Dist. 4, Divisio Textus
Book I: On the Mystery of the Trinity · Distinction 4
Divisio Textus.
In praecedenti distinctione probavit Magister Trinitatem et Unitatem per similitudines congruas et rationes. In praesenti distinctione ponitur secunda pars, in qua solvit incidentes dubitationes. Et incidit dubitatio ex hoc, quod in divinis est trinitas et unitas, et ita aliquid distinguens et distinctum, aliquid indistinctum, ut termini substantiales. Incidit ergo dubitatio ex comparatione proprietatis distinguentis ad terminum substantialem. Habet autem haec pars duas. In prima movet dubitationem ex comparatione proprietatis distinguentis ad substantiam vel essentiam; in secunda ad eius potentiam, infra distinctione sexta: Praeterea quaeri solet.
Item prima pars habet duas, quia substantia potest significari in concretione, ut per hoc nomen Deus, vel in abstractione, ut per hoc nomen essentia. Primo ergo movet quaestionem ex comparatione generationis ad hoc nomen Deus, secundo, ad hoc nomen essentia, infra distinctione quinta: Post haec quaeritur, utrum concedendum sit etc.
Haec autem distinctio habet quatuor particulas et hoc secundum quatuor, quae ibi tanguntur. In prima, supposito quod haec sit vera: Deus genuit Deum, quaeritur de hac: Genuit se vel alium, ad1 quam solvit interimendo. In secunda quaerit de hac: Genuit Deum, qui est Deus Pater, vel qui non est Deus Pater, et ad hoc solvit distinguendo ex parte praedicati, et hoc ibi: Sed adhuc opponunt. In tertia quaerit de hac: Deus est Trinitas, et probat multis auctoritatibus, quod est vera, et hoc occasione praedictorum, ibi: Quidam tamen veritatis adversarii. In quarta ad suum propositum redit, scilicet ad primo quaesitum; ad primum videlicet2 addens primae solutioni, quod quamvis non sit concedendum: Genuit se, vel alium divisim, tamen potest concedi coniunctim, ibi: Nunc ad praemissam quaestionem.
Tractatio Quaestionum.
Ad intelligentiam eorum quae tangit Magister in praesenti distinctione, quatuor quaeruntur.
Primo, utrum haec locutio sit concedenda in divinis: Deus genuit Deum.
Secundo, utrum unitas essentiae admittat hanc locutionem: Deus genuit alium Deum, vel Deus est alius a Deo.
Tertio quaeritur de consignificatione3 huius nominis Deus, utrum videlicet grammatice possimus dicere plures deos.
Quarto et ultimo quaeritur de suppositione istius nominis Deus, utrum supponat pro persona vel pro essentia.
---
Division of the Text.
In the preceding distinction the Master proved the Trinity and Unity by congruous likenesses and reasons. In the present distinction the second part is set down, in which he resolves incidental doubts. And a doubt arises from this, that in divine matters there is trinity and unity, and thus something distinguishing and distinct, and something indistinct, as the substantial terms. Therefore a doubt arises from the comparison of the distinguishing property to the substantial term. Now this part has two [sections]. In the first he raises a doubt from the comparison of the distinguishing property to the substance or essence; in the second, to its power, below in the sixth distinction: Furthermore it is wont to be asked.
Likewise the first part has two [sections], because substance can be signified in the concrete, as by this name God, or in the abstract, as by this name essence. First, therefore, he raises a question from the comparison of generation to this name God; secondly, to this name essence, below in the fifth distinction: After these things it is asked, whether it is to be granted etc.
Now this distinction has four particles, and this according to the four [points] which are touched on there. In the first, supposing that this is true: God begot God, it is asked concerning this: He begot himself or another, to1 which he resolves by ruling out. In the second he inquires concerning this: He begot God, who is God the Father, or who is not God the Father, and to this he resolves by distinguishing on the side of the predicate, and this in the place: But still they object. In the third he inquires concerning this: God is Trinity, and he proves by many authorities that it is true, and this on the occasion of the foregoing, in the place: Yet certain adversaries of the truth. In the fourth he returns to his own proposition, namely to what was first asked; to the first, that is to say2, adding to the first solution, that although it is not to be granted: He begot himself, or another, dividedly, nevertheless it can be granted conjointly, in the place: Now to the foregoing question.
Treatment of the Questions.
For an understanding of those things which the Master touches upon in the present distinction, four [questions] are asked.
First, whether this locution is to be granted in divine matters: God begot God.
Second, whether the unity of essence admits this locution: God begot another God, or God is another from God.
Third, it is asked concerning the consignification3 of this name God, namely whether grammatically we can say several gods.
Fourth and last, it is asked concerning the supposition of this name God, whether it supposits for a person or for the essence.
---
- Vat. contra mss. et ed. 1 omittit ad.The Vatican edition, against the manuscripts and ed. 1, omits ad.
- Codd. et ed. 1 contra Vat. addunt ad primum videlicet.The codices and ed. 1, against the Vatican edition, add ad primum videlicet ("to the first, that is to say").
- Auctoritate plurimorum mss. ut A F G K T etc. et ed. 1 substituimus consignificatione pro significatione et Deus loco Dii ac mox istius pro illius.On the authority of many manuscripts (such as A F G K T etc.) and of ed. 1, we have substituted consignificatione for significatione, and Deus in place of Dii, and presently istius for illius.