216. Antonomasia in Scripture and the Good of Human Nature

Subscribe in Podcast App | Download Transcript

Lecture Notes

Main Topics #

Antonomasia as a Rhetorical Device #

Definition and Etymology:

• Antonomasia (Greek: ἀντονομασία) literally means “to give a thing another name”
• A figure of speech where a general name applied to many things is used for one particular instance because that instance stands out
• The reverse also occurs: a proper name becomes a common noun (e.g., “a Romeo” for a lover, “a Hamlet” for someone slow to act)

Examples in Scripture:

• “The Bible” - by antonomasia means “the Book” par excellence
• “Gospel” (good news) - stands out as THE good news among all good news
• “The evil one” (ho poniros, masculine singular with article) - refers to Satan among all evil persons
• “The good” (ho agathos) - God referred to by His supreme attribute in Matthew 19:17
• “Christ” (Christus) - “the Anointed One,” though kings, priests, and prophets were also anointed
• “Jesus” - “the Savior,” because He saves His people from their sins (Matthew 1:21)

Importance for Biblical Interpretation:

• Scripture frequently employs antonomasia to name divine and demonic realities
• Understanding this device prevents misinterpretation of biblical passages
• The Catholic Catechism correctly identifies “the evil one” in the Our Father (Matthew 6:13) as referring to the devil, though it does not explicitly name the rhetorical device

The Logos in John’s Gospel and Antonomasia #

Multiple Meanings of Logos:

• First meaning: word
• Second meaning: thought
• Third meaning: reason itself
• English “word” does not carry these additional meanings as the Greek does

Translation Issues:

• “In the beginning was the Word” (John 1:1) - more accurately captures the Greek sense if translated as “In the beginning was the thought” or “the reason”
• The use of ho logos employs antonomasia similar to ho agathos (the good), speaking of God by His supreme rational nature
• The phrase becomes: “In the beginning was the thought, and the thought was toward God, and the thought was God”

Contrast with Physis (Nature):

• The Greek physis originally means “birth”
• We translate it as “nature” because English has adopted the word in a derived sense
• This differs from how logos is translated, showing inconsistency in translation methodology

The Good of Human Nature and Sin (Summa Theologiae II-II, Q. 85, Art. 2) #

The Question: Can the whole good of human nature be taken away by sin?

The Three-Fold Good of Nature:

1. Essential good - The principles of nature itself (to be, to live, to understand); neither taken away nor diminished by sin
2. Natural inclination to virtue - The inclination whereby man acts according to reason; diminished but never wholly taken away by sin
3. Gift of original justice - A gratuitous supernatural gift wholly lost through original sin

Objections Considered:

First Objection (Diminution through Subtraction):

• The good of human nature is finite
• Something finite can be totally consumed if one keeps taking away from it
• Therefore, the good of nature could eventually be wholly consumed through continuous diminution by sin

Second Objection (Uniform Nature):

• The good of nature is wholly uniform, like air, water, and flesh
• Since a part can be taken away through sin, the whole can be taken away

Third Objection (The Damned):

• In the damned, the disposition to virtue is totally taken away
• Like a blind man who cannot be repaired to sight, they cannot be repaired to virtue
• Therefore, sin can wholly take away the good of nature

Augustine’s Counter-Argument (from Enchiridion):

• Evil cannot exist except in the good
• The good of guilt cannot exist except in the good of virtue or grace (as contrary to it)
• Therefore, the good of nature must remain; sin does not totally take it away

Key Arguments #

Thomas’s Resolution: The Nature of Diminution #

The Good as an Inclination:

• The good of nature that is diminished through sin is the natural inclination to virtue
• This belongs to man from the fact that he is rational (rationalis), or has reason and acts according to reason
• To be good for man means to be reasonable; to sin means to act unreasonably

Why Total Consumption is Impossible:

• If the inclination were wholly consumed, man would lose reason itself
• If man lost reason, he would no longer be capable of sin
• But sin obviously exists, so the inclination cannot be wholly consumed
• Therefore, it is not possible that the good of nature can wholly be taken away

Two Types of Diminution: Per Subtraction vs. Per Proportion #

Diminution Per Subtraction (Aristotle, Physics III):

• If one subtracts the same quantity continuously from a finite magnitude, it will eventually be totally consumed
• Example: taking a handful repeatedly will eventually exhaust the pile
• The subject becomes weaker, making it less able to resist the next subtraction

Diminution Per Proportion (Aristotle, Physics VI):

• If one subtracts according to the same proportion (not quantity) — always taking half, or a third, etc.
• This can continue infinitely (in infinitum) without total consumption
• Example: dividing a line in half, then taking half of the remainder, and so on forever
• This demonstrates the continuous is divisible forever, contrasting with discrete quantity (number)

Application to Sin and Natural Inclination:

• Subsequent sins do not diminish the good of nature more weakly than preceding ones; they often diminish more gravely
• A person begins with minor sins (stealing candy) and progresses to grave sins (theft of money, murder)
• Therefore, diminution through sin follows the pattern of per-proportion, not per-subtraction

The Inclination as a Middle Between Root and End #

Two-Fold Understanding of Diminution:

1. On the side of the root (the rational nature itself)

   • Sin does not diminish the rational nature itself
   • If it did, it would eventually be wholly consumed

2. On the side of the end (the attainment of virtue and the good)

   • Sin diminishes the inclination by placing impediments before it
   • These impediments prevent the person from attaining to the limit or end
   • Because impediments are placed externally, not rooted, they can accumulate infinitely

The Impediment Model:

• The natural inclination to virtue remains always in its root (rational nature)
• But it is obscured or obstructed by impediments created through accumulated sin
• Like a transparent body (diaphanes) that retains its inclination to receive light from its transparency, but is obscured by clouds
• The clouds do not diminish the transparency; they merely block the light

Response to the Three Objections #

To the First (Diminution per subtraction):

• The first objection proceeds according to diminution per subtraction
• But the diminution of natural inclination through sin comes rather by addition of impediments
• This neither takes away nor diminishes the root of the inclination

To the Second (Uniform nature):

• While the natural inclination is wholly uniform in its nature
• It has respect both to a beginning (the root in rational nature) and to an end (the attainment of virtue)
• According to this diversity, it is diminished in one way (as to end) but not in another (as to root)

To the Third (The damned):

• Even in the damned, there remains a natural inclination to virtue
• Otherwise there would not be in them the remorse of conscience
• This inclination is not reduced to act because they lack grace according to divine justice
• Like a blind man in whom remains an aptitude to seeing in the root of nature (the animal naturally has sight)
• But it is not reduced to act because the cause is lacking which would form the organ required for seeing

Important Definitions #

Antonomasia (ἀντονομασία):

• A figure of speech in which a general name applied to many is used for one that stands out, or conversely, a proper name becomes a common noun

Natural Inclination to Virtue:

• The human disposition arising from rational nature to act according to reason and virtue
• Distinguished from the inclination itself and the external impediments that obstruct it

Per Accidens Causation:

• Causation by removal of an impediment rather than by direct action
• Sin removes original justice, which per accidens causes bodily corruption and death to occur

Diaphanes (διαφανής):

• In Greek: “to shine through”; transparency
• Used to illustrate how natural inclination retains its nature even when obscured by impediments

Rational Nature (or rationalis):

• The human capacity for reason and for acting according to reason
• The root or foundation of man’s natural inclination to virtue
• Never lost or wholly diminished by sin

Examples & Illustrations #

Antonomasia in Literature:

• A lover is called “a Romeo” (from Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet)
• A slow or hesitant person is called “a Hamlet” (from Shakespeare’s Hamlet)
• Paul VI joked about not wanting to “have a Hamlet himself” (be hesitant in action)

Progressive Sinning:

• A person begins by stealing candy from another child in grade school
• Later steals money from someone else
• Eventually may commit grave crimes
• The impediments to virtue increase, and the sins become more grave, not lesser

Snow as Impediment:

• A car does not become worse as snow accumulates on a driveway
• Rather, impediments to reaching one’s destination (getting down the block) increase
• The car’s capacity (its nature) remains unchanged; the impediments do
• Increasingly severe weather doesn’t weaken the car but increases barriers to progress

Transparency and Light:

• A transparent body (diaphanes) has a natural inclination to receive light from its very transparency
• Clouds obscure this inclination on the side of receiving light
• But the transparency itself remains in the root of nature
• Similarly, sin places impediments (like clouds) but does not destroy the root inclination

Blindness as Analogy:

• A blind man retains an aptitude to seeing in the very root of nature
• Animals naturally have sight as part of their nature
• But the inclination to see is not reduced to act because the cause is lacking: the organ is not formed
• Similarly, the damned retain natural inclination to virtue but cannot actualize it due to lacking grace

Notable Quotes #

“In the beginning was the Word [Logos], and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” — Gospel of John 1:1 (Illustrating how ho logos employs antonomasia to name God by His supreme attribute)

“Why callest thou me good? One is the good.” — Matthew 19:17 (Demonstrating antonomasia: God called ho agathos, “the good,” among all good things)

“Deliver us from the evil one” — Matthew 6:13 (Our Father, 7th petition) (Greek ho poniros: “the evil one” by antonomasia, referring to Satan among all evil persons)

“Evil is not able to be except in the good… Therefore, it must be in the good of nature. Therefore, it does not totally take it away.” — Augustine, Enchiridion (Establishing that the good of nature cannot be wholly destroyed by sin)

“It is not possible that the foresaid good of nature can wholly be taken away.” — Thomas Aquinas (Because loss of this inclination would mean loss of reason, making sin impossible)

“Because in infinitum, impediments are able to be placed before it… sin can be added to sin in infinitum; but nevertheless, one cannot be totally consumed because there always remains the root of such inclination.” — Thomas Aquinas (Explaining how the good can be infinitely diminished without total loss)

Questions Addressed #

Q: What is antonomasia and why does Berquist emphasize it? A: Antonomasia is a figure of speech where a general name is used for one instance that stands out. Berquist emphasizes it because Scripture frequently uses this device to name divine and demonic realities (e.g., “the evil one” for Satan), and understanding it is crucial for correct biblical interpretation.

Q: How does the Our Father (Matthew 6:13) exemplify antonomasia? A: The phrase “deliver us from the evil one” (ho poniros in Greek) uses antonomasia because there are many evil people, but Satan is THE evil one—he stands out among all evil persons. The Catholic Catechism identifies this correctly but does not name the rhetorical device.

Q: Why is “the good” (ho agathos) in Matthew 19:17 an example of antonomasia? A: Christ uses ho agathos (“the good”) to refer to God alone, though many things can be called good. God is THE good by antonomasia—He stands out as goodness itself among all good things.

Q: Why does the English translation of logos as “word” miss important meaning? A: In Greek, logos means word, thought, and reason. English “word” carries only the first meaning. A more accurate translation of John 1:1 would be “In the beginning was the thought” to capture the deeper sense of God as supreme reason and rational principle.

Q: Can the whole good of human nature be taken away by sin? A: No. While sin diminishes natural inclination to virtue through accumulated impediments, it cannot wholly take it away because doing so would require the loss of reason itself, which would make sin impossible. The natural inclination always remains rooted in rational nature.

Q: How do impediments differ from loss of capacity? A: A person’s rational capacity (the root of natural inclination to virtue) is not lost or weakened by sin. Rather, sin creates impediments (like clouds obscuring light) that prevent the person from attaining virtue. The capacity remains; the obstacles increase.

Q: Why do the damned retain natural inclination to virtue if they cannot actualize it? A: Because if they lost this inclination entirely, they would lose conscience and remorse. The inclination remains in the root but is not reduced to act due to lacking grace (similar to how a blind man retains natural aptitude for sight but lacks the formed organ to exercise it).

Q: Why does subsequent sin often diminish more gravely than preceding sin? A: As a person descends into sin, they become weaker and more prone to greater transgressions. The impediments accumulate, but the person’s resistance decreases, allowing for increasingly grave sins. This follows the pattern of per-proportion diminution, not per-subtraction.

Q: Can impediments to virtue accumulate infinitely? A: Yes. Because impediments are external additions (not subtractions from the root), they can accumulate infinitely like clouds over a transparent body. The person can add sin to sin without end, but the root inclination in rational nature cannot be wholly consumed.