Okay, so, after thinking about this issue some more, and consulting some other sources (including a professor in a Catholic seminary), I stand by the words that I stated in my earlier post. In particular, I stand by what I said in stating that it is
not proper to say that, according to Catholic theology, the begetting of the Son from the Father is a “process”. While the generation of the Son from the Father is a PROCESSION (perhaps that is the word you, Paidion, heard from Catholic teachers—similar sounding to “process”, but a very different idea), it is not a “process”, for the word, “process” carries with it the implication that there is a series of actions and changes that are required to complete the “process”, and this is certainly NOT what Catholic theology holds concerning the eternal generation of the Son from the Father.
So, again, what Catholic theology holds concerning the generation of the Son from the Father is that it is indeed an eternal procession and generation—meaning, a generation that exists outside of time (as Paidion alluded to in one of his recent replies). And though it is true to say that something eternal is now, always was, always will be, and always remains the same (and, thus, God is eternal based on this description), the essence of something being eternal is that it is completely outside of time. And, so, while there is certainly some truth in saying that the Father has always begotten the Son, is begetting Him now, and will always beget Him, this statement is not taken to mean that this begetting occurs IN TIME (as if it was a “process”). Rather, such statements are to be understood as meaning the generation of the Son is a
single and complete act, occurring completely outside of time, in and for all eternity—but, note this again, it is ONE, SINGLE, COMPLETE ACT: the Father generates the Son by an operation of self-understanding that is, at once, and for all eternity, perfectly complete (the Father does not “grow” in His understanding of Himself and thus have a “process” of generating a more perfect Word throughout time; but, rather, the Father, in one single “moment”, if you will,
in eternity,
perfectly understands Himself and, from this self-understanding, generates one Idea/Thought/Word, which perfectly Images Himself, so perfectly, in fact, that this Word IS the very same Divine "substance"/essence as the Father, for all eternity….there is no change or “process” in God, whether in God the Father generating or in the Word being generated—rather, God is perfect and perfectly complete, in and for all eternity, with absolutely no change or “process” in Him whatsoever...and, so, God the Father is perfect and perfectly complete for all eternity, with no change or "process" in Him at all, as is also the case with God the Son....for
BOTH are
"the one true God" (cf., Jn. 17:3)...)
And, thus, it can be stated in Scripture, “You are my Son, TODAY I have begotten you,” (Ps. 2:7, etc.) where “TODAY” stands for, one could say, the “ETERNAL DAY” in which God eternally exists. Even the pre-Christian philosophers had a notion of God generating one perfect thought, which thought is Himself, for all eternity. Thus, for example, St. Thomas Aquinas, the Catholic Church’s greatest theologian, commenting on the “Metaphysics” of Aristotle once wrote,
“[God’s] act of understanding, which is of himself, is eternal and always in the same state.” (Note the use of the
singular, "act"-- not a plural, "act
s", or "process of understanding Himself", or anything like that-- rather, just one, eternal, singular
act of self-understanding, or
intelligible operation , by which God perfectly understands Himself in and for all eternity).
This philosophical notion that God’s act of understanding, which is an understanding of Himself, being eternal and always in the same state, while it does not “PROVE” the Trinity,
does perfectly
fit with what is revealed in the Scriptures, namely, that God eternally generates a
Word, i.e., an interior Thought of Himself, which Word/Thought is so perfect that it actually
is HIMSELF. And this generation, though occurring in and for all eternity, is, again, NOT to be understood as a “process"-- as if there was “change” in God-- that is occurring over a prolonged (even everlasting) period of time. But, rather, this generation is an
eternal act.
And, to interrupt myself for a moment: it is important to note that there
is a
real difference-- and a real
big difference-- between an act being
eternal, i.e., occurring in eternity (completely outside of time) and an act(s) that "last forever" (i.e., lasting forever
in time). "Being eternal" and "lasting forever (in time)" are not quite the same thing. This can be seen by noting that, though, something which IS eternal ALSO lasts forever (in time), eg., God, still something which lasts forever
in time is not necessarily "eternal"; for, that which is eternal is, by definition,
outside of time completely (and it is possible, at least theoretically, for something to last forever
in time without being completely outside of time). The
main point here being that the very
notions of being "eternal" and of "lasting forever" are not quite the same
notions (for, again, the former has the notion of being completely outside of time, the latter the notion of having being at all times whatsoever or, at least, all times in the future).
Thus, this generation of the Word/Son from the Father is to be understood, as much as we can understand it, as a single, perfect, and
complete procession of generation, which perfectly, in and for all eternity,
by one single intellectual act (or "operation") of self-understanding by the Father, generates His Perfect Image, the Word…to Whom, with this same Father, and the Holy Spirit, belongs all glory and majesty now and for all eternity. Amen…
I hope that makes some more sense…(though, of course, in dealing with this, or any Mystery, there will always be more questions to ask, and to seek to answer, out of a love for God, Whom we wish to know, always, more and more perfectly!)
In Christ, the Second Person of the Trinity, and Son of the Blessed Mary,
BrotherAlan
P.S.
As this is now a thread totally on the Trinity, it seems, it would be good to just start a new thread on the Trinity...and, so, I have started one (under the "Trinity" section)....see
http://theos.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=39&t=5030
