← Back to Distinction 16

Dist. 16

Book I: On the Mystery of the Trinity · Distinction 16

Textus Latinus
p. 276

DISTINCTIO XVI.

De missione Spiritus sancti, quae fit duobus modis, visibiliter et invisibiliter.

Nunc de Spiritu sancto videndum est, praeter illam ineffabilem et aeternam processionem, qua procedit a Patre et Filio, et non a se ipso, quae sit eius temporalis processio, quae dicitur missio sive donatio1. Ad quod dicimus, quia sicut Filius duobus modis dicitur mitti: uno, quo visibiliter apparuit; altero, quo invisibiliter2 castis mentibus percipitur: ita et Spiritus sanctus a Patre et Filio ac a se ipso duobus modis procedere sive mitti sive dari dicitur: uno visibiliter, altero invisibiliter. Datus est enim visibilis creaturae demonstratione, sicut in die Pentecostes aliisque vicibus, et datur quotidie invisibiliter illabendo mentibus fidelium.

Et primo agamus de illo missionis modo, qui fit visibili specie. De hoc Augustinus in secundo libro de Trinitate3 ita ait: «In promptu est intelligere de Spiritu sancto, cur missus et ipse dicatur. Facta est enim quaedam creaturae species ex tempore, in qua visibiliter ostenderetur Spiritus sanctus, sive cum in ipsum Dominum corporali specie columbae descendit, sive cum in die Pentecostes factus est subito de caelo sonus, quasi ferretur flatus vehemens, et visae sunt illis linguae divisae sicut ignis, qui et insedit super unumquemque eorum. Haec operatio visibiliter expressa et oculis oblata mortalibus missio Spiritus sancti dicta est, non ut appareret eis4 ipsa substantia, qua et ipse invisibilis et incommutabilis est, sicut Pater et Filius, sed ut exterioribus visis corda hominum commota a temporali manifestatione venientis ad occultam aeternitatem semper praesentis converterentur». Ecce his verbis aperit Augustinus illum modum missionis, qui visibiliter exhibetur, cum tamen ipse Spiritus in sui natura non videatur, qui nec in illis creaturis magis erat quam in aliis, sed ad aliud. In illis enim erat, ut per eas ad homines veniens5 ostenderetur esse in illis, ad quos illae creaturae veniebant. Non enim Spiritus sanctus temporali motu tunc venit vel descendit in homines, sed per temporalem motum creaturae significata est spiritualis et invisibilis Spiritus sancti infusio. Et ut apertius dicam, per illum modum missionis Spiritus sancti corporaliter exhibitum monstrata est spiritualis et interior missio sancti Spiritus sive donatio, de qua agendum est.

Sed prius quaerendum est, cum Filius dicatur minor Patre secundum missionem, qua in forma creata apparuit, cur et Spiritus sanctus non dicatur similiter minor Patre, cum in forma creata apparuerit6. Nam de Filio, quod minor sit Patre secundum formam, qua missus apparuit, aperte ostendit Augustinus in quarto libro de Trinitate7 dicens: «Misit Deus Filium suum factum ex muliere, factum sub lege, usque adeo parvum, ut factum; eo itaque missum, quo factum. Fateamur ergo factum minorem, et in tantum minorem, in quantum factum, et in tantum factum, in quantum missum». Ecce habes, quia Filius, in quantum est missus, id est factus, minor est Patre. Cur ergo Spiritus sanctus non dicitur minor Patre, cum et ipse creaturam assumserit in qua apparuit? Quia aliter Spiritus assumsit creaturam, in qua apparuit, aliter Filius. Nam Filius accepit per unionem8, Spiritus vero non. Filius enim accepit hominem ita, ut fieret homo; Spiritus vero sanctus non ita accepit columbam, ut fieret columba. De hoc Augustinus in secundo libro de Trinitate9 ita ait: «Ideo nusquam scriptum est, quod Deus Pater maior sit Spiritu sancto, vel Spiritus sanctus minor Patre, quia non sic est assumta creatura, in qua appareret Spiritus sanctus, sicut assumtus est Filius hominis, in qua forma ipsius Verbi Dei persona praesentaretur, non ut haberet Verbum Dei, sicut alii sancti sapientes, sed quod ipsum Verbum erat. Aliud est enim Verbum in carne, aliud Verbum caro, id est, aliud est Verbum in homine, aliud Verbum homo. Caro enim pro homine posita est in eo quod ait10: Verbum caro factum est. Non ergo sic est

p. 277

assumta creatura, in qua apparuit Spiritus sanctus, sicut assumta est caro illa et humana forma ex virgine Maria. Non enim columbam vel illum flatum vel illum ignem beatificavit sibique in unitatem personae coniunxit in aeternum». Ex praedictis aperte ostensum est, secundum quid Filius dicatur minor Patre, et quare Filius dicatur minor Patre, et non Spiritus sanctus.

Cap. II.

Quod Filius secundum quod homo non modo Patre, sed Spiritu sancto etiam minor est.

Notandum autem, quod Filius, secundum quod homo factus est, non tantum Patre, sed Spiritu sancto et etiam se ipso minor dicitur. Et quod etiam se ipso minor dicatur secundum formam servi, Augustinus ostendit in primo libro de Trinitate11 dicens: «Erraverunt homines, ea quae de Christo secundum hominem dicta sunt, ad eius substantiam, quae sempiterna est, transferentes, sicut illud quod ipse Dominus dicit12: Pater maior me est; quod propter formam servi Veritas dicit, secundum quem modum etiam se ipso minor est Filius. Quomodo enim non etiam se ipso minor factus est, qui se ipsum exinanivit, formam servi accipiens13? Non enim sic accepit formam servi, ut amitteret formam Dei, in qua erat aequalis Patri. In forma ergo Dei Unigenitus Patris aequalis est Patri. In forma servi etiam se ipso minor est. Non ergo immerito Scriptura dicit utrumque, scilicet et aequalem Patri Filium, et Patrem maiorem Filio; illud enim propter formam Dei, hoc autem propter formam servi intelligitur». De hoc eodem in secundo libro de Trinitate14 Augustinus ait: «Dei Filius est aequalis Patri secundum Dei formam, in qua est, et minor Patre secundum formam servi, quam accepit, in qua non modo Patre, sed etiam Spiritu sancto, nec hoc tantum, sed etiam se ipso minor inventus est». «Propter quam, ut idem in Epistola ad Maximum15 ait, non tantum Patre, sed etiam se ipso et Spiritu sancto minor factus est et etiam minoratus paulo minus ab Angelis». «Est ergo Dei Filius, ut ipse ait in primo libro de Trinitate16, Deo Patri natura aequalis, habitu minor, id est in forma servi, quam accepit». His auctoritatibus aperte ostenditur Filius secundum formam servi minor Patre et se ipso et Spiritu sancto.

Hilarius autem dicere videtur, quod Pater sit maior Filio, nec tamen Filius sit17 minor Patre. Pater enim dicitur maior propter auctoritatem, quia in eo est auctoritas generationis, secundum quam dicit18: Pater maior me est; et Apostolus: Donavit ei nomen, quod est super omne nomen. Cum ergo ait: Pater maior me est, hoc est ac si diceret, donavit mihi nomen. «Si igitur, inquit Hilarius in nono libro de Trinitate19, donantis auctoritate Pater maior est, nunquid per doni confessionem minor Filius est? Maior itaque donans est, sed minor iam non est, cui unum esse donatur; ait enim: Ego et Pater unum sumus. Si non hoc donatur Iesu, ut confitendus sit in gloria Dei Patris, minor Patre est. Si autem in ea gloria donatur ei esse, qua Pater est, habes et in donantis auctoritate, quia maior est, et in donati20 confessione, quia unum sunt. Maior itaque Pater Filio est et plane maior, cui tantum donat esse, quantus est ipse; cui innascibilitatis esse imaginem sacramento nativitatis impertit, quem ex se in forma sua generat». Audisti, lector, quid super hoc dicat Hilarius, cuius verba, ubicumque occurrerint, diligenter nota pieque intellige.

---

English Translation
p. 276

Distinction XVI.

On the mission of the Holy Spirit, which is made in two ways, visibly and invisibly.

Now we must consider, concerning the Holy Spirit, beyond that ineffable and eternal procession by which he proceeds from the Father and the Son and not from himself, what his temporal procession is — which is called mission or bestowal1. To this we say that, just as the Son is said to be sent in two ways — one, by which he appeared visibly; the other, by which he is invisibly2 perceived by chaste minds — so also the Holy Spirit is said to proceed or be sent or be given by the Father and the Son and by himself in two ways: one visibly, the other invisibly. For he was given by visible demonstration of a creature, as on the day of Pentecost and on other occasions; and he is given daily, invisibly, by gliding into the minds of the faithful.

And first let us treat of that mode of mission which is made in a visible form. Of this Augustine in book II On the Trinity3 thus says: "It is easy to understand concerning the Holy Spirit why he too is said to be sent. For there was made some species of a creature in time, in which the Holy Spirit was visibly shown forth — whether when he descended upon the Lord himself in the bodily form of a dove, or when on the day of Pentecost there came suddenly a sound from heaven, as of a vehement wind being borne, and there appeared to them divided tongues as it were of fire, which also sat upon each one of them. This operation, visibly expressed and offered to mortal eyes, was called the mission of the Holy Spirit — not that there should appear to them4 that very substance by which he himself is invisible and unchangeable, just as the Father and the Son are, but that by these external sights the hearts of men, moved from the temporal manifestation of him as coming, might be turned to the hidden eternity of him who is always present." Behold, by these words Augustine opens up that mode of mission which is exhibited visibly — although the Spirit himself in his own nature is not seen, who was not in those creatures more than in others, but to a different end. For he was in them, that, coming through them5 to men, he might be shown to be in those to whom those creatures came. For the Holy Spirit did not then come or descend upon men by a temporal motion, but by the temporal motion of the creature was signified the spiritual and invisible infusion of the Holy Spirit. And, to speak more openly, by that mode of mission of the Holy Spirit exhibited bodily, the spiritual and interior mission or bestowal of the Holy Spirit was shown — concerning which we must now treat.

But first it must be asked: since the Son is said to be lesser than the Father with respect to the mission by which he appeared in a created form, why is the Holy Spirit not said to be similarly lesser than the Father, since he too has appeared in a created form6. For concerning the Son, that he is lesser than the Father according to the form in which he appeared as sent, Augustine plainly shows in book IV On the Trinity7, saying: "God sent his Son made of a woman, made under the law, so much made small that he was made; and so sent in the manner in which he was made. Let us therefore confess that he is lesser as having been made, and as much lesser as he was made, and as much made as he was sent." Behold, you have it that the Son, insofar as he is sent — that is, made — is lesser than the Father. Why then is the Holy Spirit not called lesser than the Father, since he also assumed a creature in which he appeared? Because the Spirit assumed the creature in which he appeared otherwise than the Son did. For the Son received [it] through union8, but the Spirit not [so]. For the Son received the man in such a way that he became man; but the Holy Spirit did not so receive the dove that he became a dove. Of this Augustine in book II On the Trinity9 thus says: "Therefore it is nowhere written that God the Father is greater than the Holy Spirit, or that the Holy Spirit is lesser than the Father, since the creature in which the Holy Spirit appeared was not so assumed as the Son of Man was assumed, in which the form of the very Word of God's person was presented — not so that he might have the Word of God, as do other holy wise men, but that he himself was the Word. For one thing is the Word in flesh, another the Word [which is] flesh; that is, one is the Word in a man, another is the Word [who is] man. For flesh is put for man in that which he says10: The Word was made flesh. Therefore the creature

p. 277

in which the Holy Spirit appeared was not so assumed as that flesh and human form was assumed from the Virgin Mary. For he did not beatify and join to himself in unity of person, for eternity, the dove or that wind or that fire." From the foregoing it has been plainly shown according to what the Son is called lesser than the Father, and why the Son is called lesser than the Father, and not the Holy Spirit.

Chapter II.

That the Son according as he is man is lesser not only than the Father but also than the Holy Spirit.

It must be noted, however, that the Son, according as he was made man, is called lesser not only than the Father but also than the Holy Spirit, and even than himself. And that even than himself he is called lesser according to the form of a servant, Augustine shows in book I On the Trinity11, saying: "Men have erred, transferring those things which were said of Christ according to [his] humanity to his substance, which is sempiternal — as in that which the Lord himself says12: The Father is greater than I; which Truth says on account of the form of a servant, in which manner the Son is also lesser than himself. For how is he not also made lesser than himself, who emptied himself, taking the form of a servant13? For he did not so take the form of a servant that he might lose the form of God, in which he was equal to the Father. In the form of God therefore the Only-Begotten of the Father is equal to the Father. In the form of a servant he is even lesser than himself. Therefore not without reason does Scripture say both — namely, both that the Son is equal to the Father, and that the Father is greater than the Son; the former is understood on account of the form of God, the latter on account of the form of a servant." On this same point in book II On the Trinity14 Augustine says: "The Son of God is equal to the Father according to the form of God, in which he is, and lesser than the Father according to the form of a servant which he received, in which he was found lesser not only than the Father but also than the Holy Spirit; and not only this, but even than himself." "On account of which" — as the same Augustine says in the Letter to Maximus15 — "he was made lesser not only than the Father but even than himself and than the Holy Spirit, and was even made a little less than the Angels." "The Son of God therefore is, as he himself says in book I On the Trinity16, equal to God the Father in nature, lesser in condition — that is, in the form of a servant which he received." By these authorities it is plainly shown that the Son according to the form of a servant is lesser than the Father and than himself and than the Holy Spirit.

Hilary, however, seems to say that the Father is greater than the Son, yet that the Son is not17 lesser than the Father. For the Father is called greater on account of authority, since in him is the authority of generation, according to which he says18: The Father is greater than I; and the Apostle: He bestowed on him a name which is above every name. When therefore he says: The Father is greater than I, this is as if he were saying: he bestowed on me a name. "If therefore," says Hilary in book IX On the Trinity19, "by the authority of the giver the Father is greater, is the Son lesser through the confession of the gift? The giver is therefore greater; but he is not now lesser to whom it is given to be one [with the giver]; for he says: I and the Father are one. If this is not given to Jesus, that he should be confessed in the glory of God the Father, he is lesser than the Father. But if it is given to him to be in that glory in which the Father is, you have both, in the authority of the giver — that he is greater — and in the confession of the one given to20 — that they are one. The Father therefore is greater than the Son, and plainly greater, to whom he gives to be as great as he himself is; to whom by the sacrament of [his] nativity he imparts being as the image of unbegottenness, [the one] whom from himself in his own form he begets." You have heard, reader, what Hilary says on this; whose words, wherever they come up, mark carefully and understand piously.

---

Apparatus Criticus
  1. Vat. cum aliis edd., exceptis 1, 8, contra codd. dicto. Paulo ante codd. ABE repetunt a ante Filio. Denique post ad quod dicimus edd. 1, 6, 8 quod loco quia.
    The Vatican edition with the other editions, except 1 and 8, against the codices, [reads] dicto. A little earlier, codices A, B, E repeat a before Filio. Lastly, after ad quod dicimus, edd. 1, 6, 8 [read] quod in place of quia.
  2. Vat. et edd. 2, 4, 5, 9 contra codd. et alias edd. post invisibiliter addunt a; e contra paulo post ante se ipso codd. BCE et edd. 1, 8 omittunt a. Mox edd. 1, 7 post mitti omittunt sive dari. Denique ante creaturae edd. 2, 3, 7 legunt visibiliter loco visibilis.
    The Vatican edition and edd. 2, 4, 5, 9, against the codices and the other editions, after invisibiliter add a; conversely, a little later, before se ipso, codices B, C, E and edd. 1, 8 omit a. Shortly after, edd. 1, 7, after mitti, omit sive dari. Lastly, before creaturae, edd. 2, 3, 7 read visibiliter in place of visibilis.
  3. Cap. 5. n. 10. — Vat. et edd. 4, 6 omittunt ita ante ait.
    [Augustine, De Trin. II,] c. 5, n. 10. — The Vatican edition and edd. 4, 6 omit ita before ait.
  4. Codd. DE cum originali legunt eius; codd. A eis eius.
    Codices D, E, with the original [Augustine], read eius; codices A [read] eis eius.
  5. Codd. BCDE et edd. 1, 6 venientes, referendo hoc participium ad eas, quod displicet.
    Codices B, C, D, E and edd. 1, 6 [read] venientes [plural], referring this participle to eas [the creatures], which is unsatisfactory.
  6. Vat. cum aliis edd. contra codd. et edd. 1, 8 non bene apparuit. Paulo ante codd. DE et edd. 1, 8 omittunt et ante Spiritus sanctus.
    The Vatican edition with the other editions, against the codices and edd. 1, 8, [reads] apparuit not well [for apparuerit]. A little earlier, codices D, E and edd. 1, 8 omit et before Spiritus sanctus.
  7. Cap. 19. n. 26. — Locus Scripturae est Gal. 4, 4.
    [Augustine, De Trin. IV,] c. 19, n. 26. — The Scripture place is Galatians 4:4.
  8. Solummodo Vat. et edd. 5, 6 adiiciunt personae.
    Only the Vatican edition and edd. 5, 6 add personae ("of [the] person").
  9. Cap. 6. n. 11. — Vat. et ed. 6 iterum omittunt ita ante ait.
    [Augustine, De Trin. II,] c. 6, n. 11. — The Vatican edition and ed. 6 again omit ita before ait.
  10. Ioan. 1, 14.
    John 1:14.
  11. Cap. 7. n. 14, sed multis a Magistro omissis. — Paulo ante cod. D Quod autem pro Et quod; cod. C Quod.
    [Augustine, De Trin. I,] c. 7, n. 14, but with many [things] omitted by the Master [Lombard]. — A little earlier, codex D [reads] Quod autem for Et quod; codex C [reads] Quod.
  12. Ioan. 14, 28. — Edd. legunt ait pro dicit contra codd. et originale.
    John 14:28. — The editions read ait ("says") for dicit against the codices and the original [Augustine].
  13. Phil. 2, 7.
    Philippians 2:7.
  14. Cap. 1. n. 2.
    [Augustine, De Trin. II,] c. 1, n. 2.
  15. Epist. 170. (olim. 66) n. 9. — Omnes codd. et edd. male citant sic: in libro contra Maximinum (vel Maximianum); Vat. in libr. Epist. ad Maximum. Maximus fuit medicus ab haeresi Ariana conversus. — In fine huius loci textus S. Scripturae est Hebr. 2, 9: qui modico quam Angeli minoratus est.
    [Augustine,] Letter 170 (formerly 66), n. 9. — All the codices and editions cite this badly as in the book against Maximinus (or Maximianus); the Vatican edition [reads] in the book of the Letter to Maximus. Maximus was a physician converted from the Arian heresy. — At the end of this place the Scripture text is Hebrews 2:9: who was made a little less than the Angels.
  16. Cap. 7. n. 14. — Hic Vat. cum ceteris edd. addit in ante natura contra originale, nostros codd. et etiam contextum, cum sibi correspondeant verba natura et habitu. Deinde solummodo Vat. et cod. C omittunt id est.
    [Augustine, De Trin. I,] c. 7, n. 14. — Here the Vatican edition with the other editions adds in before natura against the original, our codices, and even the context, since the words natura and habitu correspond to one another. Then only the Vatican edition and codex C omit id est.
  17. Vat. cum plurimis edd., sed contra codd. et edd. 1, 8 omittit sit.
    The Vatican edition with most editions, but against the codices and edd. 1, 8, omits sit.
  18. Ioan. 14, 28; et mox Phil. 2, 7. — Ed. 8 verbo dicit praemittit ipse Filius, quod ceterae subaudiunt.
    John 14:28; and shortly after, Philippians 2:7. — Ed. 8 prefixes ipse Filius ("the Son himself") to the verb dicit, which the others understand [implicitly].
  19. Num. 54. — Textus Scripturae est Ioan. 10, 30.
    [Hilary, De Trin. IX,] no. 54. — The Scripture text is John 10:30.
  20. Contra originale, omnes codd. et edd. 6, 8, 9 [legunt donati]; Vat. cum aliis edd. male legit donantis. Paulo post ead. Vat. et ed. 4 perperam addunt et ante Filio.
    Against the original, all the codices and edd. 6, 8, 9 [read donati]; the Vatican edition with the other editions wrongly reads donantis. A little later, the same Vatican edition and ed. 4 wrongly add et before Filio.
Dist. 16, Divisio Textus→