Dist. 13
Book I: On the Mystery of the Trinity · Distinction 13
# DISTINCTIO XIII.
…Deo sit, nec tamen ipse Filius sit, quoniam procedendo, non nascendo legitur esse de Deo, iam superius, quantum visum est, disputavimus.
Utrum Spiritus sanctus debeat dici ingenitus, cum non sit genitus.
Nunc considerandum est, cum Spiritus sanctus non sit genitus, utrum debeat dici ingenitus. Ad quod dicimus, Spiritum sanctum nec genitum nec ingenitum debere dici. Unde Augustinus ad Orosium1 ait: « Spiritum sanctum nec genitum nec ingenitum fides certa declarat; quia si dixerimus ingenitum, duos patres affirmare videbimur; si autem genitum, duos filios credere culpamur. » Sicut enim solus Filius dicitur genitus, ita et solus Pater dicitur ingenitus, eo quod ab alio non sit. Unde Augustinus in decimo quinto libro de Trinitate2: « Pater, inquit, solus non est de alio, ideo solus appellatur ingenitus, non quidem in Scripturis, sed in consuetudine disputantium et de re tanta sermonem qualem valuerint proferentium. Filius autem de Patre natus est, et Spiritus sanctus de Patre principaliter et communiter de utroque procedit. Ideoque cum Spiritum sanctum genitum non dicamus, dicere tamen non audemus ingenitum, ne in hoc vocabulo vel duos patres in illa Trinitate, vel duos, qui non sunt de alio, quispiam suspicetur. » Ecce his verbis aperte ostendit, Spiritum sanctum nec genitum nec ingenitum debere dici.
Hieronymus aliter loquitur.
Hieronymus tamen in Regulis definitionum3 contra haereticos Spiritum sanctum dicit ingenitum esse, his verbis: « Spiritus sanctus Pater non est, sed ingenitus atque infectus. Pater non est, quia Patris est et in Patre est; processionem habet ex Patre, et non nativitatem; Filius autem non est, quia genitus non est. » Ecce his verbis dicitur Spiritus sanctus esse ingenitus; quod videtur adversari praemissis verbis Augustini.
Quomodo dictum Hieronymi solvatur. Duplex sensus ingeniti.
Sed ut istam quae videtur repugnantiam de medio abigamus, dicimus, quod Hieronymus aliter accepit4 nomen ingeniti, et aliter Augustinus. Accepit enim Augustinus ingenitum, qui vel quod ab5 alio non est; et secundum hoc de solo Patre dicitur; Hieronymus vero ingenitum dicit non genitum; et secundum hoc de Spiritu sancto potest dici, cum Spiritus sanctus non sit genitus.
Probatur ratio.
Quod autem Hieronymus ita acceperit, ostenditur ex verbis suis, quibus in eodem tractatu6 utitur, faciens talem divisionem: « Omne quod est, aut ingenitum est, aut genitum, aut factum. Est ergo quod nec natum est nec factum; et est quod natum est et factum non est; et est quod nec natum est nec factum est; et est quod factum est et natum non est; et est quod factum est et natum est et renatum est; et est quod factum est et natum est et renatum non est. Nunc praepositorum singulis rebus subsistentiam destinemus. Quod ergo nec natum nec factum est, Pater est; non enim ab aliquo7 est. Quod autem natum est et factum non est, Filius est, qui a Patre genitus est, non factus. Quod iterum nec natum nec factum est, Spiritus sanctus est, qui a Patre procedit. Quod etiam factum est et natum non est, caelum et terra8 ceteraque, quae sunt insensibilia. Quod autem factum et natum et renatum est, homo est. Quod vero factum est et natum est et renatum non est, animalia sunt. » Ecce his verbis ostendit Hieronymus, se ingenitum accipere non genitum. Aliter enim non esset praemissa divisio vera, scilicet omne quod est aut ingenitum est, aut genitum, aut factum. Atque in divisionis huius prosecutione in assignatione ingeniti, ubique ponit non natum.
---
# Distinction XIII.
…that he is from God, yet is not himself the Son — for he is read of as being from God by proceeding, not by being born — we have already disputed above, so far as it seemed fit.
Whether the Holy Spirit ought to be called unbegotten, since he is not begotten.
Now it must be considered, since the Holy Spirit is not begotten, whether he ought to be called unbegotten. To which we say, that the Holy Spirit ought to be called neither begotten nor unbegotten. Hence Augustine, to Orosius1, says: "Sure faith declares the Holy Spirit to be neither begotten nor unbegotten; for if we say unbegotten, we shall seem to affirm two fathers; but if begotten, we are blamed for believing two sons." For just as the Son alone is called begotten, so also the Father alone is called unbegotten, in that he is not from another. Hence Augustine in the fifteenth book On the Trinity2: "The Father alone," he says, "is not from another, and for that reason he alone is called unbegotten — not indeed in the Scriptures, but in the usage of disputants who utter such speech as they were able concerning so great a matter. But the Son is born of the Father, and the Holy Spirit proceeds principally from the Father, and from both in common. And therefore, although we do not call the Holy Spirit begotten, yet we do not dare to call him unbegotten, lest by this word someone should suspect either two fathers in that Trinity, or two persons who are not from another." Behold, by these words he plainly shows that the Holy Spirit ought to be called neither begotten nor unbegotten.
Jerome speaks otherwise.
Yet Jerome in the Rules of Definitions3, against the heretics, says that the Holy Spirit is unbegotten, in these words: "The Holy Spirit is not the Father, but is unbegotten and unmade. He is not the Father, because he is of the Father and is in the Father; he has procession from the Father, and not nativity; nor is he the Son, because he is not begotten." Behold, by these words the Holy Spirit is said to be unbegotten — which seems to be opposed to the preceding words of Augustine.
How Jerome's saying is to be resolved. The two senses of "unbegotten".
But that we may put aside this seeming contradiction, we say that Jerome took4 the term unbegotten in one sense, and Augustine in another. For Augustine took unbegotten as meaning "he, or that, which is not from5 another"; and according to this, it is said only of the Father. Jerome, however, calls unbegotten "not begotten"; and according to this it can be said of the Holy Spirit, since the Holy Spirit is not begotten.
The reason is shown.
That Jerome did so understand the term is shown from his own words, which he uses in the same treatise6, making this division: "Everything that is, is either unbegotten, or begotten, or made. There is therefore that which is neither born nor made; and there is that which is born and is not made; and there is that which is neither born nor made; and there is that which is made and is not born; and there is that which is made and is born and is reborn; and there is that which is made and is born and is not reborn. Let us now assign a subsistence to each of the things set forth. That which is neither born nor made is the Father; for he is not from anything7. That which is born and is not made is the Son, who is begotten of the Father, not made. That which is again neither born nor made is the Holy Spirit, who proceeds from the Father. That which is made and is not born is heaven and earth8 and the other things that are insensible. That which is made and born and reborn is man. That which is made and born and not reborn — these are the animals." Behold, by these words Jerome shows that he takes unbegotten as not begotten. For otherwise the foregoing division would not be true — namely, that everything which is, is either unbegotten, or begotten, or made. And in carrying out this division, in his assignment of "unbegotten", he everywhere puts not born.
---
- In dialogo nempe quaestionum sub titulo ad Orosium, quaest. 2. Sed supposititium est hoc opus. In fine huius loci ed. 8 cum originali culpabimur pro culpamur.Namely, in the dialogue of questions under the title to Orosius, q. 2. But this work is spurious. At the end of this passage, ed. 8, with the original, has culpabimur ("we shall be blamed") for culpamur ("we are blamed").
- Cap. 26. n. 47. — In hoc textu post sermonem cod. D qualemcumque loco qualem. Ipse Augustinus post principaliter interserit: ipso sine ullo temporis intervallo dante etc. — In fine ed. 1 non sint pro non sunt, et edd. 5, 9 ab aliquo pro de alio.Ch. 26, n. 47. — In this text, after sermonem, codex D reads qualemcumque in place of qualem. Augustine himself, after principaliter, inserts: ipso sine ullo temporis intervallo dante ("with him giving without any interval of time"), etc. — At the end, ed. 1 has non sint for non sunt, and edd. 5, 9 ab aliquo for de alio.
- Edd. 1, 8 titulo huius operis addunt: vel definitionum. Hic liber non est S. Hieronymi, nec in appendicibus editionum eiusdem invenitur. In appendice ad opera S. Ambrosii (Patrolog. Migne, Lat. tom. 17. col. 510.) impressum est opusculum anonymum sub titulo: de Trinitate; alias, in Symbolum Apostolorum Tractatus, ex quo (c. 3. coll. 512.) textus secundus, paulo infra citatus, integre desumtus est, paucis tantum verbis deficientibus vel mutatis. Locus vero hic citatus tantum quoad sensum ibi exhibetur. Cum autem hoc opusculum, ut putant editores, sit mutilum et iam antiquitus interpolatum, fortasse Lombardus etiam primum textum ad verbum inde accepit. In praevia admonitione Benedictini editores huius libelli censent, ipsum contra Priscillianistas et ad vindicandam Toletanam fidei regulam esse editum atque Concilio, si minus Toletano, saltem Braccarensi secundo, quod a. 563 vulgo ponitur, supparem esse. — Locum infra a Magistro exhibitum Alcuinus (de Fide Ss. Trinitatis libr. II. c. 9. Patrolog. Lat. Migne, tom. 101. col. 28.) totum reportat, sed nonnullis additis vel mutatis.Edd. 1, 8 add to the title of this work: or, of Definitions. This book is not by St. Jerome, nor is it found in the appendices of his editions. In the appendix to the works of St. Ambrose (Patrologia, Migne, Lat. vol. 17, col. 510) there is printed an anonymous little work under the title On the Trinity; otherwise, Tractatus on the Apostles' Creed, from which (c. 3, col. 512) the second text cited a little below is taken in its entirety, with only a few words missing or altered. The passage here cited, however, is given there only as to its sense. Since, moreover — as the editors think — this little work is mutilated and was anciently interpolated, perhaps Lombard took even the first text from it word-for-word. In their introductory notice the Benedictine editors of this booklet judge that it was issued against the Priscillianists and to vindicate the Toledan rule of faith, and that it is roughly contemporary with a council — if not the Toledan, at least the second of Braga, which is commonly placed in the year 563. — The passage given below by the Master is reported in full by Alcuin (On the Faith of the Holy Trinity, bk. II, c. 9, Patrologia Lat., Migne, vol. 101, col. 28), with some things added or altered.
- Codd. ACDE acceperit.Codices A, C, D, E read acceperit ("[Jerome] would have taken").
- Vat. et edd. 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 9 de. Immediate ante ed. 1 omittit vel quod. Deinde codd. ABCD post Spiritu omittunt sancto. Denique ed. 1 omittit ultima verba: cum Spiritus etc.The Vatican edition and edd. 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 9 read de. Just before, ed. 1 omits vel quod. Next, codices A, B, C, D after Spiritu omit sancto. Finally, ed. 1 omits the last words: cum Spiritus etc.
- Cap. 3. — Vide notam paulo supra. — Immediate ante Vat. et edd. 4, 6, 8 verbis eius pro verbis suis; quod licet sit minus rectum, exhibent tamen omnes codd. et ceterae edd. Deinde ubi prima vice ponitur nec natum codd. omittunt est contra edd.Ch. 3. — See the note a little above. — Just before, the Vatican edition and edd. 4, 6, 8 have verbis eius ("his words") in place of verbis suis ("his own words"); which, although less correct, is nonetheless given by all codices and the remaining editions. Then, where nec natum is first set down, the codices omit est, against the editions.
- Vat. et edd. 4, 5, 6, 9 verbo aliquo praemittunt alio.The Vatican edition and edd. 4, 5, 6, 9 prefix alio to the word aliquo (i.e., reading ab alio aliquo).
- Supple cum ed. 6 est. — Immediate post edd. 2, 3, 5, 7, 9 omittunt sunt. Non multum infra ante ostendit Hieronymus cod. C addit aperte.Supply est with ed. 6. — Just after, edd. 2, 3, 5, 7, 9 omit sunt. Not much further on, before ostendit Hieronymus, codex C adds aperte ("openly").