Chapter 5.—In God, Substance is Spoken Improperly, Essence Properly.

10. If, however, it is fitting that God should be said to subsist—(For this word is rightly applied to those things, in which as subjects those things are, which are said to be in a subject, as color or shape in body. For body subsists, and so is substance; but those things are in the body, which subsists and is their subject, and they are not substances, but are in a substance: and so, if either that color or that shape ceases to be, it does not deprive the body of being a body, because it is not of the being of body, that it should retain this or that shape or color; therefore neither changeable nor simple things are properly called substances.)—If, I say, God subsists so that He can be properly called a substance, then there is something in Him as it were in a subject, and He is not simple, i.e. such that to Him to be is the same as is anything else that is said concerning Him in respect to Himself; as, for instance, great, omnipotent, good, and whatever of this kind is not unfitly said of God. But it is an impiety to say that God subsists, and is a subject in relation to His own goodness, and that this goodness is not a substance or rather essence, and that God Himself is not His own goodness, but that it is in Him as in a subject. And hence it is clear that God is improperly called substance, in order that He may be understood to be, by the more usual name essence, which He is truly and properly called; so that perhaps it is right that God alone should be called essence. For He is truly alone, because He is unchangeable; and declared this to be His own name to His servant Moses, when He says, “I am that I am;” and, “Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel: He who is hath sent me unto you.”642    Ex. iii. 14 However, whether He be called essence, which He is properly called, or substance, which He is called improperly, He is called both in respect to Himself, not relatively to anything; whence to God to be is the same thing as to subsist; and so the Trinity, if one essence, is also one substance. Perhaps therefore they are more conveniently called three persons than three substances.

CAPUT V.

10. In Deo substantia abusive dicitur, essentia proprie. Si tamen dignum est ut Deus dicatur subsistere: de his enim rebus recte intelligitur, in quibus subjectis sunt ea quae in aliquo subjecto esse dicuntur, sicut color aut forma in corpore. Corpus enim subsistit, et ideo substantia est: illa vero in subsistente atque subjecto corpore, quae non substantiae sunt, sed in substantia; et ideo si esse desinat, vel ille color, vel illa forma, non adimunt corpori esse corpus, quia non hoc ei est esse, quod illam vel illam formam coloremve retinere. Res ergo mutabiles neque simplices, proprie dicuntur substantiae. Deus autem si subsistit ut substantia proprie dici possit, inest in eo aliquid tanquam in subjecto, et non est simplex, cui hoc sit esse quod illi est quidquid aliud de illo ad illum dicitur, sicut magnus, omnipotens, bonus, et si quid hujusmodi de Deo non incongrue dicitur: nefas est autem dicere ut subsistat et subsit Deus bonitati suae, atque illa bonitas non substantia sit vel potius essentia, neque ipse Deus sit bonitas sua, sed in illo sit tanquam in subjecto: unde manifestum est Deum abusive substantiam vocari, ut nomine usitatiore intelligatur essentia, quod vere ac proprie dicitur; ita ut fortasse solum Deum dici oporteat essentiam. Est enim vere solus, quia incommutabilis est, idque nomen suum famulo suo Moysi enuntiavit, cum ait, Ego sum qui sum; et, dices ad eos: Qui est, misit me ad vos (Exod. III, 14). Sed tamen sive essentia dicatur quod proprie dicitur, sive substantia quod abusive; utrumque ad se dicitur, 0943 non relative ad aliquid. Unde hoc est Deo esse quod subsistere, et ideo si una essentia Trinitas, una etiam substantia. Fortassis igitur commodius dicuntur tres personae, quam tres substantiae.