Each name [of God] has its own force and use for us.
Five Books on the Nature of God,
or
On the Divine Attributes
or
On the Divine Attributes
By Girolamo Zanchi
Translated by Patrick J. O'Banion
Book 1, Chapter 8, Quaestio 5
Volume 1 is available for order now from Merchant Royal Press
Quaestio 5
On to the fifth quaestio, which arises from the fourth: If, for that reason, God’s many names are said not to come into conflict with His simplicity, since they do not mean that various things are in God but really only one (namely, the divine essence), are these many names, then, all synonymous? Now, this would be utterly absurd, since they would then be nothing but idle repetition. Therefore, I respond with this thesis.
The Thesis
The various names that all signify the same essence of God are not synonymous.
This is the reason why: Although the many names really signify one and the same divine essence, nevertheless, the same divine essence [res] is indicated, not by one but by many different reasons [rationibus], and that is how we perceive it, as has already been stated. And so, the different names actually signify one thing [rem] existing outside of us (so to speak), but in our mind they have different reasons [rationes] among themselves, which signify the one thing.
Now, the reason [ratio] that is signified by a name is the concept that our mind makes of the thing signified by some name. But our intellect grasps one thing when it hears the name righteous and something else when it conceives of the name mercy. So, these names have various reasons [rationes] according to which they signify the same thing. Now, things are called synonyms when they not only signify the same thing but do so according to the same reason [rationem] and in the same manner, like sun and greater light. For those words signify precisely the same thing, and our minds do not conceive one thing from what the name sun signifies and something else from what the name greater light expresses. But when it comes to all of the divine names, there is no singular reason [ratio] but multiple, since the human mind conceives of one thing when it hears that God is righteous and another when it reads that He is merciful.
Accordingly, although the various names appear to be synonymous with respect to the one-and-the-same essence signified by God’s various names, nevertheless, they are not synonymous with respect to the diverse reasons [rationum] whereby that singular and identical essence [res] is indicated and which the various names reveal. This is why the names contain no meaningless or idle repetition. For, we are unable to grasp what that one most perfect essence[1] is like except by means of the various perfections that flow from it to us, and these many and various perfections in creatures need their names, if they are to be explained or understood. The reason why these various divine names are not idle repetition is because, as far as we are concerned, each and every name has a distinct use.
Thus, when we explain the singular virtue of the sun with various names—pure, shining, hot, and dry—we might seem to indicate various virtues in the sun, yet there is only one, which has the force for all these effects. So then, should we call these names synonymous? Or are they idle repetitions? Neither, because they signify that singular virtue by those various reasons [rationibus], and apart from them, we cannot otherwise grasp it.
Thus, the virtue of Christ whereby He makes us die to sin and live to God is singular. At the same time, it is denominated by various names, namely, mortification and vivification. Likewise, the power of the Holy Spirit whereby He renders us strong, wise, and chaste is singular. Nevertheless, because we cannot perceive that by a single word (as He does), Scripture familiarizes us with that one virtue by various names: the Spirit of counsel, the Spirit of fortitude, and others of that sort. And each name has its own force and use for us. I believe this topic has now also been clearly explained.
[1] οὐσίαν.