Dist. 13, Divisio Textus
Book I: On the Mystery of the Trinity · Distinction 13
# COMMENTARIUS IN DISTINCTIONEM XIII.
De aeterna processione Spiritus sancti, quatenus distinguitur a generatione.
Post haec considerandum etc.
DIVISIO TEXTUS.
Supra egit Magister de processione per comparationem ad illum, ad quem et a quo est. Hic tertio loco agit de ipsa secundum1 comparationem ad generationem, a qua differt. Et haec pars habet duas partes. In prima Magister quaerit et determinat, utrum Spiritus sanctus debeat dici genitus; in secunda, utrum debeat dici ingenitus, ibi: Nunc considerandum est, cum Spiritus sanctus non sit genitus.
Item, prima pars habet quatuor. In prima ostendit, quod Spiritus sanctus non debeat dici natus2. In secunda ostendit, quod quamvis dicatur de Spiritu sancto procedere, dicitur tamen de Filio, ibi: Cum autem Spiritus sanctus non dicatur genitus; et ratio est, quod aliter dicitur Filius procedere quam Spiritus sanctus. In tertia vero tentat assignare differentiam inter generationem et processionem, ibi: Inter generationem vero Filii et processionem etc. In quarta vero et ultima ostendit humanam insufficientiam3 ad illam differentiam indagandam, ibi: Quid autem inter nasci et procedere intersit.
Nunc considerandum est, cum Spiritus sanctus. Haec est4 secunda pars, in qua Magister quaerit et determinat, utrum Spiritus sanctus debeat dici ingenitus; et haec pars habet quatuor partes. In prima ostendit Magister et probat auctoritate Augustini, quod Spiritus sanctus non debet dici ingenitus. In secunda vero ostendit contrarium auctoritate Hieronymi, quod debet dici ingenitus, et ponitur ibi: Hieronymus tamen in Regulis distinctionum etc. In tertia vero praedictam controversiam determinat per distinctionem, ibi: Sed ut istam quae videtur esse repugnantiam. In quarta auctoritate Hieronymi confirmat suam solutionem, ibi: Quod autem Hieronymus ita accepit etc.
TRACTATIO QUAESTIONUM.
Ad intelligentiam eorum quae dicuntur in littera, quatuor quaeruntur.
Primo quaeritur, utrum in divinis sit ponere processionem.
Secundo, utrum processio Spiritus sancti sit generatio.
Tertio, utrum processio Spiritus sancti realiter differat a generatione.
Quarto, utrum Spiritus sanctus debeat dici ingenitus aut5 non.
---
# Commentary on Distinction XIII.
On the eternal procession of the Holy Spirit, insofar as it is distinguished from generation.
"After these things, it must be considered..." etc.
Division of the text.
Above, the Master treated of the procession by comparing it to him from whom and to whom it is. Here, in the third place, he treats of it according to1 its comparison with generation, from which it differs. And this part has two parts. In the first, the Master inquires and determines whether the Holy Spirit ought to be called begotten; in the second, whether he ought to be called unbegotten, at the words: Now it must be considered, since the Holy Spirit is not begotten.
Likewise, the first part has four divisions. In the first, he shows that the Holy Spirit ought not to be called born2. In the second, he shows that although "to proceed" is said of the Holy Spirit, it is nonetheless said also of the Son, at the words: But although the Holy Spirit is not called begotten; and the reason is that the Son is said to proceed in a manner different from the Holy Spirit. In the third, he attempts to assign the difference between generation and procession, at the words: But between the generation of the Son and the procession, etc. In the fourth and last, he shows the insufficiency3 of human reason to investigate that difference, at the words: But what lies between being born and proceeding.
Now it must be considered, since the Holy Spirit. This is4 the second part, in which the Master inquires and determines whether the Holy Spirit ought to be called unbegotten; and this part has four divisions. In the first, the Master shows and proves on the authority of Augustine that the Holy Spirit ought not to be called unbegotten. In the second, he shows the contrary on the authority of Jerome — that he ought to be called unbegotten — set down at the words: Yet Jerome in the Rules of Distinctions, etc. In the third, he resolves the aforesaid controversy by means of a distinction, at the words: But that we may put aside this seeming contradiction. In the fourth, he confirms his solution by the authority of Jerome, at the words: That Jerome did so understand, etc.
Treatment of the questions.
For the understanding of what is said in the letter, four questions are asked.
First, whether procession is to be posited in divine things.
Second, whether the procession of the Holy Spirit is generation.
Third, whether the procession of the Holy Spirit really differs from generation.
Fourth, whether the Holy Spirit ought to be called unbegotten or5 not.
---
- Cod. M et ed. 1 prius.Codex M and ed. 1 read prius ("first" — i.e. "treats of it first by comparison with generation").
- Vat. absque auctoritate mss. et ed. 1 addit vel genitus vel Filius, sicut et mox prosequitur: In secunda ostendit, quod cum Spiritus sanctus non dicatur genitus, cur Filius, qui dicitur genitus, etiam dicatur procedere; ibi.The Vatican edition, without the support of the manuscripts or ed. 1, adds or begotten or the Son, just as it goes on shortly to read: In the second, he shows that, since the Holy Spirit is not called begotten, why the Son, who is called begotten, is nonetheless said also to proceed; at the words.
- Codd. L O intelligentiam insufficientem esse loco insufficientiam.Codices L, O read intelligentiam insufficientem esse ("that the understanding is insufficient") in place of insufficientiam ("the insufficiency").
- Vat. praeter fidem mss. et ed. 1, omissis verbis Magistri Nunc considerandum etc., loco Haec est ponit Similiter, et consequenter propter variatam constructionem paulo infra omittit et haec pars.The Vatican edition, against the manuscripts and ed. 1, omitting the Master's words Now it must be considered, etc., places Similiter ("Likewise") in place of Haec est ("This is"), and consequently, on account of the altered construction, also omits et haec pars ("and this part") a little further on.
- Fide plurium mss. ut A F G H I T etc. et ed. 1 loco aut substituimus an.On the authority of several manuscripts (A, F, G, H, I, T, etc.) and ed. 1, we have substituted an for aut (both meaning "or" in indirect questions).