Analogical Language

• Univocal Language


  Uses a word in the same way

  King Charles III and God are both rulers
• Equivocal Language


  When the same word is used in different ways

  For example God's love is different to human love.
• Aquinas' analogy of attribution

  As there is some connection between creatures and creator there must be something that can be said about God. For example, using medieval medicine, if a bull's urine is healthy we can deduce that the bull is healthy. B. Davies uses a baker analogy. Good bread and a good baker are good in different ways but from good bread we can surmise a good baker. The same way something good can be attributed to God.
• Aquinas' analogy of proper proportion


  Aquinas says talking about God's good is more than human good. God is proportionally much more good. Theologian Baron von Hugel highlighted that it was similar to how a humans faithfulness is proportionally more than that of a dog. Similarly when we use a human word to talk about God, we mean it in a proportionately larger sense.
• Aquinas' view on religious language

  By using analogical language it is possible to make positive statements about God while avoiding the pitfalls of univocal and equivocal language. He believes analogical language retains the mystery of God and avoids anthropomorphising God.
• J. Don Scotus criticism of Aquinas' analogical cataphatic way

  Scotus argued that analogy is too vague and leaves us unable to understand God and his actions.
• John Hicks support of Aquinas' analogical cataphatic way

  Hick supports the use of analogy since it enables us to make some statements about God but also preserves a degree of mystery. The incarnation and stories of Jesus show God’s character, so some statements about God are possible.
• Aquinas' analogy of attribution avoids the problems of equivocal language because there is some similarity between Gods love and the love seen in families.
• Aquinas avoids anthropomorphism by using the analogy of proportion - this recognises God is proportionately greater than humans.
• I. Ramsey used models and qualifiers to build on Aquinas' theory of analogy. For example, 'shepherd' is a model that we can understand from our experience. By adding a qualifier 'good shepherd' we show God is somehow the same but different.
• Hick supports the use of analogy since it enables us to make some statements about God but also preserves a degree of mystery.
• By attributing similar ideas to God, we may still limit God
• A problem with analogy of proportion is how do we know how much greater God is? There is no point of reference to judge the appropriateness of the analogy.
• J. Don. Scotus argues that analogy is too vague and leaves us unable to understand God or his actions.
• A problem with analogy is that it assumes a similarity between God and humans. If God is completely different then analogy cannot be used. Perhaps there is nothing we can say.
• Analogy of attribution - Talk about God can use analogical language to give God characteristics seen in his creation.
• Analogy of proportion - Recognises the difference between humans and God, so any words used must reflect a proportionately greater being.
• Jesus' use of parables is a form of analogical language. The use of analogical language to describe God is just a continuation of what Jesus did.