Fifteen Books of Aurelius Augustinus,
Chapter 2.—In What Manner This Work Proposes to Discourse Concerning the Trinity.
Chapter 4.—What the Doctrine of the Catholic Faith is Concerning the Trinity.
Chapter 7.—In What Manner the Son is Less Than the Father, and Than Himself.
Chapter 9.—All are Sometimes Understood in One Person.
Chapter 11.—By What Rule in the Scriptures It is Understood that the Son is Now Equal and Now Less.
Chapter 4.—The Glorification of the Son by the Father Does Not Prove Inequality.
Chapter 6.—The Creature is Not So Taken by the Holy Spirit as Flesh is by the Word.
Chapter 7.—A Doubt Raised About Divine Appearances.
Chapter 8.—The Entire Trinity Invisible.
Chapter 11.—Of the Same Appearance.
Chapter 12.—The Appearance to Lot is Examined.
Chapter 13.—The Appearance in the Bush.
Chapter 14.—Of the Appearance in the Pillar of Cloud and of Fire.
Chapter 16.—In What Manner Moses Saw God.
Chapter 18.—The Vision of Daniel.
Chapter 1.—What is to Be Said Thereupon.
Chapter 2.—The Will of God is the Higher Cause of All Corporeal Change. This is Shown by an Example.
Chapter 3.—Of the Same Argument.
Chapter 5.—Why Miracles are Not Usual Works.
Chapter 6.—Diversity Alone Makes a Miracle.
Chapter 7.—Great Miracles Wrought by Magic Arts.
Chapter 8.—God Alone Creates Those Things Which are Changed by Magic Art.
Chapter 9.—The Original Cause of All Things is from God.
Chapter 10.—In How Many Ways the Creature is to Be Taken by Way of Sign. The Eucharist.
Preface.—The Knowledge of God is to Be Sought from God.
Chapter 2.—How We are Rendered Apt for the Perception of Truth Through the Incarnate Word.
Chapter 7.—In What Manner We are Gathered from Many into One Through One Mediator.
Chapter 8.—In What Manner Christ Wills that All Shall Be One in Himself.
Chapter 9.—The Same Argument Continued.
Chapter 10.—As Christ is the Mediator of Life, So the Devil is the Mediator of Death.
Chapter 11.—Miracles Which are Done by Demons are to Be Spurned.
Chapter 12.—The Devil the Mediator of Death, Christ of Life.
Chapter 2.—God the Only Unchangeable Essence.
Chapter 4.—The Accidental Always Implies Some Change in the Thing.
Chapter 7.—The Addition of a Negative Does Not Change the Predicament.
Chapter 9.—The Three Persons Not Properly So Called [in a Human Sense].
Chapter 11.—What is Said Relatively in the Trinity.
Chapter 12.—In Relative Things that are Reciprocal, Names are Sometimes Wanting.
Chapter 13.—How the Word Beginning (Principium) is Spoken Relatively in the Trinity.
Chapter 14.—The Father and the Son the Only Beginning (Principium) of the Holy Spirit.
Chapter 15.—Whether the Holy Spirit Was a Gift Before as Well as After He Was Given.
Chapter 16.—What is Said of God in Time, is Said Relatively, Not Accidentally.
Chapter 2 .—What is Said of the Father and Son Together, and What Not.
Chapter 4.—The Same Argument Continued.
Chapter 5.—The Holy Spirit Also is Equal to the Father and the Son in All Things.
Chapter 6.—How God is a Substance Both Simple and Manifold.
Chapter 7.—God is a Trinity, But Not Triple (Triplex).
Chapter 8.—No Addition Can Be Made to the Nature of God.
Chapter 9.—Whether One or the Three Persons Together are Called the Only God.
Chapter 5.—In God, Substance is Spoken Improperly, Essence Properly.
Chapter 1.—It is Shown by Reason that in God Three are Not Anything Greater Than One Person.
Chapter 4.—God Must First Be Known by an Unerring Faith, that He May Be Loved.
Chapter 5.—How the Trinity May Be Loved Though Unknown.
Chapter 6.—How the Man Not Yet Righteous Can Know the Righteous Man Whom He Loves.
Chapter 10.—There are Three Things in Love, as It Were a Trace of the Trinity.
Chapter 1.—In What Way We Must Inquire Concerning the Trinity.
Chapter 5.—That These Three are Several in Themselves, and Mutually All in All.
Chapter 8.—In What Desire and Love Differ.
Chapter 10.—Whether Only Knowledge that is Loved is the Word of the Mind.
Chapter 2.—No One at All Loves Things Unknown.
Chapter 3.—That When the Mind Loves Itself, It is Not Unknown to Itself.
Chapter 4.—How the Mind Knows Itself, Not in Part, But as a Whole.
Chapter 6.—The Opinion Which the Mind Has of Itself is Deceitful.
Chapter 8.—How the Soul Inquires into Itself. Whence Comes the Error of the Soul Concerning Itself.
Chapter 9.—The Mind Knows Itself, by the Very Act of Understanding the Precept to Know Itself.
Chapter 12.—The Mind is an Image of the Trinity in Its Own Memory, and Understanding, and Will.
Chapter 1.—A Trace of the Trinity Also In the Outer Man.
Chapter 4.—How This Unity Comes to Pass.
Chapter 6.—Of What Kind We are to Reckon the Rest (Requies), and End (Finis), of the Will in Vision.
Chapter 7.—There is Another Trinity in the Memory of Him Who Thinks Over Again What He Has Seen.
Chapter 8.—Different Modes of Conceiving.
Chapter 9.—Species is Produced by Species in Succession.
Chapter 11.—Number, Weight, Measure.
Chapter 1.—Of What Kind are the Outer and the Inner Man.
Chapter 6. —Why This Opinion is to Be Rejected.
Chapter 8.—Turning Aside from the Image of God.
Chapter 9.—The Same Argument is Continued.
Chapter 10.—The Lowest Degradation Reached by Degrees.
Chapter 11.—The Image of the Beast in Man.
Chapter 12.—There is a Kind of Hidden Wedlock in the Inner Man. Unlawful Pleasures of the Thoughts.
Chapter 3.—Some Desires Being the Same in All, are Known to Each. The Poet Ennius.
Chapter 8.—Blessedness Cannot Exist Without Immortality.
Chapter 11.—A Difficulty, How We are Justified in the Blood of the Son of God.
Chapter 12.—All, on Account of the Sin of Adam, Were Delivered into the Power of the Devil.
Chapter 13.—Man Was to Be Rescued from the Power of the Devil, Not by Power, But by Righteousness.
Chapter 14.—The Unobligated Death of Christ Has Freed Those Who Were Liable to Death.
Chapter 15.—Of the Same Subject.
Chapter 17.—Other Advantages of the Incarnation.
Chapter 18.—Why the Son of God Took Man Upon Himself from the Race of Adam, and from a Virgin.
Chapter 19.—What in the Incarnate Word Belongs to Knowledge, What to Wisdom.
Chapter 3.—A Difficulty Removed, Which Lies in the Way of What Has Just Been Said.
Chapter 5.—Whether the Mind of Infants Knows Itself.
Chapter 9.—Whether Justice and the Other Virtues Cease to Exist in the Future Life.
Chapter 10.—How a Trinity is Produced by the Mind Remembering, Understanding, and Loving Itself.
Chapter 11.—Whether Memory is Also of Things Present.
Chapter 13.—How Any One Can Forget and Remember God.
Chapter 16.—How the Image of God is Formed Anew in Man.
Chapter 1.—God is Above the Mind.
Chapter 3.—A Brief Recapitulation of All the Previous Books.
Chapter 4.—What Universal Nature Teaches Us Concerning God.
Chapter 5.—How Difficult It is to Demonstrate the Trinity by Natural Reason.
Chapter 8.—How the Apostle Says that God is Now Seen by Us Through a Glass.
Chapter 9.—Of the Term “Enigma,” And of Tropical Modes of Speech.
Chapter 12.—The Academic Philosophy.
Chapter 14.—The Word of God is in All Things Equal to the Father, from Whom It is.
Chapter 16.—Our Word is Never to Be Equalled to the Divine Word, Not Even When We Shall Be Like God.
Chapter 18.—No Gift of God is More Excellent Than Love.
Chapter 24.—The Infirmity of the Human Mind.
Chapter 28.—The Conclusion of the Book with a Prayer, and an Apology for Multitude of Words.
Chapter 6.—That the Son is Very God, of the Same Substance with the Father. Not Only the Father, But the Trinity, is Affirmed to Be Immortal. All Things are Not from the Father Alone, But Also from the Son. That the Holy Spirit is Very God, Equal with the Father and the Son.
9. They who have said that our Lord Jesus Christ is not God, or not very God, or not with the Father the One and only God, or not truly immortal because changeable, are proved wrong by the most plain and unanimous voice of divine testimonies; as, for instance, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” For it is plain that we are to take the Word of God to be the only Son of God, of whom it is afterwards said, “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us,” on account of that birth of His incarnation, which was wrought in time of the Virgin. But herein is declared, not only that He is God, but also that He is of the same substance with the Father; because, after saying, “And the Word was God,” it is said also, “The same was in the beginning with God: all things were made by Him, and without Him was not anything made.”27 John i. 1, 14, 2, 3 Not simply “all things;” but only all things that were made, that is; the whole creature. From which it appears clearly, that He Himself was not made, by whom all things were made. And if He was not made, then He is not a creature; but if He is not a creature, then He is of the same substance with the Father. For all substance that is not God is creature; and all that is not creature is God.28 [Augustin here postulates the theistic doctrines of two substances—infinite and finite; in contradiction to the postulate of pantheism, that there is only one substance—the infinite.—W.G.T.S.] And if the Son is not of the same substance with the Father, then He is a substance that was made: and if He is a substance that was made, then all things were not made by Him; but “all things were made by Him,” therefore He is of one and the same substance with the Father. And so He is not only God, but also very God. And the same John most expressly affirms this in his epistle: “For we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know the true God, and that we may be in His true Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life.”29 1 John v. 20
10. Hence also it follows by consequence, that the Apostle Paul did not say, “Who alone has immortality,” of the Father merely; but of the One and only God, which is the Trinity itself. For that which is itself eternal life is not mortal according to any changeableness; and hence the Son of God, because “He is Eternal Life,” is also Himself understood with the Father, where it is said, “Who only hath immortality.” For we, too, are made partakers of this eternal life, and become, in our own measure, immortal. But the eternal life itself, of which we are made partakers, is one thing; we ourselves, who, by partaking of it, shall live eternally, are another. For if He had said, “Whom in His own time the Father will show, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; who only hath immortality;” not even so would it be necessarily understood that the Son is excluded. For neither has the Son separated the Father from Himself, because He Himself, speaking elsewhere with the voice of wisdom (for He Himself is the Wisdom of God),30 1 Cor. i. 24 says, “I alone compassed the circuit of heaven.”31 Ecclus. xxiv. 5 And therefore so much the more is it not necessary that the words, “Who hath immortality,” should be understood of the Father alone, omitting the Son; when they are said thus: “That thou keep this commandment without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ: whom in His own time He will show, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honor and power everlasting. Amen.”32 1 Tim. vi. 14–16 In which words neither is the Father specially named, nor the Son, nor the Holy Spirit; but the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; that is, the One and only and true God, the Trinity itself.
11. But perhaps what follows may interfere with this meaning; because it is said, “Whom no man hath seen, nor can see:” although this may also be taken as belonging to Christ according to His divinity, which the Jews did not see, who yet saw and crucified Him in the flesh; whereas His divinity can in no wise be seen by human sight, but is seen with that sight with which they who see are no longer men, but beyond men. Rightly, therefore, is God Himself, the Trinity, understood to be the “blessed and only Potentate,” who “shows the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ in His own time.” For the words, “Who only hath immortality,” are said in the same way as it is said, “Who only doeth wondrous things.”33 Ps. lxxii. 18 And I should be glad to know of whom they take these words to be said. If only of the Father, how then is that true which the Son Himself says, “For what things soever the Father doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise?” Is there any, among wonderful works, more wonderful than to raise up and quicken the dead? Yet the same Son saith, “As the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them, even so the Son quickeneth whom He will.”34 John v. 19, 21 How, then, does the Father alone “do wondrous things,” when these words allow us to understand neither the Father only, nor the Son only, but assuredly the one only true God, that is, the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit?35 [Nothing is more important, in order to a correct interpretation of the New Testament, than a correct explanation of the term God. Sometimes it denotes the Trinity, and sometimes a person of the Trinity. The context always shows which it is. The examples given here by Augustin are only a few out of many.—W.G.T.S.]
12. Also, when the same apostle says, “But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by Him,”36 1 Cor. viii. 6 who can doubt that he speaks of all things which are created; as does John, when he says, “All things were made by Him”? I ask, therefore, of whom he speaks in another place: “For of Him, and through Him, and in Him, are all things: to whom be glory for ever. Amen.”37 Rom. xi. 36 For if of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, so as to assign each clause severally to each person: of Him, that is to say, of the Father; through Him, that is to say, through the Son; in Him, that is to say, in the Holy Spirit,—it is manifest that the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit is one God, inasmuch as the words continue in the singular number, “To whom38 Ipsi. be glory for ever.” For at the beginning of the passage he does not say, “O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge” of the Father, or of the Son, or of the Holy Spirit, but “of the wisdom and knowledge of God!” “How unsearchable are His judgments, and His ways past finding out! For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been His counsellor? Or who hath first given to Him and it shall be recompensed unto him again? For of Him, and through Him, and in Him, are all things: to whom be glory for ever. Amen.”39 Rom. xi. 33–36 But if they will have this to be understood only of the Father, then in what way are all things by the Father, as is said here; and all things by the Son, as where it is said to the Corinthians, “And one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things,”40 1 Cor. viii. 6 and as in the Gospel of John, “All things were made by Him?” For if some things were made by the Father, and some by the Son, then all things were not made by the Father, nor all things by the Son; but if all things were made by the Father, and all things by the Son, then the same things were made by the Father and by the Son. The Son, therefore, is equal with the Father, and the working of the Father and the Son is indivisible. Because if the Father made even the Son, whom certainly the Son Himself did not make, then all things were not made by the Son; but all things were made by the Son: therefore He Himself was not made, that with the Father He might make all things that were made. And the apostle has not refrained from using the very word itself, but has said most expressly, “Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God;”41 Phil. ii. 6 using here the name of God specially of the Father;42 [It is not generally safe to differ from Augustin in trinitarian exegesis. But in Phil. ii. 6 “God” must surely denote the Divine Essence, not the first Person of the Essence. St. Paul describes “Christ Jesus” as “subsisting” (ὑπάρχων) originally, that is prior to incarnation, “in a form of God”(ἐν μορφῇ θεοῦ), and because he so subsisted, as being “equal with God.” The word μορφῇ is anarthrous in the text: a form, not the form, as the A.V and R.V. render. St. Paul refers to one of three “forms” of God—namely, that particular form of Sonship, which is peculiar to the second person of the Godhead. Had the apostle employed the article with μορφῆ, the implication would be that there is only one “form of God”—that is, only one person in the Divine Essence. If then θεοῦ, in this place, denotes the Father, as Augustin says, St. Paul would teach that the Logos subsisted “in a form of the Father,” which would imply that the Father had more than one “form,” or else (if μορφῆ be rendered with the article) that the Logos subsisted in the “form” of the Father, neither of which is true. But if “God,” in this place, denotes the Divine Essence, then St. Paul teaches that the unincarnate Logos subsisted in a particular “form” of the Essence—the Father and Spirit subsisting in other “forms” of it. The student will observe that Augustin is careful to teach that the Logos, when he took on him “a form of a servant,” did not lay aside “a form of God.” He understands the kenosis (ἐκένωσε) to be, the humbling of the divinity by its union with the humanity, not the exinanition of it in the extremest sense of entirely divesting himself of the divinity, nor the less extreme sense of a total non-use of it during the humiliation.—W.G.T.S.] as elsewhere, “But the head of Christ is God.”43 1 Cor. xi. 3
13. Similar evidence has been collected also concerning the Holy Spirit, of which those who have discussed the subject before ourselves have most fully availed themselves, that He too is God, and not a creature. But if not a creature, then not only God (for men likewise are called gods44 Ps. lxxxii. 6), but also very God; and therefore absolutely equal with the Father and the Son, and in the unity of the Trinity consubstantial and co-eternal. But that the Holy Spirit is not a creature is made quite plain by that passage above all others, where we are commanded not to serve the creature, but the Creator;45 Rom. i. 25 not in the sense in which we are commanded to “serve” one another by love,46 Gal. v. 13 which is in Greek δουλεύειν, but in that in which God alone is served, which is in Greek λατρεύειν. From whence they are called idolaters who tender that service to images which is due to God. For it is this service concerning which it is said, “Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and Him only shalt thou serve.”47 Deut. vi. 13 For this is found also more distinctly in the Greek Scriptures, which have λατρεύσεις. Now if we are forbidden to serve the creature with such a service, seeing that it is written, “Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and Him only shalt thou serve” (and hence, too, the apostle repudiates those who worship and serve the creature more than the Creator), then assuredly the Holy Spirit is not a creature, to whom such a service is paid by all the saints; as says the apostle, “For we are the circumcision, which serve the Spirit of God,”48 Phil. iii. 3 (Vulgate, etc.). which is in the Greek λατρεύοντες. For even most Latin copies also have it thus, “We who serve the Spirit of God;” but all Greek ones, or almost all, have it so. Although in some Latin copies we find, not “We worship the Spirit of God,” but, “We worship God in the Spirit.” But let those who err in this case, and refuse to give up to the more weighty authority, tell us whether they find this text also varied in the mss.: “Know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost, which is in you, which ye have of God?” Yet what can be more senseless or more profane, than that any one should dare to say that the members of Christ are the temple of one who, in their opinion, is a creature inferior to Christ? For the apostle says in another place, “Your bodies are members of Christ.” But if the members of Christ are also the temple of the Holy Spirit, then the Holy Spirit is not a creature; because we must needs owe to Him, of whom our body is the temple, that service wherewith God only is to be served, which in Greek is called λατρεία. And accordingly the apostle says, “Therefore glorify God in your body.”49 1 Cor. vi. 19, 15, 20
CAPUT VI.
9. Filium esse verum Deum ejusdem cum Patre substantiae. Non solus Pater, sed Trinitas dicta immortalis. Non ex solo Patre omnia, sed etiam ex Filio. Spiritum sanctum esse verum Deum Patri et Filio aequalem. Qui dixerunt Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum non esse Deum, aut non esse verum Deum, aut non cum Patre unum et solum Deum, aut non vere immortalem, quia mutabilem, manifestissima divinorum testimoniorum et consona voce convicti sunt; unde sunt illa: In principio erat Verbum, et Verbum erat apud Deum, et Deus erat Verbum. Manifestum est enim quod Verbum Dei, Filium Dei unicum accipimus, de quo post dicit, Et Verbum caro factum est, et habitavit in nobis, propter nativitatem incarnationis ejus, quae facta est in tempore ex Virgine. In eo autem declarat, non tantum Deum esse, sed etiam ejusdem cum Patre substantiae, quia cum dixisset, Et Deus erat Verbum: Hoc erat, inquit, in principio apud Deum; omnia per ipsum facta sunt, et sine ipso factum est nihil (Joan. I, 1, 14, 2, 3). Neque enim dicit, omnia; nisi quae facta sunt, id est omnem creaturam. Unde liquido apparet ipsum factum non esse per quem facta sunt omnia. Et si factus non est, creatura non est: si autem creatura non est, ejusdem cum Patre substantiae est. Omnis enim substantia quae Deus non est, creatura est; et quae creatura non est, Deus est. Et si non est Filius ejusdem substantiae cujus Pater; ergo facta substantia est: si facta substantia est, non omnia per ipsum facta sunt: at omnia per ipsum facta sunt; unius igitur ejusdemque cum Patre substantiae est. Et ideo non tantum Deus, sed et verus Deus. Quod idem Joannes apertissime in Epistola sua dicit: Scimus quod Filius Dei venerit, et dederit nobis intellectum ut cognoscamus verum Deum, et simus in vero Filio ejus Jesu Christo. Hic est verus Deus, et vita aeterna (I Joan. V, 20).
0826 10. Hinc etiam consequenter intelligitur non tantummodo de Patre dixisse apostolum Paulum, Qui solus habet immortalitatem; sed de uno et solo Deo quod est ipsa Trinitas. Neque enim ipsa vita aeterna mortalis est secundum aliquam mutabilitatem: ac per hoc Filius Dei, quia vita aeterna est, cum Patre etiam ipse intelligitur, ubi dictum est, Qui solus habet immortalitatem. Ejus enim vitae aeternae et nos participes facti, pro modulo nostro immortales efficimur. Sed aliud est ipsa cujus participes efficimur, vita aeterna; aliud nos qui ejus participatione vivemus in aeternum. Si enim dixisset, Quem temporibus propriis ostendet Pater beatus et solus potens, Rex regum et Dominus dominantium, qui solus habet immortalitatem, nec sic inde separatum Filium oporteret intelligi. Neque enim, quia ipse Filius alibi loquens voce Sapientiae (ipse est enim Dei Sapientia [I Cor. I, 24]) ait, Gyrum coeli circuivi sola (Eccli. XXIV, 8), separavit a se Patrem: quanto magis ergo non est necesse ut tantummodo de Patre praeter Filium intelligatur, quod dictum est, Qui solus habet immortalitatem, cum ita dictum sit: Ut serves, inquit, mandatum sine macula, irreprehensibile, usque in adventum Domini nostri Jesu Christi: quem temporibus propriis ostendet beatus et solus potens, Rex regum et Dominus dominantium; qui solus habet immortalitatem, et lucem habitat inaccessibilem; quem nemo hominum vidit, nec videre potest; cui est honor et gloria in saecula saeculorum. Amen (I Tim. VI, 14-16). In quibus verbis, nec Pater proprie nominatus est, nec Filius, nec Spiritus sanctus; sed beatus et solus potens, Rex regum et Dominus dominantium, quod est unus et solus et verus Deus ipsa Trinitas.
11. Nisi forte quae sequuntur, perturbabunt hunc intellectum, quia dixit, Quem nemo hominum vidit, nec videre potest: cum hoc etiam ad Christum pertinere secundum ejus divinitatem accipiatur, quam non viderunt Judaei, qui tamen carnem viderunt et crucifixerunt. Videri autem divinitas humano visu nullo modo potest: sed eo visu videtur, quo jam qui vident, non homines sed ultra homines sunt. Recte ergo ipse Deus Trinitatis intelligitur beatus et solus potens, ostendens adventum Domini nostri Jesu Christi temporibus propriis. Sic enim dictum est, Solus habet immortalitatem; quomodo dictum est, Qui facit mirabilia solus (Psal. LXXI, 18). Quod velim scire de quo dictum accipiant: si de Patre tantum, quomodo ergo verum est, quod ipse Filius dicit, Quaecumque enim Pater facit, haec eadem et Filius facit similiter? An quidquam est inter mirabilia mirabilius quam resuscitare et vivificare mortuos? Dicit autem idem Filius, Sicut Pater suscitat mortuos et vivificat, sic et Filius quos vult vivificat (Joan. V, 19, 21). Quomodo ergo solus Pater facit mirabilia, cum haec verba nec Patrem tantum, nec Filium tantum permittant intelligi, sed utique Deum unum verum solum, id est, Patrem et Filium et Spiritum sanctum?
0827 12. Item cum dicit idem apostolus, Nobis unus Deus Pater, ex quo omnia, et nos in ipso; et unus Dominus Jesus Christus, per quem omnia, et nos per ipsum (I Cor. VIII, 6); quis dubitet eum omnia quae creata sunt dicere, sicut Joannes, Omnia per ipsum facta sunt? Quaero itaque de quo dicat alio loco, Quoniam ex ipso, et per ipsum, et in ipso sunt omnia: ipsi gloria in saecula saeculorum. Amen. Si enim de Patre et Filio et Spiritu sancto, ut singulis personis singula tribuantur; Ex ipso, ex Patre; per ipsum, per Filium; in ipso, in Spiritu sancto: manifestum quod Pater et Filius et Spiritus sanctus unus Deus est, quando singulariter intulit, Ipsi gloria in saecula saeculorum. Unde enim coepit hunc sensum, non ait, O altitudo diviliarum sapientiae et scientiae Patris, aut Filii, aut Spiritus sancti; sed, sapientiae et scientiae Dei! Quam inscrutabilia sunt judicia ejus, et investigabiles viae ejus! Quis enim cognovit mentem Domini? Aut quis consiliarius ejus fuit? Aut quis prior dedit illi, et retribuetur ei? Quoniam ex ipso, et per ipsum, et in ipso sunt omnia: ipsi gloria in saecula saeculorum. Amen (Rom. XI, 33-36). Si autem hoc de Patre tantummodo intelligi volunt, quomodo ergo omnia per Patrem sunt, sicut hic dicitur; et omnia per Filium, sicut ad Corinthios ubi ait, Et unus Dominus Jesus Christus, per quem omnia; et sicut in Evangelio Joannis, Omnia par ipsum facta sunt? Si enim alia per Patrem, alia per Filium, jam non omnia per Patrem, nec omnia per Filium. Si autem omnia per Patrem, et omnia per Filium; eadem per Patrem, quae per Filium. Aequalis est ergo Patri Filius, et inseparabilis operatio est Patris et Filii. Quia si vel Filium fecit Pater quem non fecit ipse Filius, non omnia per Filium facta sunt: at omnia per Filium facta sunt; ipse igitur factus non est, ut cum Patre faceret omnia quae facta sunt. Quanquam nec ab ipso verbo tacuerit Apostolus, et apertissime omnino dixerit, Qui cum in Dei forma esset, non rapinam arbitratus est esse aequalis Deo (Philipp. II, 6): hic Deum proprie Patrem appellans, sicut alibi, Caput autem Christi, Deus (I Cor. XI, 3).
13. Similiter et de Spiritu sancto collecta sunt testimonia, quibus ante nos qui haec disputaverunt, abundantius usi sunt, quia et ipse Deus, et non creatura. Quod si non creatura, non tantum (Deus nam et homines dicti sunt dii [Psal. LXXXI, 6]), sed etiam verus Deus. Ergo Patri et Filio prorsus aequalis, et in Trinitatis unitate consubstantialis et coaeternus. Maxime vero illo loco satis claret, quod Spiritus sanctus non sit creatura, ubi jubemur non servire creaturae, sed Creatori (Rom. I, 25): non eo modo quo jubemur per charitatem servire invicem (Galat. V, 13), quod est graece δουλεύειν; sed eo modo quo tantum Deo servitur, quod est graece λατρεύειν. Unde idololatrae dicuntur qui simulacris eam servitutem exhibent quae debetur Deo. Secundum hanc enim servitutem dictum est, Dominum Deum tuum adorabis, et illi soli servies (Deut. VI, 13). Nam et hoc distinctius in graeca Scriptura invenitur; λατρεύσεις enim habet. Porro si tali servitute creaturae servire prohibemur, quandoquidem 0828 dictum est, Dominum Deum tuum adorabis, et illi soli servies; unde et Apostolus detestatur eos qui coluerunt, et servierunt creaturae, potius quam Creatori: non est utique creatura Spiritus sanctus, cui ab omnibus sanctis talis servitus exhibetur dicente Apostolo, Nos enim sumus circumcisio, Spiritui Dei servientes (Philipp. III, 3), quod est in graeco, λατρεύοντες. Plures enim codices etiam latini sic habent, qui Spiritui Dei servimus: graeci autem omnes, aut pene omnes. In nonnullis autem exemplaribus latinis invenimus non, Spiritui Dei servimus; sed, spiritu Deo servimus . Sed qui in hoc errant, et auctoritati graviori cedere detrectant, numquid et illud varium in codicibus reperiunt: Nescitis quia corpora vestra templum in vobis estSpiritus sancti, quem habetis a Deo? Quid autem insanius magisque sacrilegum est, quam ut quisquam dicere audeat membra Christi templum esse creaturae minoris secundum ipsos, quam Christus est? Alio enim loco dicit: Corpora vestra membra sunt Christi. Si autem quae membra sunt Christi, templum est Spiritus sancti, non est creatura Spiritus sanctus: quia cui corpus nostrum templum exhibemus, necesse est ut huic eam servitutem debeamus, qua nonnisi Deo serviendum est, quae graece appellatur λατρεία. Unde consequenter dicit: Glorificate ergoDeum in corpore vestro (I Cor. VI, 19, 15, 20).