On the Divine Names and the Mystical Theology — trans. C. E. Rolt
The translator’s English as printed (C. E. Rolt). The original-language text is not held; names are romanised as the translator printed them.
Jesus being above all essence1 has stooped to an essential state in which all the truths of human nature meet; and all the other revelations of Scripture whereof my Outlines of Divinity treat. And in the book of the Dzvzwe Names 1 have considered the meaning as concerning God of the titles Good, Existent, Life, Wisdom, Power and of the other titles which the understanding frames, and in my Symbolic Divinity I have considered what are the metaphorical titles drawn from the world of sense and applied to the nature of God; what are the mental or material images we form of God or the functions and instruments of activity we attribute to Him; what are the places where He dwells and the robes He is adorned with; what is meant by God’s anger, grief, and indignation, or the divine inebriation and wrath; what is meant by God’s oath and His malediction, by His slumber and awaking, and all the other inspired imagery of allegoric symbolism. And I doubt not that you have also observed how far more copious are the last terms than the first for the doctrines of God’s Nature and the exposition of His Names could not but be briefer than the Symbolic Divinity.2 For the more that we soar upwards the more our language becomes restricted to the compass of purely intellectual conceptions, even as in the present instance plunging into the Darkness which is above the intellect we shall find ourselves reduced not merely to brevity of speech but even to absolute dumbness both of speech and thought. Now in the former treatises the course of the argument, as it came down from the highest to the lowest categories; embraced an ever-widening number of conceptions which increased at each stage of the descent, but in the present treatise it mounts upwards from below towards the category of transcendence, and in proportion to its ascent it contracts its terminology, and when the whole ascent is passed it will be totally dumb, being at last wholly united with Him Whom words cannot describe. But why is it, you will ask, that after beginning from the highest category when one method was affirmative we begin from the lowest category where it is negative?? Because, when affirming the existence of that which transcends all affirmation, we were obliged to start from that which is most akin to It, and then to make the affirmation on which the rest depended ; but when pursuing the negative method, to reach that which is beyond all negation, we must start by applying our negations to those qualities which differ most from the ultimate goal. Surely it is truer to affirm that God is life and goodness than that He is air or stone, and truer to deny that drunkenness or fury can be attributed to Him than to deny that we may apply to Him the categories of human thought.t
Persons. The Rays = God the Son and God the Holy Ghost, Who, as manifested Differentiations, eternally proceed from the Father. The separate being of the Three Persons exists on the plane of Manifestation (cf. St. Augustine, who says: “They exist secundum relativum and not secundum essentiam”). [Augustine says non secundum substantiam. The translator quotes it correctly in his introduction, p. 10.—Ed.] But this plane is eternal. They wholly interpenetrate, and the state of rest is co-eternal with the Act of Their Procession, because They possess eternal repose and eternal motion.
1 This is a case of communtcatio tdiomatum (cf. the title “Mother of God” applied to the Blessed Virgin Mary). The Godhead of our Lord is Super-Essential, not His Manhood.
2 The Symbolical Divinity was an attempt to spiritualize “popular” theology, the Divine Names sought to spiritualize philosophical theology, the present treatise is a direct essay in Spiritual Theology.
Jesus, being above all essence,1 has stooped to an essential state in which all the truths of human nature meet; and all the other revelations of Scripture of which my Outlines of Divinity treat. In the book of the Divine Names I have considered the meaning, as applied to God, of the titles Good, Existent, Life, Wisdom, Power, and of the other titles which the understanding frames. In my Symbolic Divinity I have considered what metaphorical titles are drawn from the world of sense and applied to the nature of God; what mental or material images we form of God, or what functions and instruments of activity we attribute to Him; what the places are where He dwells and the robes He is adorned with; what is meant by God’s anger, grief, and indignation, or by the divine inebriation and wrath; what is meant by God’s oath and His malediction, by His slumber and awaking, and by all the other inspired imagery of allegorical symbolism.
And I do not doubt that you have also observed how much more copious the last are than the first; for the doctrines of God’s Nature and the exposition of His Names could not but be briefer than the Symbolic Divinity.2 For the higher we soar, the more our language is restricted to the compass of purely intellectual conceptions; so in the present instance, plunging into the Darkness which is above the intellect, we shall find ourselves reduced not merely to brevity of speech but to absolute dumbness of both speech and thought.
In the former treatises the course of the argument, as it came down from the highest to the lowest categories, embraced an ever-widening number of conceptions, which increased at each stage of the descent. In the present treatise it mounts upwards from below towards the category of transcendence, contracting its terminology in proportion to its ascent; and when the whole ascent is passed it will be totally dumb, being at last wholly united with Him Whom words cannot describe.
But why is it, you will ask, that after beginning from the highest category when the method was affirmative, we now begin from the lowest category where it is negative?2 Because, when affirming the existence of that which transcends all affirmation, we had to start from what is most akin to It, and then make the affirmation on which the rest depended; but when pursuing the negative method, to reach that which is beyond all negation, we must begin by applying our negations to the qualities that differ most from the ultimate goal. Surely it is truer to affirm that God is life and goodness than that He is air or stone, and truer to deny that drunkenness or fury can be attributed to Him than to deny that the categories of human thought may be applied to Him.
Persons. The Rays = God the Son and God the Holy Ghost, Who, as manifested Differentiations, eternally proceed from the Father. The separate being of the Three Persons exists on the plane of Manifestation (cf. St. Augustine, who says: “They exist according to relation (secundum relativum) and not according to essence (secundum essentiam)”). [Augustine says “not according to substance” (non secundum substantiam). The translator quotes it correctly in his introduction, p. 10.—Ed.] But this plane is eternal. They wholly interpenetrate, and the state of rest is co-eternal with the Act of Their Procession, because They possess eternal repose and eternal motion.
1 This is a case of communicatio idiomatum (cf. the title “Mother of God” applied to the Blessed Virgin Mary). It is our Lord’s Godhead that is Super-Essential, not His Manhood.
2 The Symbolical Divinity was an attempt to spiritualize “popular” theology; the Divine Names sought to spiritualize philosophical theology; the present treatise is a direct essay in Spiritual Theology.