the love between the Father and the Son. These are the only differences between the divine persons.

For these reasons, divine acts of power are generally attributed (in theology, “appropriated”) to the Father, acts of wisdom to the Son, and acts of love to the Holy Ghost.

And I’ve read you can’t have an image of an image. So the holy spirit is not an image. Procession within the Godhead if I am correct is: Father produces son, then father and son together produce the holy spirit. Does that sound right? If man has only one person which is it? Is it right to pray to specific persons of God?

 

[HardRockGTR]

One thing I never understood is why God has an inherent name (YHWH), as part of his nature. I doubt He just “named” Himself.

 

[polytropos]

One thing I never understood is why God has an inherent name (YHWH), as part of his nature. I doubt He just “named” Himself.

Natures (or essences, or real definitions) can be thought of as the “intrinsic name” of anything. Humans, for instance, are “rational animals.”

To say that God’s name is YHWH, “I am Who am,” is to say that his nature or essence is just to exist. God exists because of what He is. That is not true of any other thing: humans have a real definition (rational animality), but our real definition does not entail existence, since we once did not exist and no part of our nature necessitates our existing. God, on the other hand, is subsistent being itself; He could not not exist.

I recently came across a quote that is tangentially relevant:
“God is not the name of God, but an opinion about Him.” ~ Pope Sixtus I

 

[Ad_Orientem]

And I’ve read you can’t have an image of an image. So the holy spirit is not an image.

“Image” is just a metaphor.

Procession within the Godhead if I am correct is: Father produces son, then father and son together produce the holy spirit. Does that sound right?

Yes

If man has only one person which is it?

The indwelling is all three persons in our souls, but it is appropriated to the Holy Ghost.

Is it right to pray to specific persons of God?

Yes. But we pray principally to the Father

 

[billcu1]

So does Aquinus or anyone have the idea God was once “something” or “somethings” that simply became so knowledgeable that there was nothing else that could be known and so on his own became “self-aware”. Aware that he was and was all and there was nothing else? The Father’s knowledge of himself is so perfect he created his “image” or the son. Then the holy spirit within the Godhead. We were created divinely aware and fell but will eventually become what we were not created with self-awareness. When our substance becomes like that of God and there is no other substance other than our own.

id Theologica Germanica, a catholic text rediscovered and published by Martin Luther.

 

[Ad_Orientem]

So does Aquinus or anyone have the idea God was once “something” or “somethings” that simply became so knowledgeable that there was nothing else that could be known and so on his own became “self-aware”.

No. That’s not a Catholic idea, and is incompatible with Catholic theology. God is “immutable” (unchanging). He is, from eternity, perfect, complete, and actual. Creatures go from potency to act, but not God; he is pure act.

St. Thomas says that " God’s existence includes in itself life and wisdom, because nothing of the perfection of being can be wanting to Him who is subsisting being itself." (S.T. I, Q4, a2)

Remember that the generation of the Son and the Holy Ghost is not something that happened at some point in time; the Godhead transcends time, the persons are co-equal and co-eternal. The 2nd and 3rd persons are generated eternally.

 

[billcu1]

“Image” is just a metaphor.

Yes

The indwelling is all three persons in our souls, but it is appropriated to the Holy Ghost.

Yes. But we pray principally to the Father

I asked this because Jesus said he would send the holy spirit to teach. The opening prayer of Vatican 2 that I have is a prayer to the holy spirit.

 

[Ad_Orientem]

There’s a Sequence in the Mass for Pentecost which is addressed to the Holy Ghost. In Latin it’s called the Veni Sancte Spiritus. Here’s a literal translation:

Come, Holy Spirit,
send forth the heavenly
radiance of your light.

Come, father of the poor,
come, giver of gifts,
come, light of the heart.

Greatest comforter,
sweet guest of the soul,
sweet consolation.

In labor, rest,
in heat, temperance,
in tears, solace.

O most blessed light,
fill the inmost heart
of your faithful.

Without your grace,
there is nothing in us,
nothing that is not harmful.

Cleanse that which is unclean,
water that which is dry,
heal that which is wounded.

Bend that which is inflexible,
fire that which is chilled,
correct what goes astray.

Give to your faithful,
those who trust in you,
the sevenfold gifts.

Grant the reward of virtue,
grant the deliverance of salvation,
grant eternal joy.

 

[HardRockGTR]

Natures (or essences, or real definitions) can be thought of as the “intrinsic name” of anything. Humans, for instance, are “rational animals.”

To say that God’s name is YHWH, “I am Who am,” is to say that his nature or essence is just to exist. God exists because of what He is. That is not true of any other thing: humans have a real definition (rational animality), but our real definition does not entail existence, since we once did not exist and no part of our nature necessitates our existing. God, on the other hand, is subsistent being itself; He could not not exist.

Ah, so YHWH is more like a definition of God, then.

 

[polytropos]

Ah, so YHWH is more like a definition of God, then.

Yes. And given that God is one, it is the closest thing we could give to a “name.”

 

[billcu1]

Ah, so YHWH is more like a definition of God, then.

I don’t like to mix OT with catholicism myself. There is a whole Jewish tradition that explains YHWH. It was a local cannanite god from olden times. Remember Abraham wasn’t a monotheist (so to speak) Yes he knew there was one supreme creator but subservient gods too.

 

[HardRockGTR]

I don’t like to mix OT with catholicism myself. There is a whole Jewish tradition that explains YHWH. It was a local cannanite god from olden times. Remember Abraham wasn’t a monotheist (so to speak) Yes he knew there was one supreme creator but subservient gods too.

This is so weird. All my life I was told that in the Abrahamic faiths there has always only been one God, not many with a great one.

Yes. And given that God is one, it is the closest thing we could give to a “name.”

Interesting. Thanks for clearing that up!

 

[StrawberryJam]

I don’t like to mix OT with catholicism myself. There is a whole Jewish tradition that explains YHWH. It was a local cannanite god from olden times. Remember Abraham wasn’t a monotheist (so to speak) Yes he knew there was one supreme creator but subservient gods too.

Not sure you are teaching catholic theology here, but willing to learn if you actually are.
Which subservient gods did Abraham believe in?
IOW, What the heck are you really trying to say?

 

[Ad_Orientem]

I don’t like to mix OT with catholicism myself. There is a whole Jewish tradition that explains YHWH. It was a local cannanite god from olden times. Remember Abraham wasn’t a monotheist (so to speak) Yes he knew there was one supreme creator but subservient gods too.

I’m not sure what you mean. The Old Testament cannot be “mixed” with Catholicism because it is part of it. Perhaps you are referring to *modern *Judaism. I don’t like to mix that with Catholicism, either, and I suspect that is the source of the tradition to which you refer.

As to the claim that Abraham was not a monotheist, God revealed himself and his truths gradually and in stages. The Patriarchs may not have been always aware of all the truths that were revealed by the time of Christ, but certainly their substance. They believed in the one true God and in his coming Christ. I seriously doubt that Abraham died a henotheist, if he ever was one. It is also possible to know God is the only true God, but to have idols because of our fallen nature.

Further, the word “gods” does not mean the same thing in every place in scripture. It may indeed refer to God’s rivals (You shall have no gods before me–Ex. 20:3), or it could be a loose reference, for example, to the communion of saints, or to the deification of the blessed (I have said you are gods–Ps. 82:6; Jn 10:34).

 

[billcu1]

I’m not sure what you mean. The Old Testament cannot be “mixed” with Catholicism because it is part of it. Perhaps you are referring to *modern *Judaism. I don’t like to mix that with Catholicism, either, and I suspect that is the source of the tradition to which you refer.

As to the claim that Abraham was not a monotheist, God revealed himself and his truths gradually and in stages. The Patriarchs may not have been always aware of all the truths that were revealed by the time of Christ, but certainly their substance. They believed in the one true God and in his coming Christ. I seriously doubt that Abraham died a henotheist, if he ever was one. It is also possible to know God is the only true God, but to have idols because of our fallen nature.

Further, the word “gods” does not mean the same thing in every place in scripture. It may indeed refer to God’s rivals (You shall have no gods before me–Ex. 20:3), or it could be a loose reference, for example, to the communion of saints, or to the deification of the blessed (I have said you are gods–Ps. 82:6; Jn 10:34).

Yes I meant modern Judaism. They don’t really know what the ancients taught either I don’t believe. The church is the oldest institution around and what we know about hellenistic times comes from what the church teaches, for example of course. Biblical archeology reveals a lot too. Especially looking at it from a non-religious point of view.

 

[billcu1]

There’s a Sequence in the Mass for Pentecost which is addressed to the Holy Ghost. In Latin it’s called the Veni Sancte Spiritus. Here’s a literal translation:

Come, Holy Spirit,
send forth the heavenly
radiance of your light.

Come, father of the poor,
come, giver of gifts,
come, light of the heart.

Greatest comforter,
sweet guest of the soul,
sweet consolation.

In labor, rest,
in heat, temperance,
in tears, solace.

O most blessed light,
fill the inmost heart
of your faithful.

Without your grace,
there is nothing in us,
nothing that is not harmful.

Cleanse that which is unclean,
water that which is dry,
heal that which is wounded.

Bend that which is inflexible,
fire that which is chilled,
correct what goes astray.

Give to your faithful,
those who trust in you,
the sevenfold gifts.

Grant the reward of virtue,
grant the deliverance of salvation,
grant eternal joy.

Thank you very much for that prayer. I find it very effective.