Some of the Catholics think the veneration of this name to be improper and catachresti-
(col. 50)
-cal — [a veneration] which, namely, pertains nothing to the name itself, but is carried over to the very thing signified: Dominic Soto (book 2 On Justice, q. 4, a. 2), the Cordovan (book 1, q. 5, dub. 4, a. 2). But others do not indeed deny that that [veneration] can be improper, yet acknowledge [it] also [to be] properly so called — not absolute, but respective, so that, namely, [it is] an honor not only of the thing signified, but of the very name itself — yet on account of that very thing signified. And it seems more consonant to reason. First, from the Synods cited before (q. 15). Secondly, from the nature of this worship. A thing which is referred to the religious worship of someone can also, in some manner, itself be worshipped, on account of that to which it is referred — as can be proved from Isaiah ch. 49, v. 7, and as is clear in other images, codices, and the like. Therefore also this name. Thirdly. So teaches St. Thomas (opusculum 60, ch. 6), [and] Suárez (part 3, q. 2, a. 3, sect. 5). Yet it can be asked — whether this honor is to be done to all the names of God, or [to] this one before the rest? It must be answered [that] honor can indeed be had for all the other names of God, but it is taught in Scripture [that] in this one chiefly [it is] to be done, for the reasons already brought above. For just as any image of God — and in whatever place and species [it be] — is always worshipped, so among the names of God a selection has been made. Hence Isaiah 12: “I will confess to thee, O Lord: behold, God my Saviour comes; I will act confidently, and will not fear. He is made unto me for salvation. Confess to the Lord, and invoke his name. Remember, for his name is exalted.” And ch. 62: “For Sion’s sake I will not be silent, and for Jerusalem’s sake I will not rest, until her just one go forth [as] a splendor, and her Saviour be kindled as a lamp.”