QUESTION 33 — THE PERSON OF THE FATHER
We must, logically, deal with Persons in particular. And first of all about the person of the Father:
1. Is it appropriate for the Father to be described as “Principle”?
2. Is the name “Father” the proper name of this Person?
3. Is it, in God, a personal name before being an attribute of the essence?
4. Is it proper for the Father to be unbegotten?
Article 1 — Is it appropriate for the Father to be described as “Principle”?
Objections: 1. It cannot be said that the Father is “principle” of the Son or of the Holy Spirit. Because principle and cause are all one, according to the Philosopher. Now, we do not say that the Father is the cause of the Son. So we should not say that it is the principle either. 2. To every principle there is a term which depends on it. Therefore, if the Father is the principle of the Son, it follows that the Son depends on the Father, consequently that he is created. Obvious error. 3 . The name “principle” is based on a …More