← Back to Distinction 29

Dist. 29

Book I: On the Mystery of the Trinity · Distinction 29

Textus Latinus
p. 506

DISTINCTIO XXIX.

Cap. I. De principio.

Est praeterea aliud nomen, multiplicem notans relationem, scilicet principium. Dicitur enim principium semper ad aliquid. Et dicitur Pater principium, et Filius principium, et Spiritus sanctus principium; sed differenter. Nam Pater dicitur principium ad Filium et ad Spiritum sanctum. Unde Augustinus in libro quarto de Trinitate1 ait: «Pater est principium totius divinitatis, vel si melius dicitur, deitatis, quia ipse est a nullo. Non enim habet de quo sit vel de quo procedat»; sed ab eo et Filius est genitus, et Spiritus sanctus procedit. Non igitur dicitur principium totius deitatis, quod vel sui vel divinae essentiae principium sit, sed quia principium est Filii et Spiritus sancti, in quibus singulis tota divinitas est. Filius ad Spiritum sanctum dicitur principium. Spiritus vero sanctus non dicitur principium nisi ad creaturas, ad quas etiam Pater dicitur principium et Filius et Trinitas ipsa simul, et singula persona2 principium dicitur creaturarum. «Pater ergo principium est sine principio, Filius principium de principio, Spiritus sanctus principium de utroque, id est de Patre et Filio3».

Cap. II. Quod ab aeterno Pater est principium et Filii, sed non Spiritus sanctus.

Et Pater ab aeterno principium est Filii, et Pater et Filius principium Spiritus sancti, quia Filius est a Patre, et Spiritus sanctus ab utroque. Spiritus vero sanctus non ab aeterno principium est, sed esse coepit, quia non dicitur principium nisi ad creaturas. Cum ergo creaturae esse coeperunt, et Spiritus sanctus esse coepit principium earum. Ita etiam Pater et Filius esse coepit cum Spiritu sancto unum principium creaturarum, quia creaturae coeperunt esse a Patre et Filio et Spiritu sancto; et dicuntur hi tres non tria, sed unum principium omnium creaturarum, quia uno eodemque modo principium rerum sunt. Non enim aliter sunt res a Patre et aliter a Filio, sed penitus eodem modo. Ideo Apostolus intelligens, hanc Trinitatem esse unum principium rerum, ait4: Ex ipso et per ipsum et in ipso sunt omnia. «Cum vero audimus, omnia esse ex Deo, ut ait Augustinus de Natura boni5, omnes utique naturas intelligere debemus, et omnia quae naturaliter6 sunt. Non enim ex ipso sunt peccata, quae naturam non servant, sed vitiant, quae ex voluntate peccantium nascuntur». Omnium ergo, quae naturaliter sunt, unum principium est Pater cum Filio et Spiritu sancto, et hoc esse coepit. Ab aeterno autem Pater principium est Filii generatione, et Pater et Filius unum principium Spiritus sancti. Unde Augustinus in quinto libro de Trinitate7 ita ait: «Dicitur relative Pater, idemque relative dicitur principium. Sed Pater ad Filium dicitur, principium vero ad omnia quae ab ipso sunt. Et principium dicitur Filius. Cum enim diceretur ei8: Tu quis es? respondit: Principium, qui et loquor vobis. Sed nunquid Patris principium est? Immo creatorem se voluit ostendere, cum se dixit esse principium, sicut et Pater principium est creaturae, quia ab ipso sunt omnia. Cum vero dicimus et Patrem principium et Filium principium, non duo principia creaturae dicimus, quia Pater et Filius simul ad creaturam unum principium est, sicut unus creator. Si autem quidquid in se manet et gignit vel operatur aliquid, principium est eius rei, quam gignit, vel eius, quam operatur; non possumus negare, etiam Spiritum sanctum9 recte dici principium, quia non eum separamus ab appellatione creatoris: quia scriptum est10 de illo, quod operetur, et utique in se manens operatur. Non enim in aliquid eorum quae operatur, ipse mutatur et vertitur. Unum ergo principium ad creaturam cum Patre et Filio est Spiritus sanctus, non duo vel tria principia». Ecce aperte ostendit Augustinus, Patrem et Filium et Spiritum sanctum esse unum principium rerum creatarum, id est, uno eodemque modo esse principium; et illum modum satis aperuit, quia scilicet operantur omnia, et quia similiter11 operantur hi tres, ideo unum principium esse dicuntur.

Cap. III. Quomodo Pater principium Filii, et ipse cum Filio Spiritus sancti.

Deinde in eodem libro continue ostendit, quomodo Pater dicatur principium ad Filium, et ad Spiritum sanctum ipse et Filius dicens, ideo Patrem esse principium Filii, quia genuit eum, et Patrem et Filium esse principium Spiritus sancti, quia Spiritus sanctus procedit vel datur ab utroque. Ait enim ita12: «Si gignens ad id quod gignitur principium est, Pater ad

p. 507

Filium principium est, quia genuit eum. Utrum autem et ad Spiritum sanctum principium sit Pater, quia dictum est: De Patre procedit, non parva quaestio est. Quod si ita est, non iam principium ei13 tantum rei erit, quam gignit vel facit, sed et ei, quam dat et quae procedit ab ipso. Si ergo quod datur vel quod procedit principium habet, a quo datur vel procedit, fatendum est, Patrem et Filium principium esse Spiritus sancti, non duo principia. Sed sicut Pater et Filius ad creaturam relative unus creator et unus dominus dicitur, sic relative ad Spiritum sanctum unum principium. Ad creaturam vero Pater et Filius et Spiritus sanctus unum principium sunt, sicut unus creator et unus dominus». Ecce habes, quod Pater principium Filii dicitur, quia genuit eum. Qua ergo notione est Pater, ea principium Filii dicitur, id est generatione, secundum quam etiam dicitur auctor Filii. Unde Hilarius in quarto libro de Trinitate14 ait: «Ipso quo Pater dicitur, eius quem genuit auctor ostenditur, id nomen habens, quod neque ex alio profectum intelligatur, et ex quo is qui genitus est substitisse doceatur», «Novit Ecclesia unum innascibilem Deum, novit unigenitum Dei Filium. Confitetur Patrem ab origine liberum, confitetur et Filii originem ab initio non ipsum ab initio, sed ab ininitiabili non per se ipsum, sed ab eo qui a nemine est, natum ab aeterno, nativitatem scilicet ex paterna aeternitate sumentem. Edita est hic fidei professio, sed professionis ratio nondum exposita est»; et ideo quaerenda, scilicet quomodo intelligendum sit quod ait, Filii originem esse ab initio, et non ipsum esse ab initio, sed ab ininitiabili. Hoc utique subdens determinavit, quomodo acceperit initium, inquiens, originem Filii esse ab initio, ac si diceret: non ita intelligas, originem Filii esse ab initio, quasi ipse Filius habeat initium, sed quia ipse est ab ininitiabili, id est a Patre, a quo sunt omnia. Nam licet Filius sit principium de principio, non est tamen concedendum, quod Filius habeat principium. Cumque Filius sit principium de principio et Pater principium, non de principio, non est principium de principio principium sine principio, sicut Filius non est Pater; neque duo tamen principia, sed unum, sicut Pater et Filius non duo creatores, sed unus creator.

Cap. IV. An eadem notione Pater et Filius sint principium Spiritus sancti.

Unum autem principium sunt Pater et Filius non tantum creaturarum, ut dictum est supra, sed etiam Spiritus sancti; ideo quaeri solet, utrum eadem notione Pater sit principium Spiritus sancti et Filius, an sit alia notio, qua Pater dicatur principium Spiritus sancti, et alia, qua Filius. — Ad quod dicimus, cum Pater dicatur principium Spiritus sancti et Filius — quia Spiritus sanctus procedit vel datur ab utroque, nec aliter procedit vel datur a Patre quam a Filio — sane intelligi potest, Patrem et Filium eadem relatione vel notione dici principium Spiritus sancti. — Si vero quaeritur, quae sit illa notio quam ibi notat principium, nomen eius non habemus15, sed non est ipsa paternitas vel filiatio, immo notio quaedam, quae16 Patris est et Filii, qua ab aeterno Pater et Filius unum principium sunt Spiritus sancti. Donator autem, ut praedictum est17, dicitur Pater vel Filius ex tempore, sicut Spiritus sanctus datum vel donatum.

---

English Translation
p. 506

DISTINCTION XXIX.

Cap. I. On the [name] principle.

There is, moreover, another name noting a manifold relation, namely principle. For principle is always said in relation to something. And the Father is called principle, and the Son principle, and the Holy Spirit principle; but in different ways. For the Father is called principle in relation to the Son and to the Holy Spirit. Whence Augustine in the fourth book On the Trinity1 says: "The Father is the principle of the whole divinity, or, if it is better said, of the deity, because He Himself is from no one. For He has nothing from which He is or from which He proceeds"; but from Him both the Son is begotten and the Holy Spirit proceeds. He is therefore not called the principle of the whole deity in the sense that He is the principle either of Himself or of the divine essence, but because He is the principle of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, in each of whom the whole divinity is. The Son is called principle in relation to the Holy Spirit. But the Holy Spirit is not called principle except in relation to creatures; in relation to which also the Father is called principle, and the Son, and the Trinity itself together, and each single person2 is called the principle of creatures. "The Father therefore is principle without principle; the Son [is] principle from a principle; the Holy Spirit [is] principle from both, that is, from the Father and the Son3."

Cap. II. That the Father is from eternity the principle also of the Son, but the Holy Spirit is not [eternally principle].

And the Father from eternity is the principle of the Son, and the Father and the Son [are] the principle of the Holy Spirit, since the Son is from the Father, and the Holy Spirit from both. But the Holy Spirit is not from eternity a principle, but began to be [principle], because He is not called principle except in relation to creatures. When therefore creatures began to be, the Holy Spirit also began to be the principle of them. Likewise also the Father and the Son began to be, with the Holy Spirit, one principle of creatures, since creatures began to be from the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit; and these three are called not three, but one principle of all creatures, because they are the principle of things in one and the same way. For things are not from the Father in one way and from the Son in another, but altogether in the same way. And so the Apostle, understanding that this Trinity is one principle of things, says4: From Him and through Him and in Him are all things. "But when we hear that all things are from God," as Augustine says in On the Nature of the Good5, "we ought to understand all natures whatever, and all things which are naturally6. For from Him are not the sins, which do not preserve nature but vitiate it, [and] which are born from the will of those who sin." Of all things therefore which are naturally, the one principle is the Father with the Son and the Holy Spirit, and this began to be. But from eternity the Father is the principle of the Son by generation, and the Father and the Son are one principle of the Holy Spirit. Whence Augustine in the fifth book On the Trinity7 thus says: "He is called Father relatively, and likewise He is called principle relatively. But Father is said in relation to the Son, but principle in relation to all things which are from Him. And the Son also is called principle. For when it was said to Him8, Who art Thou?, He answered: The Principle, who also speak unto you. But is He then a principle of the Father? Rather, He wished to show Himself to be Creator, when He said that He was a principle, just as the Father is a principle of the creature, since from Him are all things. But when we say both that the Father is a principle and that the Son is a principle, we do not say two principles of the creature, since the Father and the Son together are one principle in relation to the creature, just as [they are] one Creator. But if whatever remains in itself and begets or works something is the principle of that thing which it begets or of that which it works, we cannot deny that even the Holy Spirit9 is rightly called a principle, since we do not separate Him from the appellation of Creator: for it is written10 of Him that He works, and certainly remaining in Himself He works. For He is not changed and turned into any one of the things which He works. The Holy Spirit therefore is one principle in relation to the creature with the Father and the Son, not two or three principles." Behold, Augustine plainly shows that the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit are one principle of created things, that is, that they are principle in one and the same way; and he sufficiently set forth that way, since namely they all work, and since these three work in like manner11, they are therefore called one principle.

Cap. III. How the Father [is] principle of the Son, and He with the Son [is principle] of the Holy Spirit.

Then in the same book he continuously shows how the Father is called principle in relation to the Son, and He Himself with the Son in relation to the Holy Spirit, saying that the Father is therefore the principle of the Son because He begot Him, and that the Father and the Son are the principle of the Holy Spirit, because the Holy Spirit proceeds or is given from both. For he speaks thus12: "If the begetter is principle in relation to that which is begotten, the Father is principle in relation to

p. 507

the Son, since He begot Him. But whether the Father is also principle in relation to the Holy Spirit, since it is said: He proceeds from the Father, is no small question. For if it is so, He will now be principle not only of that thing13 which He begets or makes, but also of that which He gives and which proceeds from Him. If therefore that which is given or which proceeds has a principle from which it is given or proceeds, it must be confessed that the Father and the Son are the principle of the Holy Spirit, not two principles. But just as the Father and the Son are called, in relation to the creature, relatively one Creator and one Lord, so relatively in relation to the Holy Spirit [they are] one principle. But in relation to the creature the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit are one principle, just as [they are] one Creator and one Lord." Behold, you have it that the Father is called the principle of the Son because He begot Him. By that notion therefore by which He is Father, by that He is called principle of the Son, that is, by generation, according to which He is also called the author of the Son. Whence Hilary in the fourth book On the Trinity14 says: "By the very [fact] by which He is called Father, He is shown the author of Him whom He begot, having that name [such] that it may be understood neither to have proceeded from another, and from which He who has been begotten is taught to have subsisted," "The Church knows one unbegotten God; she knows the only-begotten Son of God. She confesses the Father free from origin; she confesses also the origin of the Son [to be] from a beginning — not Himself from a beginning, but from One without beginning; not through Himself, but from Him who is from no one — born from eternity, taking, namely, His nativity from the paternal eternity. The profession of faith is here set forth, but the rationale of the profession is not yet expounded"; and therefore [it is] to be sought, namely how it is to be understood, what he says, that the origin of the Son is from a beginning, and that He Himself is not from a beginning, but from One without beginning. Adding this, he in any case determined how he meant beginning, saying that the origin of the Son is from a beginning, as if he said: do not understand it thus, that the origin of the Son is from a beginning, as though the Son Himself has a beginning, but [it means] that He Himself is from One without beginning, that is, from the Father, from whom are all things. For although the Son is principle from a principle, it is nevertheless not to be conceded that the Son has a principle. And although the Son is principle from a principle and the Father is principle, not from a principle, the principle from a principle is not a principle without principle, just as the Son is not the Father; nor yet two principles, but one, just as the Father and the Son [are] not two creators, but one Creator.

Cap. IV. Whether the Father and the Son are principle of the Holy Spirit by the same notion.

Now the Father and the Son are one principle not only of creatures, as has been said above, but also of the Holy Spirit; therefore it is wont to be asked whether the Father is principle of the Holy Spirit by the same notion as the Son, or whether there is one notion by which the Father is called principle of the Holy Spirit, and another by which the Son [is]. — To which we say: since the Father is called principle of the Holy Spirit, and the Son [also is] — because the Holy Spirit proceeds or is given from both, nor does He proceed or is given from the Father otherwise than from the Son — it can soundly be understood that the Father and the Son are called principle of the Holy Spirit by the same relation or notion. — But if it is asked what that notion is which principle there denotes, we have no name for it15, but it is not paternity itself or filiation, but rather a certain notion which16 is of the Father and of the Son, by which from eternity the Father and the Son are one principle of the Holy Spirit. But donor, as has been said before17, is said of the Father or of the Son in time, just as the Holy Spirit [is called] gift or donated.

---

Apparatus Criticus
  1. Cap. 20. n. 29. Verba: ipse est a nullo etc. sunt ex n. 28.
    Chapter 20, n. 29. The words ipse est a nullo ("He is from no one") etc. are from n. 28.
  2. Vat. cum aliis edd. personarum contra codd. ABDE et ed. 1.
    The Vatican with the other editions [reads] personarum, against codices ABDE and edition 1.
  3. August., l. contra Maxim. c. 17. n. 4.
    Augustine, book Against Maximinus, c. 17, n. 4.
  4. Rom. 11, 36.
    Rom. 11:36.
  5. Cap. 28. Etiam ea quae praecedunt, secundum sensum dicta sunt ab August., V. de Trin. c. 13. n. 14.
    Chapter 28. Also the things which precede are said, according to sense, by Augustine, book V On the Trinity, c. 13, n. 14.
  6. Vat. aliaeque edd., excepta 1, naturalia, sed contra codd. 1, 2, 3 et originale.
    The Vatican and the other editions, except edition 1, [read] naturalia, but against codices 1, 2, 3 and the original.
  7. Cap. 13. n. 14. Vide etiam Enarrat. in Psalm. 109. n. 13.
    Chapter 13, n. 14. See also Expositions on the Psalms, Ps. 109, n. 13.
  8. Ioan. 8, 25.
    John 8:25.
  9. Cod. D adiungit esse principium et. Paulo inferius ed. 9 cum originali post creatoris habet et pro quia.
    Codex D adds esse principium et. A little further on, edition 9 with the original, after creatoris, has et in place of quia.
  10. 1. Cor. 12, 11: Haec autem omnia operatur unus atque idem Spiritus.
    1 Cor. 12:11: But all these things one and the same Spirit works.
  11. Codd. A D, ed. 1 et 5 (in margine) simul.
    Codices A, D, edition 1 and edition 5 (in the margin) [read] simul.
  12. Libr. V. de Trin. c. 14. n. 13. In principio textus codd. 1, 2, 3 cum originali ad id quod gignit pro ad id quod gignitur. — Locus s. Scripturae est Ioan. 15, 26.
    Book V On the Trinity, c. 14, n. 13. At the beginning of the text codices 1, 2, 3 with the original [read] ad id quod gignit in place of ad id quod gignitur. — The passage of Holy Scripture is John 15:26.
  13. Ita hic et paulo inferius omnes codd. cum originali; sed omnes edd. bis habent eius pro ei. Deinde post Patrem et Filium omnes edd., excepta 1, addunt unum, sed contra originale et codd. Denique plures codd. et edd. 2, 3, 4 cum originali omittunt sunt ante sicut unus creator.
    So here and a little further on read all the codices with the original; but all editions read twice eius in place of ei. Then, after Patrem et Filium, all editions except 1 add unum, but against the original and the codices. Finally, several codices and editions 2, 3, 4 with the original omit sunt before sicut unus creator.
  14. N. 9. Alius locus est ibid. n. 6.
    N. 9. The other passage is in the same place, n. 6.
  15. Receptum est nomen spiratio, consecratum a Concilio Lugdunensi II. (an. 1274): «Spiritus sanctus... non duabus spirationibus, sed unica spiratione procedit».
    The name spiration has been received, consecrated by the Second Council of Lyon (A.D. 1274): "The Holy Spirit... proceeds not by two spirations, but by a single spiration."
  16. Vat. sola omittit quae; paulo inferius eadem cum cod. C et aliis edd., excepta 1, est pro sunt.
    The Vatican alone omits quae; a little further on the same [Vatican], with codex C and the other editions, except edition 1, [reads] est in place of sunt.
  17. Dist. XIV, XV, XVIII.
    Distinctions XIV, XV, XVIII.
Dist. 29, Divisio Textus→