Article 3 — Whether "Word" is a proper name of the Holy Spirit

Third, it is asked whether Word is a proper name of the Holy Spirit? (Parallel texts: ST I.34.2, ad 5; In I Sent., d. 27, q. 2, a. 2, qa. 2; Commentary on the Hebrews, ch. 1, lect. 2; Contra errores Graecorum, part 1, ch. 12; On the Power of God, q. 9, a. 9, ad 8.)

Obj. 1: It seems that it is, for Basil says: the Holy Spirit is related to the Son in the same way in which the Son is related to the Father; and, for this reason, the Son is the Word of God, and the Spirit is the word of the Son. (Basil, Adversus Eunomium, bk. 5 (PG 29:732A) from the book De fide S. Trinitatis, para. 58; cf. Aquinas, Contra errores Graecorum, part 1, ch. 12.) Therefore, the Holy Spirit can be called a word.

Obj. 2: In the Epistle to the Hebrews 1:3 the following is said of the Son: who being the brightness of his glory, and the figure of his substance, and upholding all things by the word of his power. Hence, the Son has a word proceeding from himself by which he upholds all things. But in God no one proceeds from the Son except the Holy Spirit. Therefore, the Holy Spirit can be called the Word.

Obj. 3: As Augustine says: the Word is loving knowledge. (Augustine, On the Trinity, bk. 9, ch. 10 (PL 42:969).) But, just as knowledge is appropriated to the Son, so love is appropriated to the Holy Spirit. Consequently, the Word is a proper name for the Holy Spirit as well as for the Son.

Obj. 4: The Gloss on upholding all things by the word of his power (Heb 1:3) says that word should be taken as meaning a command. (Glossa interlinearis, at Hebrews 1:3 (in Glossa ordinaria 6.795); Peter Lombard, Commentary on Hebrews, at Hebrews 1:3 (PL 192:406B).) But a command is classified as a sign of the will. (Cf. Peter Lombard, Sentences, bk. 1, d. 45, ch. 6.) Therefore, since the Holy Spirit proceeds from the will, it seems that he can be called Word.

Obj. 5: The notion of word implies a making manifest. Now, the Holy Spirit manifests the Father and the Son, just as the Son manifests the Father; for, as we read in the Gospel of St. John 16:13: the Holy Spirit teaches all truth. Therefore, the Holy Spirit should be called Word.

On the contrary, Augustine says: the Son is called Word for the same reason that he is called Son. (It is actually Augustine, On the Trinity, bk. 7, ch. 2 (PL 42:936).) Now, the Son is called Son because he is generated. Therefore, he is called Word, also, because he is generated. The Holy Spirit, however, is not generated; hence, he is not a word.

I answer that "word" and image are used differently by us and our holy men (For example, Richard of St. Victor, On the Trinity, bk. 6, cc. 11, 19 (PL 196:975, 983); Augustine, On the Trinity, bk. 6, ch. 2 (PL 42:925).) than they were used by the ancient Greek doctors, (Basil, Gregory of Caesarea, Athanasius, and Cyril of Alexandria according to Aquinas, Contra errores Graecorum, part 1, ch. 10; part 2, ch. 5.) who used these names to signify everything that proceeds from the Godhead, and indifferently called the Son and the Holy Spirit "Word" and "Image." Our saints and ourselves, however, have followed the custom of canonical Scripture in the use of these words; and Scripture seldom if ever uses "Word" or "Image" for any one except the Son. We are not now concerned with image, but that our use of "word" is reasonable enough will appear from the following. "Word" implies a making manifest, and manifestation is found essentially only in the intellect. If something outside the intellect is said to “manifest” this is true only to the extent that something of it remains in the intellect. Hence, what proximately manifests is within the intellect, even though what remotely manifests can be outside of it. Consequently, "word" is used properly of that which proceeds from the intellect. Of that which does not proceed from the intellect it can be used only metaphorically; that is, it can be used of such a thing only in so far as it manifests in some way or other. I say, therefore, that in God only the Son proceeds from the intellect, because he proceeds from one person; the Holy Spirit, who proceeds from two persons, proceeds from the will. Consequently, the Holy Spirit can be called word only metaphorically, that is, only in so far as whatever manifests can be called a word. The quotation from Basil should be understood in this sense.

Reply Obj. 1: The reply is clear from our discussion.

Reply Obj. 2: According to Basil’s the word referred to in this passage is the Holy Spirit. (Basil, Adversus Eunomium, bk. 5 (PG 29:732A) from the book De fide S. Trinitatis, para. 58; cf. Aquinas, Contra errores Graecorum, part 1, ch. 12.) If this is true, our reply is the same as we gave to the first difficulty. Or, if we follow the Gloss, the word referred to is the command of the Son. (Glossa interlinearis, at Hebrews 1:3 (in Glossa ordinaria 6.795); Peter Lombard, Commentary on Hebrews, at Hebrews 1:3 (PL 192:406B).) This is called the word metaphorically, since we ordinarily command by means of a word.

Reply Obj. 3: Knowledge belongs to the notion of word since it implies, as it were, the very essence of word; but love belongs to the notion of word, not as something pertaining to its essence, but as something that accompanies a word. The passage cited shows this. Hence, one cannot conclude that the Holy Spirit is a word, but, rather, that he proceeds from the Word.

Reply Obj. 4: A word manifests not only what is in the intellect but also what is in the will, in so far as the will itself is also understood. Hence, even though a command is a sign of the will, it can be called a word and it pertains to the intellect.

Reply Obj. 5: The reply is clear from our discussion.