← Back to Distinction 15

Dist. 15

Book I: On the Mystery of the Trinity · Distinction 15

Textus Latinus
p. 256

DISTINCTIO XV.

Cap. I.

Quod Spiritus sanctus a se ipso datur, et Filius a se ipso mittitur.

Hic considerandum est, cum Spiritus sanctus detur hominibus a Patre et Filio, quod est ipsum temporaliter procedere ab utroque vel mitti, utrum etiam a se ipso detur. Si datur a se, et procedit vel mittitur a se. Ad quod dicimus, quia Spiritus sanctus et Deus est et donum sive datum: et ideo1 dat et datur. Dat quidem in quantum Deus, et datur in quantum donum. Cum autem donatio sive datio Spiritus sancti sit operatio Dei et communis sit et indivisa operatio trium personarum, donatur2 itaque Spiritus sanctus non tantum a Patre et Filio, sed etiam a se ipso. Unde Augustinus in decimo quinto libro de Trinitate3 dicit, quod se ipsum dat. «Sicut, inquit, corpus carnis nihil est aliud quam caro, sic donum Spiritus sancti nihil est aliud quam Spiritus sanctus. In tantum ergo donum Dei est, in quantum datur eis quibus datur. Apud se autem Deus est, etsi nemini datur, quia Deus erat Patri et Filio coaeternus, antequam cuiquam daretur. Nec quia illi dant et ipse datur, ideo minor est illis. Ita enim datur, sicut Dei donum, ut etiam se ipsum det, sicut Deus. Non enim dici potest, non esse suae potestatis, de quo dictum est4: Spiritus ubi vult spirat». Ecce aperte dicit, quod Spiritus sanctus se ipsum dat. Si enim Spiritus sanctus se ipsum dare non potest, et eum Pater dare potest et Filius, potest itaque5 Pater dare aliquid et Filius, quod non potest Spiritus sanctus. Item, si Pater et Filius dant Spiritum sanctum, nec ipse dat: aliquid ergo Pater operatur et Filius, quod non operatur Spiritus sanctus. Dat ergo Spiritus sanctus se ipsum. Si autem se ipsum dat, tunc et6 a se ipso procedit et mittitur; quod utique verum est. Nam processio temporalis Spiritus sancti vel missio ipsius est donatio, et ipsa est Dei operatio. Procedit ergo Spiritus sanctus temporaliter a se et mittitur a se, quia datur a se.

Ne autem mireris, quod Spiritus sanctus dicitur mitti vel procedere a se. Nam et de Filio Dei dicit Augustinus in secundo libro de Trinitate7, quod non tantum a Patre missus est, sed etiam a se ipso et a Spiritu sancto, quaerens, quo modo Filius vel Spiritus sanctus sit missus, cum uterque sit ubique tanquam Deus. Nam uterque, inquit Augustinus, legitur missus. De Spiritu enim sancto legitur8: Quem mittet Pater in nomine meo. Et iterum: Si abiero, mittam eum ad vos. Et Filius de se dicit: Exivi a Patre et veni in mundum. Et Apostolus dicit9: Misit Deus Filium suum. In Propheta autem scriptum est ex persona Dei: Caelum et terram ego impleo. Itaque ubique Deus est, ubique ergo est Filius, ubique etiam est Spiritus sanctus. Illuc ergo missus est Filius et Spiritus sanctus, ubi erant.

Cap. II.

Quomodo intelligenda sit missio utriusque.

«Quocirca quaerendum est, quomodo intelligatur missio Filii vel Spiritus sancti. Pater enim solus, inquit Augustinus in eodem10, nusquam legitur missus».

p. 257

Sed Filius et Spiritus sanctus. Et de Filio primum videamus, quomodo missus? «Apostolus dicit11: Misit Deus Filium suum factum ex muliere, ubi satis ostendit, eo ipso missum Filium, quo factum ex muliere. Proinde mitti a Patre sine Spiritu sancto non potuit, quia Pater intelligitur misisse eum, cum fecit ex femina; quod utique non fecit sine Spiritu sancto». Ecce hic dicit, Filium missum a Patre et Spiritu sancto.

Cap. III.

Quod a Spiritu sancto etiam Filius sit missus.

Et quod a Spiritu sancto Filius sit missus, ut ait Augustinus in eodem12, auctoritatibus confirmatur. Ipse Christus dicit per Isaiam: Nunc misit me Dominus et Spiritus eius. De hoc Ambrosius in libro tertio de Spiritu sancto13 ita ait: «Quis est, qui dicit: Misit me Dominus et Spiritus eius, nisi qui venit a Patre, ut salvos faceret peccatores», id est Christus? «Ergo et Pater Filium misit et Spiritus». Idem in eodem: «Datus est a Patre, ut Isaias dicit14: Puer natus est nobis, et Filius datus est nobis. Datus est, audeo dicere, et a Spiritu, quia et a Spiritu missus est». «Dicit enim Filius Dei15: Spiritus Domini super me, propter quod unxit me: evangelizare pauperibus misit me, praedicare captivis remissionem etc. Quod cum de libro Isaiae legeret, ait in Evangelio: Hodie completa est haec Scriptura in auribus vestris, ut de se dictum esse significaret. Bene autem dixit, super me; quia quasi filius hominis et unctus est et missus ad praedicandum. Nam secundum divinitatem non super Christum est Spiritus, sed in Christo». Ecce his verbis ostendit Ambrosius, Filium esse missum et datum nobis non tantum a Patre, sed etiam a Spiritu sancto.

Cap. IV.

Quod Filius etiam sit datus a se ipso.

Deinde ostendit, esse datum etiam a se ipso, ita dicens in eodem libro16: «Cum non definitum fuerit per Prophetam, a quo datus sit Filius, ostenditur datus gratia Trinitatis, ut etiam ipse Filius se dederit». Ecce hic dicit, quod Filius se dedit, quia Trinitas17 eum dedit. Si autem Filius a se datus est, a se ergo missus est et a se processit. Et hoc utique verum est et concedi oportet, cum eius missio sit divina operatio.

Cap. V.

Quod a se mittatur Filius.

Quod autem a se mittatur Augustinus astruit in libro secundo de Trinitate18 dicens: «Forte aliquis cogat, ut dicamus, etiam a se ipso missum esse Filium; quia Mariae conceptus et partus operatio Trinitatis est. Sed, inquit aliquis, quomodo Pater eum misit, si ipse se misit? Cui respondeo quaerens, ut dicat, quomodo eum Pater sanctificavit, si ipse se sanctificavit? Utrumque enim Dominus ait19: Quem Pater, inquit, sanctificavit et misit in hunc mundum. Et alibi: Ego pro eis sanctifico me ipsum. Item quaero, quomodo Pater eum tradidit, si ipse se tradidit? Utrumque enim legitur20. Credo, respondebit, si probe sapit, quia una voluntas est Patris et Filii et inseparabilis operatio. Sic ergo intelligat, illam incarnationem et ex Virgine nativitatem, in qua Filius intelligitur missus, una eademque operatione Patris et Filii inseparabiliter esse factam, non inde separato Spiritu sancto. Ergo a Patre et Filio missus est idem Filius, quia a Patre et21 Verbo eius factum est, ut mitteretur, id est, incarnatus hominibus appareret. Non enim missus est mutando locum, quia in mundo erat. Quapropter Pater invisibilis una cum Filio secum invisibili, eundem Filium visibilem faciendo, misisse eum dictus est: qui si ita visibilis fieret, ut cum Patre invisibilis esse desisteret, id est, si substantia22 invisibilis Verbi in creaturam visibilem mutata et transiens verteretur, ita missus a Patre intelligeretur Filius, ut tantum missus, non etiam cum Patre mittens inveniretur. Cum vero sic accepta est forma servi, ut maneret incommutabilis forma Dei23, manifestum est, quod a Patre et Filio non apparentibus factum sit, quod appareret in Filio, id est, ab invisibili Patre cum invisibili Filio idem ipse Filius visibilis mitteretur».

##### Epilogus.

Ex praedictis aperte monstratur, quod Filius missus est a Patre et a24 Spiritu sancto et a se ipso, et quae sit ipsa missio, scilicet incarnatio, id est, quod factus est homo, per quod visibilis apparuit, quod est opus commune Patris et Filii et Spiritus sancti.

Cap. VI.

Quomodo intelligendum sit illud: A me ipso non veni.

Sed ad hoc opponitur: si Filius a se ipso missus est, cur ergo ait25: A me ipso non veni? Ad hoc Augustinus respondet in secundo libro de Trinitate26 dicens: «Hoc dictum esse secundum formam servi, secundum quam non fecit, ut mitteretur», id est, non est operatus incarnationem, sed secundum formam Dei.

##### Utrum semel tantum sit missus Filius, an saepe.

Hic quaeritur, utrum semel tantum missus sit Filius, an saepe mittatur. Si enim missio Filii ipsius tantum Incarnatio est, cum semel tantum incarnatus sit, et semel tantum videtur missus. At si saepe mittitur, est et alia eius missio quam incarnatio. Sed quae est illa? Nunquid aeterna genitura missio eius dicenda est, an etiam alia missio quaerenda est?

Cap. VII.

De duobus modis missionis Filii.

Ad quod dicimus, quod duobus modis dicitur Filius mitti27 praeter illam aeternam genituram, quae ineffabilis est, secundum quam etiam missus posset dici, ut videtur quibusdam, sed melius ac verius secundum eam dicitur genitus. Praeter eam igitur duobus modis dicitur mitti, scilicet vel cum visibiliter mundo apparuit carne indutus, vel cum se in animas pias sic transfert28, ut ab eis percipiatur ac cognoscatur. Hos duos missionis modos Augustinus aperte distinguit in quarto libro de Trinitate29 dicens: «Non eo ipso quod de Patre natus est, missus dicitur Filius, sed vel eo quod apparuit huic mundo Verbum caro factum; unde dicit30: A Patre exivi et veni in mundum; vel eo quod ex tempore cuiusquam mente percipitur, sicut dictum est de Sapientia31: Emitte illam de caelis sanctis tuis et a sede magnitudinis tuae, ut mecum sit et mecum laboret, id est, doceat me laborare. Et tunc unicuique mittitur, cum a quoquam cognoscitur atque percipitur, quantum cognosci et percipi potest pro captu vel proficientis in Deum, vel perfectae in Deo animae rationalis.»

Cap. VIII.

Quod secundum alterum modum sit missus semel, secundum alterum saepe; et secundum alterum modum dicitur missus in mundum, secundum alterum non.

Ecce distincti sunt duo modi missionis Filii32, et secundum alterum semel tantum missus est Dei Filius, secundum alterum saepe missus est et mittitur quotidie. Nam secundum alterum missus est, ut sit homo, quod semel tantum factum est; secundum alterum vero mittitur, ut sit cum homine, quo modo33 quotidie mittitur ad Sanctos et missus est etiam ante incarnationem et ad omnes Sanctos, qui ante fuerunt, et etiam ad Angelos. Unde Augustinus de Filio, id est de Sapientia Patris loquens in quarto libro de Trinitate34 ait: «Aliter mittitur Sapientia, ut sit cum homine; aliter missa est, ut sit homo. In animas enim sanctas se transfert, et amicos Dei et Prophetas constituit; sicut etiam implet sanctos Angelos. Sed cum venit plenitudo temporis, missa est, non ut impleret Angelos nec ut esset Angelus nec ut esset cum hominibus vel in hominibus35, ut antea in Patribus erat et in Prophetis, sed ut ipsum Verbum fieret caro, id est homo».

Praeterea notandum est, quod cum his duobus modis mittatur Filius, secundum alterum dicitur missus in mundum, secundum alterum vero non. Eo enim modo missus in mundum dicitur, quo visibilis mundo apparuit. Unde Augustinus in eodem libro36 ait: «Cum ex tempore cuiusquam mente percipitur, mitti quidem dicitur, sed non in hunc mundum. Non enim sensibiliter apparet, id est, corporeis sensibus praesto est. Nam et nos, secundum quod mente aliquid aeternum capimus, non in hoc mundo sumus, et omnium iustorum spiritus etiam in carne viventium, in quantum di-

p. 258

vina sapiunt, non sunt in hoc mundo». Ex praedictis liquet, quod praeter ineffabilem genituram duobus modis mittitur Filius, scilicet cum visibiliter apparuit, vel invisibiliter percipitur mente.

Cap. IX.

Quare Pater non dicitur missus.

Hic quaeritur, cur Pater non dicitur missus, cum ex tempore a quoquam cognoscitur, sicut Filius. Ad quod dicimus, quia in eo est principii auctoritas, qui37 non habet, de quo sit, a quo Filius est et Spiritus sanctus. «Pater enim est, ut ait Augustinus in eodem libro38, principium totius divinitatis, vel si melius dicitur, deitatis», quia principium est Filii et Spiritus sancti. Nam, ut ait Augustinus in eodem39, «si voluisset etiam Deus Pater per subiectam creaturam visibiliter apparere, absurdissime tamen aut a Filio, quem genuit, aut a Spiritu sancto, qui de illo procedit, missus diceretur». Congruenter autem ille missus dicitur, qui in carne apparuit; misisse autem ille, qui in ea non apparuit.

Cap. X.

Quod Filius et Spiritus sanctus non sunt quasi minores Patre, quia missi.

Ideoque putaverunt quidam haeretici, cum Pater non sit missus, sed Filius et Spiritus sanctus, Patrem esse maiorem ac Filium minorem40 et Spiritum sanctum; atque Patrem quasi maiorem misisse utrumque quasi minorem. Quod Augustinus improbat in quarto libro de Trinitate41 illis contradicens: «Non ideo, inquit, arbitrandum est, minorem esse Filium, quod missus est a Patre, nec ideo minorem Spiritum sanctum, quia et Pater eum misit et Filius; sive enim propter visibilem creaturam, sive potius propter principii commendationem, non propter inaequalitatem vel imparilitatem vel dissimilitudinem substantiae in Scripturis haec posita intelliguntur». Non ergo ideo dicitur Pater misisse Filium vel Spiritum sanctum, quod ille esset maior et illi minores, sed maxime propter auctoritatem principii commendandam, et quia in visibili creatura non, sicut illi42, apparuit. Ecce ostensum est, quae sit missio Filii, et quibus modis mittatur.

---

English Translation
p. 256

DISTINCTION XV.

Chapter I.

That the Holy Spirit is given by himself, and the Son is sent by himself.

Here it must be considered: since the Holy Spirit is given to men by the Father and the Son — which is for him to proceed temporally from both, or to be sent — whether also he is given by himself. If he is given by himself, then he proceeds or is sent by himself. To this we say that the Holy Spirit is both God and gift (or given); and therefore1 he both gives and is given. He gives indeed insofar as he is God, and is given insofar as he is gift. But since the donation or giving of the Holy Spirit is the operation of God, and is the common and undivided operation of the three persons, the Holy Spirit is given2 therefore not only by the Father and the Son, but also by himself. Whence Augustine in the fifteenth book On the Trinity3 says that he gives himself. «Just as, he says, the body of the flesh is nothing other than flesh, so the gift of the Holy Spirit is nothing other than the Holy Spirit. To that extent, then, is he the gift of God, in that he is given to those to whom he is given. With himself however he is God, even if he is given to no one — for he was God coeternal with the Father and the Son before he was given to anyone. Nor because they give and he himself is given, is he therefore lesser than they. For he is so given as the gift of God that he also gives himself, as God. For it cannot be said that he is not of his own power, of whom it is said4: The Spirit breathes where he wills». Behold, he plainly says that the Holy Spirit gives himself. For if the Holy Spirit cannot give himself, while the Father can give him and the Son [can], the Father can therefore5 give something — and the Son [can] — that the Holy Spirit cannot. Likewise, if the Father and the Son give the Holy Spirit, but he does not give [himself]: then the Father and the Son work something which the Holy Spirit does not work. Therefore the Holy Spirit gives himself. But if he gives himself, then also6 he proceeds and is sent from himself; which is indeed true. For the temporal procession of the Holy Spirit, or his mission, is donation, and this is the operation of God. Therefore the Holy Spirit proceeds temporally from himself and is sent by himself, since he is given by himself.

But do not be amazed that the Holy Spirit is said to be sent or to proceed from himself. For also of the Son of God Augustine says in the second book On the Trinity7 that he was sent not only by the Father, but also by himself and by the Holy Spirit, asking how the Son or the Holy Spirit can be sent, since each is everywhere as God. For both — Augustine says — are read as having been sent. For of the Holy Spirit it is read8: Whom the Father will send in my name. And again: If I go away, I will send him to you. And the Son says of himself: I went forth from the Father and came into the world. And the Apostle says9: God sent his Son. But in the Prophet it is written in the person of God: I fill heaven and earth. Therefore God is everywhere — and so the Son is everywhere; the Holy Spirit also is everywhere. They were sent therefore where they were.

Chapter II.

How the mission of each is to be understood.

«Wherefore it must be asked how the mission of the Son or of the Holy Spirit is to be understood. For the Father alone — Augustine says in the same [book]10 — is nowhere read as sent».

p. 257

[Sent] rather are the Son and the Holy Spirit. And let us first see, of the Son, in what way [he was] sent. «The Apostle says11: God sent his Son made of woman; in which he sufficiently shows the Son to have been sent by that very thing by which he was made of woman. Accordingly he could not be sent by the Father without the Holy Spirit, since the Father is understood to have sent him when he made him from a woman; which indeed he did not do without the Holy Spirit». Behold, here he says that the Son was sent by the Father and by the Holy Spirit.

Chapter III.

That the Son was sent also by the Holy Spirit.

And that the Son was sent by the Holy Spirit, as Augustine says in the same [book]12, is confirmed by authorities. Christ himself says through Isaiah: Now the Lord and his Spirit have sent me. On this Ambrose in the third book On the Holy Spirit13 thus says: «Who is he who says, The Lord and his Spirit have sent me, except he who came from the Father to save sinners» — that is, Christ? «Therefore both the Father has sent the Son, and the Spirit». The same in the same: «He was given by the Father, as Isaiah says14: A child is born to us, and a Son is given to us. He was given — I dare say — also by the Spirit, since he was sent also by the Spirit». «For the Son of God says15: The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because of which he has anointed me; he has sent me to evangelize the poor, to preach release to captives, etc. And when he had read this from the book of Isaiah, he said in the Gospel: Today this Scripture is fulfilled in your ears, signifying that it had been said of himself. He spoke well in saying upon me, since as it were son of man he was both anointed and sent to preach. For according to divinity the Spirit is not upon Christ, but in Christ». Behold, with these words Ambrose shows that the Son was sent and given to us not only by the Father, but also by the Holy Spirit.

Chapter IV.

That the Son was given also by himself.

Then he shows that he was given also by himself, saying thus in the same book16: «Since it has not been defined by the Prophet by whom the Son was given, he is shown to have been given by the grace of the Trinity — so that the Son himself also gave himself». Behold, here he says that the Son gave himself, since the Trinity17 gave him. But if the Son was given by himself, then he was sent by himself and proceeded from himself. And this is indeed true and must be granted, since his mission is a divine operation.

Chapter V.

That the Son is sent by himself.

But that he is sent by himself, Augustine establishes in the second book On the Trinity18 saying: «Perhaps someone may compel us to say that the Son was sent also by himself — since Mary's conception and childbirth are an operation of the Trinity. But, says someone, how did the Father send him, if he sent himself? To whom I respond, asking him to say how the Father sanctified him, if he sanctified himself? For the Lord says both19: Whom the Father, he says, sanctified and sent into this world. And elsewhere: I sanctify myself for them. Likewise I ask: how did the Father hand him over, if he handed himself over? For both are read20. He will reply, I trust, if he is well-versed: that there is one will of the Father and the Son, and an inseparable operation. Let him understand thus that the Incarnation and birth from the Virgin — in which the Son is understood to have been sent — were done by one and the same inseparable operation of the Father and the Son, with the Holy Spirit not separated from this. Therefore the same Son was sent by the Father and the Son, since by the Father and his21 Word it was brought about that he should be sent — that is, that he should appear incarnate to men. For he was not sent by changing place, since he was in the world. Wherefore the invisible Father, together with the Son invisible with him, by making the same Son visible, is said to have sent him: who if he became visible in such a way that he ceased to be invisible together with the Father — that is, if the substance22 of the invisible Word were changed and converted into a visible creature — then the Son would be understood to have been so sent by the Father that he would be found only sent, and not also sending with the Father. But since the form of a servant was so taken on that the unchangeable form of God23 should remain, it is plain that what appeared in the Son was done by the Father and the Son, who do not appear — that is, that by the invisible Father, with the invisible Son, the same Son visible should be sent».

##### Epilogue.

From the foregoing it is plainly shown that the Son was sent by the Father and by24 the Holy Spirit and by himself; and what the mission itself is — namely, the Incarnation, that is, that he was made man, by which he appeared visible — which is the common work of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.

Chapter VI.

How that saying — «From myself I did not come» — is to be understood.

But against this it is objected: if the Son was sent by himself, why then does he say25: From myself I did not come? To this Augustine responds in the second book On the Trinity26 saying: «This was said according to the form of a servant, according to which he did not act so as to be sent» — that is, he did not bring about the Incarnation [in the form of a servant], but [did so] according to the form of God.

##### Whether the Son was sent only once, or often.

Here it is asked whether the Son was sent only once, or is sent often. For if the mission of the Son is only his Incarnation — since he was incarnate only once — he seems to have been sent only once. But if he is often sent, there is also another mission of his besides the Incarnation. But what is that? Should the eternal generation be called his mission? Or is some other mission to be sought?

Chapter VII.

On the two modes of the Son's mission.

To this we say that the Son is said to be sent in two modes27, besides that eternal generation which is ineffable — according to which he could even be said to have been sent (as it seems to some) — but according to which he is rather better and more truly said to be generated. Setting that aside, then, he is said to be sent in two modes: namely, either when he visibly appeared to the world clothed in flesh, or when he so passes into pious souls28 as to be perceived and known by them. These two modes of mission Augustine plainly distinguishes in the fourth book On the Trinity29 saying: «The Son is not said to be sent by that very thing by which he is born of the Father, but either by his having appeared to this world as the Word made flesh — whence he says30: I went forth from the Father and came into the world; or by his being perceived from time in someone's mind, as it is said of Wisdom31: Send her forth from your holy heavens and from the seat of your majesty, that she may be with me and may labor with me — that is, that she may teach me to labor. And then he is sent to each one when he is known by anyone and perceived, as far as he can be known and perceived according to the capacity of a rational soul progressing toward God or perfected in God.»

Chapter VIII.

That according to one mode he was sent once, according to the other often; and according to one mode he is said to be sent into the world, according to the other not.

Behold, two modes of the Son's mission are distinguished32; and according to one the Son of God was sent only once, according to the other he was sent often and is sent daily. For according to the one he was sent in order to be man — which was done only once; according to the other he is sent in order to be with man, in which mode33 he is sent daily to the Saints — and was sent even before the Incarnation, both to all the Saints who were before, and even to the Angels. Whence Augustine, speaking of the Son — that is, of the Wisdom of the Father — in the fourth book On the Trinity34 says: «Wisdom is sent in one way to be with man, in another way she was sent to be man. For she passes into holy souls and constitutes [them] friends of God and prophets, just as she also fills the holy Angels. But when the fullness of time came, she was sent — not in order to fill the Angels, nor to be an Angel, nor to be with men or in men35 (as before she was in the Patriarchs and Prophets) — but in order that the Word himself should become flesh, that is, become man».

Furthermore it must be noted that, since the Son is sent in these two modes, in the one he is said to be sent into the world, but in the other not. For he is said to be sent into the world in that mode in which he appeared visibly to the world. Whence Augustine in the same book36 says: «When he is perceived from time in someone's mind, he is said indeed to be sent — but not into this world. For he does not appear sensibly — that is, he is not present to the bodily senses. For we ourselves, insofar as we grasp something eternal in the mind, are not in this world; and the spirits of all the just, even those living in the flesh, insofar as they

p. 258

savor divine [things], are not in this world». From the foregoing it is clear that, besides the ineffable generation, the Son is sent in two modes — namely, when he appeared visibly, or [when] he is invisibly perceived in the mind.

Chapter IX.

Why the Father is not said to be sent.

Here it is asked why the Father is not said to be sent, since he is from time known by anyone, just as the Son [is]. To this we say that in him is the authority of the principle, who37 does not have [a person] from which he is — from whom the Son is, and the Holy Spirit. «For the Father — as Augustine says in the same book38 — is the principle of the whole divinity, or if better said, of the deity», since he is the principle of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. For, as Augustine says in the same [book]39, «if God the Father had also wished to appear visibly through a subjected creature, it would still be most absurd to say that he was sent either by the Son whom he generated, or by the Holy Spirit who proceeds from him». But fittingly is he said to have been sent who appeared in the flesh; and [fittingly] to have sent he who did not appear in it.

Chapter X.

That the Son and the Holy Spirit are not as it were lesser than the Father, because sent.

And so certain heretics have supposed that, since the Father is not sent, but the Son and the Holy Spirit [are], the Father is greater and the Son and the Holy Spirit are lesser40 — and that the Father, as it were the greater, has sent both, as it were the lesser. This Augustine refutes in the fourth book On the Trinity41 contradicting them: «Therefore — he says — it is not to be thought that the Son is lesser because he was sent by the Father, nor that the Holy Spirit is lesser because both the Father sent him and the Son [did]; for whether on account of the visible creature, or rather on account of the commendation of the principle, [these things are] not on account of inequality, or disparity, or dissimilarity of substance — these things are to be understood as set down in the Scriptures». Therefore the Father is not said to have sent the Son or the Holy Spirit because he were greater and they lesser, but chiefly for the commendation of the authority of the principle, and because he did not appear in a visible creature as they42 [did]. Behold, it has been shown what the mission of the Son is, and in what modes he is sent.

---

Apparatus Criticus
  1. Codd. ABCE addunt et. Paulo post Vat. et edd. 1, 5, 6, 9 adiiciunt sive datum post donum.
    Codices A, B, C, E add et. A little later the Vatican edition and editions 1, 5, 6, 9 add sive datum after donum.
  2. Vat. et ed. 8 datur. Immediate post cod. D utique pro itaque.
    The Vatican edition and ed. 8 read datur. Immediately after, codex D reads utique in place of itaque.
  3. Cap. 19. n. 36 [de Trin. XV].
    Chap. 19, n. 36 [of De Trinitate XV].
  4. Ioan. 3, 8.
    John 3:8.
  5. Vat. et edd. 3, 4, 6, 8 cum cod. D utique; cod. A igitur; cod. C et itaque; codd. BE et ceterae edd. itaque. Statim edd. 1, 2, 7, 8 omittunt dare post Pater.
    The Vatican edition and editions 3, 4, 6, 8 with codex D read utique; codex A reads igitur; codex C reads et itaque; codices B, E and the other editions read itaque. Soon after, editions 1, 2, 7, 8 omit dare after Pater.
  6. Vat. et edd. 2, 3, 9 cum cod. D omittunt et. In sequenti propositione post ipsa Vat. cum aliis edd., excepta 6, omittit est, contradicentibus omnibus codd.
    The Vatican edition and editions 2, 3, 9 with codex D omit et. In the following proposition, after ipsa, the Vatican edition with the other editions (except 6) omits est, with all the codices in opposition.
  7. Cap. 5. n. 7 [de Trin. II]; sed Magister diffusam doctrinam S. Augustini valde contrahit, verba transponit et de suo addit. — Paulo ante post Filio Vat. cum pluribus edd. omittit Dei.
    Chap. 5, n. 7 [of De Trinitate II]; but the Master greatly compresses Augustine's diffuse doctrine, transposes the words, and adds something of his own. — A little before, after Filio, the Vatican edition with several editions omits Dei.
  8. Ioan. 14, 26; postea ibid. 16, 7. Vulgata: Si autem abiero; ed. 1: Et ita: si abiero; ed. 4: Etsi abiero, omittendo iterum. — Deinde ibid. v. 28.
    John 14:26; afterwards ibid. 16:7. Vulgate: But if I go away; ed. 1: And so: if I go away; ed. 4: Even if I go away, omitting iterum. — Then ibid. v. 28.
  9. Gal. 4, 4. — Deinde Ierem. 23, 24. Vulgata: Numquid non caelum et terram ego impleo, dicit Dominus? — Edd. 1, 8 pro scriptum habent dictum est. Mox Vat. et edd. 5, 6, 9 addunt si post Itaque.
    Galatians 4:4. — Then Jeremiah 23:24. Vulgate: Do I not fill heaven and earth, says the Lord? — Editions 1, 8 read dictum est in place of scriptum. Soon after, the Vatican edition and editions 5, 6, 9 add si after Itaque.
  10. Loc. cit. n. 8, ubi etiam quae sequuntur. — Paulo ante edd. 5, 9 praemittunt ut ante inquit.
    Loc. cit. n. 8 [of De Trinitate II], where also what follows is found. — A little before, editions 5, 9 prefix ut to inquit.
  11. Gal. 4, 4. — Paulo ante Vat. contra codd. ABCD et edd. 1, 8 primo pro primum, et immediate post cum omnibus edd., excepta 2, mutata interpunctione, male legit: missum eum Apostolus dicat.
    Galatians 4:4. — A little before, the Vatican edition, against codices A, B, C, D and editions 1, 8, reads primo in place of primum; and immediately after, with all the editions (except 2), with the punctuation altered, wrongly reads: missum eum Apostolus dicat.
  12. Loc. cit. n. 8, secundum sensum. — Locus Isaiae est 48, 16. Vulgata: Nunc Dominus Deus misit me etc.
    Loc. cit. n. 8, according to the sense. — The Isaiah passage is 48:16. Vulgate: Now the Lord God has sent me, etc.
  13. Cap. 1. n. 7 et 8 [Ambr. de Spiritu sancto III]. — Secundus locus ibid. c. 2. n. 9; tertius a verbis: Dicit enim sumtus est passim ibid. c. 1. n. 1, 2, 6.
    Chap. 1, n. 7 and 8 [of Ambrose, On the Holy Spirit III]. — The second passage [is at] ibid., c. 2, n. 9; the third, from the words Dicit enim, is taken from various places, ibid. c. 1, nn. 1, 2, 6.
  14. Isai. 9, 6. Vulgata: Parvulus enim natus est etc.
    Isaiah 9:6. Vulgate: For a little child is born, etc.
  15. Luc. 4, 18, ubi Christus in synagoga legit verba Isaiae 61, 1–2, et deinde v. 21 dicit: Quia hodie impleta est etc. — Mox pro significaret Vat. cum plerisque edd. signaret, sed contradicentibus codd. ACD et edd. 1, 8.
    Luke 4:18, where Christ in the synagogue reads the words of Isaiah 61:1–2, and then in v. 21 says: Because today it is fulfilled, etc. — Soon after, in place of significaret, the Vatican edition with most editions reads signaret, but with codices A, C, D and editions 1, 8 in opposition.
  16. Cap. 2. n. 9 [Ambr. de Spiritu s. III]. — In principio huius loci post Cum Vat. et edd. 4, 6, 8, 9 addunt enim. Mox post a quo datus loco est posuimus sit auctoritate omnium codd. et edd. 1, 5, 6, 8.
    Chap. 2, n. 9 [of Ambrose, On the Holy Spirit III]. — At the beginning of this passage, after Cum, the Vatican edition and editions 4, 6, 8, 9 add enim. Soon after, after a quo datus, in place of est we have set sit on the authority of all the codices and editions 1, 5, 6, 8.
  17. Cod. D praemittit tota; ed. 1 adiungit aequae.
    Codex D prefixes tota; ed. 1 adds aequae.
  18. Cap. 5. n. 9 [de Trin. II]. — In hoc textu pro cogat ed. 6 rogat; et edd. 8, 9 cogitat. — Ante Mariae Vat. et pleraeque edd. addunt et contra codd. et ed. 1, 6; Augustinus ille pro et. — Paulo infra ante ipse se sanctificavit iterum removimus et auctoritate codd. et edd. 1, 6, 8.
    Chap. 5, n. 9 [of De Trinitate II]. — In this text, in place of cogat, ed. 6 reads rogat; and editions 8, 9 read cogitat. — Before Mariae, the Vatican edition and most editions add et, against the codices and editions 1, 6; Augustinus ille in place of et. — A little further on, before ipse se sanctificavit, we have again removed et on the authority of the codices and editions 1, 6, 8.
  19. Ioan. 10, 36, ubi Vulgata omittit hunc ante mundum. — Secundus locus est Ioan. 17, 19.
    John 10:36, where the Vulgate omits hunc before mundum. — The second passage is John 17:19.
  20. Rom. 8, 32, et Gal. 2, 20. — Mox pleraeque edd. post Credo adiiciunt quod.
    Romans 8:32, and Galatians 2:20. — Soon after, most editions add quod after Credo.
  21. Codd. AB et edd. 1, 8 repetunt a.
    Codices A, B and editions 1, 8 repeat a.
  22. Solummodo Vat. et edd. 4, 8, 9 male praemittunt in, legendo: in substantia.
    Only the Vatican edition and editions 4, 8, 9 wrongly prefix in, reading: in substantia.
  23. Respicitur Phil. 2, 6. 7.
    It alludes to Philippians 2:6–7.
  24. Vat. et ed. 6 omittunt a; paulo ante edd. 1, 8 supra dictis loco praedictis.
    The Vatican edition and ed. 6 omit a; a little before, editions 1, 8 read supra dictis in place of praedictis.
  25. Ioan. 7, 28 et 8, 42. — Codd. ABCE et ed. 1 adhuc pro Sed ad hoc.
    John 7:28 and 8:42. — Codices A, B, C, E and ed. 1 read adhuc in place of Sed ad hoc.
  26. Cap. 5. n. 9 [de Trin. II]. — Cod. D repetit eius post missio; in cod. C omittit est.
    Chap. 5, n. 9 [of De Trinitate II]. — Codex D repeats eius after missio; in codex C est is omitted.
  27. Cod. C minus.
    Codex C reads minus.
  28. Alludit ad Sap. 7, 27, ubi Vulgata: Et per nationes in animas sanctas se transfert, amicos Dei et Prophetas constituit.
    It alludes to Wisdom 7:27, where the Vulgate reads: And throughout the nations she passes into holy souls, [and] constitutes [them] friends of God and prophets.
  29. Cap. 20. n. 28 et aliqua verba n. 27. — In hoc loco August. et codd. AD legunt eo ipso quo loco eo ipso quod; deinde Vat. et ed. 4 omittunt vel post sed.
    Chap. 20, n. 28, and some words from n. 27 [of De Trinitate IV]. — In this passage, Augustine and codices A, D read eo ipso quo in place of eo ipso quod; then the Vatican edition and ed. 4 omit vel after sed.
  30. Ioan. 16, 28.
    John 16:28.
  31. Sap. 9, 10. Vulgata: Mitte illam etc.
    Wisdom 9:10. Vulgate: Send her, etc.
  32. Ed. 6 addit hic Dei et deinde omittit Dei Filius; post haec verba ultima edd. 2, 3, 8, 9 adiiciunt et.
    Ed. 6 adds Dei here, and then omits Dei Filius; after these last words, editions 2, 3, 8, 9 add et.
  33. Cod. C addit per gratiam. Infra edd. 1, 4 omittunt et post incarnationem.
    Codex C adds per gratiam. Below, editions 1, 4 omit et after incarnationem.
  34. Cap. 20. n. 27 [de Trin. IV]. — Rursus citatur Sap. 7, 27. In Vulgata deest enim, quod posuimus ex August., codd. omnibus et edd., exceptis Vat. et 3, 8.
    Chap. 20, n. 27 [of De Trinitate IV]. — Again Wisdom 7:27 is cited. In the Vulgate enim is missing, which we have set from Augustine, all the codices and editions, except the Vatican edition and 3, 8.
  35. Edd. 1, 8 addunt tantum, et immediate ante ed. 1 legit nec pro vel.
    Editions 1, 8 add tantum; and immediately before, ed. 1 reads nec in place of vel.
  36. Cap. 20. n. 28 [de Trin. IV]. — In hoc textu codd. ACD addunt etiam post Nam et nos.
    Chap. 20, n. 28 [of De Trinitate IV]. — In this text, codices A, C, D add etiam after Nam et nos.
  37. Contra omnes codd. et ed. 6 perperam legit Vat. cum aliis edd. quae, cum relativum secundum contextum referendum sit ad in eo. Paulo ante codd. DE quod pro quia. Deinde post Filius Vat. sola omittit est.
    Against all the codices and ed. 6, the Vatican edition with the other editions wrongly reads quae, since the relative according to the context must be referred to in eo. A little before, codices D, E read quod in place of quia. Then, after Filius, the Vatican edition alone omits est.
  38. Libr. IV. de Trin. c. 20. n. 29.
    Book IV of On the Trinity, c. 20, n. 29.
  39. Cap. 21. n. 32 [de Trin. IV]. — Vat. sola: Quia etiam si voluisset pro Si voluisset etiam. Deinde omnes edd., demptis Vat. et ed. 8, male legunt appareret pro apparere. Pro nostra lectione faciunt codd. et originale. Denique ante procedit codd. ACD bene legunt ipso pro illo.
    Chap. 21, n. 32 [of De Trinitate IV]. — The Vatican edition alone reads: Quia etiam si voluisset in place of Si voluisset etiam. Then all the editions, except the Vatican edition and ed. 8, wrongly read appareret for apparere. The codices and the original [Augustine text] support our reading. Finally, before procedit, codices A, C, D rightly read ipso in place of illo.
  40. Vat. et aliae edd., excepta 1, contra codd., excepto E, addunt esse.
    The Vatican edition and the other editions (except 1), against the codices (except E), add esse.
  41. Cap. 21. n. 32 [de Trin. IV]. — In hoc loco auctoritate codd., edd. 1, 8 et originalis post Spiritum sanctum posuimus quia loco quod, et post principii expunximus auctoritatem, vel.
    Chap. 21, n. 32 [of De Trinitate IV]. — In this passage, on the authority of the codices and editions 1, 8 and of the original, after Spiritum sanctum we have set quia in place of quod, and after principii we have expunged auctoritatem, vel.
  42. Vat. cum omnibus edd., excepta 1, mendose ille, contradicentibus omnibus codd.; illi refertur ad Filium et Spiritum sanctum.
    The Vatican edition with all the editions (except 1) erroneously reads ille, with all the codices in opposition; illi refers to the Son and the Holy Spirit.
Dist. 15, Part 1, Divisio Textus→