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 11.—The Essence of God Never Appeared in Itself. Divine Appearances to the Fathers Wrought by the Ministry of Angels. An Objection Drawn from the Mode of Speech Removed. That the Appearing of God to Abraham Himself, Just as that to Moses, Was Wrought by Angels. The Same Thing is Proved by the Law Being Given to Moses by Angels. What Has Been Said in This Book, and What Remains to Be Said in the Next.
Wherefore the substance, or, if it is better so to say, the essence of God,405 [“Substance,” from sub stans, is a passive term, denoting latent and potential being. “Essence,” from esse, is an active term, denoting energetic being. The schoolmen, as Augustin does here, preferred the latter term to the former, though employing both to designate the divine nature.—W.G.T.S.] wherein we understand, in proportion to our measure, in however small a degree, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, since it is in no way changeable, can in no way in its proper self be visible.
22. It is manifest, accordingly, that all those appearances to the fathers, when God was presented to them according to His own dispensation, suitable to the times, were wrought through the creature. And if we cannot discern in what manner He wrought them by ministry of angels, yet we say that they were wrought by angels; but not from our own power of discernment, lest we should seem to any one to be wise beyond our measure, whereas we are wise so as to think soberly, as God hath dealt to us the measure of faith;406 Rom. xii. 3 and we believe, and therefore speak.407 2 Cor. iv. 13 For the authority is extant of the divine Scriptures, from which our reason ought not to turn aside; nor by leaving the solid support of the divine utterance, to fall headlong over the precipice of its own surmisings, in matters wherein neither the perceptions of the body rule, nor the clear reason of the truth shines forth. Now, certainly, it is written most clearly in the Epistle to the Hebrews, when the dispensation of the New Testament was to be distinguished from the dispensation of the Old, according to the fitness of ages and of times, that not only those visible things, but also the word itself, was wrought by angels. For it is said thus: “But to which of the angels said He at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool? Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?”408 Heb. i. 13, 14 Whence it appears that all those things were not only wrought by angels, but wrought also on our account, that is, on account of the people of God, to whom is promised the inheritance of eternal life. As it is written also to the Corinthians, “Now all these things happened unto them in a figure: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.”409 1 Cor. x. 11 And then, demonstrating by plain consequence that as at that time the word was spoken by the angels, so now by the Son; “Therefore,” he says, “we ought to give the more earnest heed to the things which we have heard, lest at any time we should let them slip. For if the word spoken by angels was steadfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just recompense of reward; how shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation?” And then, as though you asked, What salvation?—in order to show that he is now speaking of the New Testament, that is, of the word which was spoken not by angels, but by the Lord, he says, “Which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard Him; God also bearing them witness, both with signs and wonders, and with divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Ghost, according to His own will.”410 Heb. ii. 1–4
23. But some one may say, Why then is it written, “The Lord said to Moses;” and not, rather, The angel said to Moses? Because, when the crier proclaims the words of the judge, it is not usually written in the record, so and so the crier said, but so and so the judge. In like manner also, when the holy prophet speaks, although we say, The prophet said, we mean nothing else to be understood than that the Lord said; and if we were to say, The Lord said, we should not put the prophet aside, but only intimate who spake by him. And, indeed, these Scriptures often reveal the angel to be the Lord, of whose speaking it is from time to time said, “the Lord said,” as we have shown already. But on account of those who, since the Scripture in that place specifies an angel, will have the Son of God Himself and in Himself to be understood, because He is called an angel by the prophet, as announcing the will of His Father and of Himself; I have therefore thought fit to produce a plainer testimony from this epistle, where it is not said by an angel, but “by angels.”
24. For Stephen, too, in the Acts of the Apostles, relates these things in that manner in which they are also written in the Old Testament: “Men, brethren, and fathers, hearken,” he says; “The God of glory appeared unto our father Abraham, when he was in Mesopotamia.”411 Acts vii. 2 But lest any one should think that the God of glory appeared then to the eyes of any mortal in that which He is in Himself, he goes on to say that an angel appeared to Moses. “Then fled Moses,” he says, “at that saying, and was a stranger in the land of Midian, where he begat two sons. And when forty years were expired, there appeared to him in the wilderness of mount Sinai an angel of the Lord in a flame of fire in a bush. When Moses saw it, he wondered at the sight: and as he drew near to behold it, the voice of the Lord came unto him, saying, I am the God of thy fathers, the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. Then Moses trembled, and durst not behold. Then said the Lord to him, Put off thy shoes from thy feet,”412 Ex. ii. 15 and iii. 7, and Acts vii. 29–33 etc. Here, certainly, he speaks both of angel and of Lord; and of the same as the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob; as is written in Genesis.
25. Can there be any one who will say that the Lord appeared to Moses by an angel, but to Abraham by Himself? Let us not answer this question from Stephen, but from the book itself, whence Stephen took his narrative. For, pray, because it is written, “And the Lord God said unto Abraham;”413 Gen. xii. 1 and a little after, “And the Lord God appeared unto Abraham;”414 Gen. xvii. 1 were these things, for this reason, not done by angels? Whereas it is said in like manner in another place, “And the Lord appeared to him in the plains of Mamre, as he sat in the tent door in the heat of the day;” and yet it is added immediately, “And he lift up his eyes and looked, and, lo, three men stood by him:”415 Gen. xviii. 1, 2 of whom we have already spoken. For how will these people, who either will not rise from the words to the meaning, or easily throw themselves down from the meaning to the words,—how, I say, will they be able to explain that God was seen in three men, except they confess that they were angels, as that which follows also shows? Because it is not said an angel spoke or appeared to him, will they therefore venture to say that the vision and voice granted to Moses was wrought by an angel because it is so written, but that God appeared and spake in His own substance to Abraham because there is no mention made of an angel? What of the fact, that even in respect to Abraham an angel is not left unmentioned? For when his son was ordered to be offered up as a sacrifice, we read thus: “And it came to pass after these things that God did tempt Abraham, and said unto him, Abraham: and he said, Behold, here I am. And He said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt-offering upon one of the mountains that I will tell thee of.” Certainly God is here mentioned, not an angel. But a little afterwards Scripture hath it thus: “And Abraham stretched forth his hand, and took the knife to slay his son. And the angel of the Lord called unto him out of heaven, and said, Abraham, Abraham: and he said, Here am I. And he said, Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do thou anything unto him.” What can be answered to this? Will they say that God commanded that Isaac should be slain, and that an angel forbade it? and further, that the father himself, in opposition to the decree of God, who had commanded that he should be slain, obeyed the angel, who had bidden him spare him? Such an interpretation is to be rejected as absurd. Yet not even for it, gross and abject as it is, does Scripture leave any room, for it immediately adds: “For now I know that thou fearest God, seeing thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son, on account of me.”416 Propter me What is “on account of me,” except on account of Him who had commanded him to be slain? Was then the God of Abraham the same as the angel, or was it not rather God by an angel? Consider what follows. Here, certainly, already an angel has been most clearly spoken of; yet notice the context: “And Abraham lifted up his eyes, and looked, and behold behind him a ram caught in a thicket by his horns: and Abraham went and took the ram, and offered him up for a burnt-offering in the stead of his son. And Abraham called the name of that place, The Lord saw:417 Dominus vidit as it is said to this day, In the mount the Lord was seen.”418 Dominus visus est Just as that which a little before God said by an angel, “For now I know that thou fearest God;” not because it was to be understood that God then came to know, but that He brought it to pass that through God Abraham himself came to know what strength of heart he had to obey God, even to the sacrificing of his only son: after that mode of speech in which the effect is signified by the efficient,—as cold is said to be sluggish, because it makes men sluggish; so that He was therefore said to know, because He had made Abraham himself to know, who might well have not discerned the firmness of his own faith, had it not been proved by such a trial. So here, too, Abraham called the name of the place “The Lord saw,” that is, caused Himself to be seen. For he goes on immediately to say, “As it is said to this day, In the mount the Lord was seen.” Here you see the same angel is called Lord: wherefore, unless because the Lord spake by the angel? But if we pass on to that which follows, the angel altogether speaks as a prophet, and reveals expressly that God is speaking by the angel. “And the angel of the Lord,” he says, “called unto Abraham out of heaven the second time, and said, By myself I have sworn, saith the Lord; for because thou hast done this thing, and hast not withheld thy son, thine only son, on account of me,”419 Gen. xxii etc. Certainly these words, viz. that he by whom the Lord speaks should say, “Thus saith the Lord,” are commonly used by the prophets also. Does the Son of God say of the Father, “The Lord saith,” while He Himself is that Angel of the Father? What then? Do they not see how hard pressed they are about these three men who appeared to Abraham, when it had been said before, “The Lord appeared to him?” Were they not angels because they are called men? Let them read Daniel, saying, “Behold the man Gabriel.”420 Dan. ix. 21
26. But why do we delay any longer to stop their mouths by another most clear and most weighty proof, where not an angel in the singular nor men in the plural are spoken of, but simply angels; by whom not any particular word was wrought, but the Law itself is most distinctly declared to be given; which certainly none of the faithful doubts that God gave to Moses for the control of the children of Israel, or yet, that it was given by angels. So Stephen speaks: “Ye stiff-necked,” he says, “and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye. Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which showed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers: who have received the Law by the disposition of angels,421 In edictis angelorum and have not kept it.”422 Acts vii. 51–53 What is more evident than this? What more strong than such an authority? The Law, indeed, was given to that people by the disposition of angels; but the advent of our Lord Jesus Christ was by it prepared and pre-announced; and He Himself, as the Word of God, was in some wonderful and unspeakable manner in the angels, by whose disposition the Law itself was given. And hence He said in the Gospel, “For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me.”423 John v. 46 Therefore then the Lord was speaking by the angels; and the son of God, who was to be the Mediator of God and men, from the seed of Abraham, was preparing His own advent by the angels, that He might find some by whom He would be received, confessing themselves guilty, whom the Law unfulfilled had made transgressors. And hence the apostle also says to the Galatians, “Wherefore then serveth the Law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made, which [seed] was ordered424 Dispositum through angels in the hand of a mediator;”425 Gal. iii. 19 that is, ordered through angels in His own hand. For He was not born in limitation, but in power. But you learn in another place that he does not mean any one of the angels as a mediator, but the Lord Jesus Christ Himself, in so far as He deigned to be made man: “For there is one God,” he says, “and one Mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus.”426 1 Tim. ii. 5 Hence that passover in the killing of the lamb:427 Ex. xii hence all those things which are figuratively spoken in the Law, of Christ to come in the flesh, and to suffer, but also to rise again, which Law was given by the disposition of angels; in which angels, were certainly the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit; and in which, sometimes the Father, sometimes the Son, sometimes the Holy Spirit, and sometimes God, without any distinction of person, was figuratively signified by them, although appearing in visible and sensible forms, yet by His own creature, not by His substance, in order to the seeing of which, hearts are cleansed through all those things which are seen by the eyes and heard by the ears.
27. But now, as I think, that which we had undertaken to show in this book has been sufficiently discussed and demonstrated, according to our capacity; and it has been established, both by probable reason, so far as a man, or rather, so far as I am able, and by strength of authority, so far as the divine declarations from the Holy Scriptures have been made clear, that those words and bodily appearances which were given to these ancient fathers of ours before the incarnation of the Saviour, when God was said to appear, were wrought by angels: whether themselves speaking or doing something in the person of God, as we have shown that the prophets also were wont to do, or assuming from the creature that which they themselves were not, wherein God might be shown in a figure to men; which manner of showing also, Scripture teaches by many examples, that the prophets, too, did not omit. It remains, therefore, now for us to consider,—since both in the Lord as born of a virgin, and in the Holy Spirit descending in a corporeal form like a dove,428 Matt. iii. 16 and in the tongues like as of fire, which appeared with a sound from heaven on the day of Pentecost, after the ascension of the Lord,429 Acts ii. 1–4 it was not the Word of God Himself by His own substance, in which He is equal and eternal with the Father, nor the Spirit of the Father and of the Son by His own substance, in which He Himself also is equal and co-eternal with both, but assuredly a creature, such as could be formed and exist in these fashions, which appeared to corporeal and mortal senses,—it remains, I say, to consider what difference there is between these manifestations and those which were proper to the Son of God and to the Holy Spirit, although wrought by the visible creature;430 [The reference here is to the difference between a theophany, and an incarnation; already alluded to, in the note on p. 149.—W.G.T.S.] which subject we shall more conveniently begin in another book.
CAPUT XI.
Essentia Dei nunquam per se apparuit. Angelorum ministerio factae divinae Patribus apparitiones. Objectio ex loquendi modo ducta diluitur. Apparitionem Dei ipsi Abrahae perinde ac Moysi, per Angelos factam esse. Idem probatur ex lege data Moysi per Angelos. Quid dictum in hoc libro, quid dicendum in sequente. Quapropter substantia, vel, si melius dicitur, essentia Dei, ubi pro modulo nostro ex quantulacumque particulaintelligimus Patrem et Filium et Spiritum 0882 sanctum, quandoquidem nulio modo mutabilis est, nullo modo potest ipsa per semetipsam esse visibilis.
22. Proinde illa omnia quae Patribus visa sunt, cum Deus illis secundum suam dispensationem temporibus congruam praesentaretur, per creaturam facta esse manifestum est. Et si nos latet quomodo ea ministris Angelis fecerit, per Angelos tamen esse facta, non ex nostro sensu dicimus, ne cuiquam videamur plus sapere; sed sapimus ad temperantiam, sicut Deus nobis partitus est mensuram fidei (Rom. XII, 3), et credimus, propter quod et loquimur (II Cor. IV, 13). Exstat enim auctoritas divinarum Scripturarum, unde mens nostra deviare non debet, nec relicto solidamento divini eloquii per suspicionum suarum abrupta praecipitari, ubi nec sensus corporis regit, nec perspicua ratio veritatis elucet. Apertissime quippe scriptum est in Epistola ad Hebraeos, cum dispensatio Novi Testamenti a dispensatione Veteris Testamenti secundum congruentiam saeculorum ac temporum distingueretur, non tantum illa visibilia, sed ipsum etiam sermonem per Angelos factum. Sic enim dicit: Ad quem autem Angelorum dixit aliquando: Sede ad dexteram meam, quo usque ponam inimicos tuos scabellum pedum tuorum? Nonne omnes sunt ministri spiritus, ad ministrationem missi, propter eos qui futuri sunt haereditate possidere salutem (Hebr. I, 13, 14)? Hinc ostendit illa omnia non solum per Angelos facta, sed etiam propter nos facta, id est, propter populum Dei, cui promittitur haereditas vitae aeternae. Sicut ad Corinthios etiam scriptum est: Omnia haec in figura contingebant illis; scripta sunt autem ad correptionem nostram, in quos finis saeculorum obvenit (I Cor. X, 11). Deinde quia tunc per Angelos, nunc autem per Filium sermo factus est, consequenter aperteque demonstrans: Propterea, inquit, abundantius oportet attendere nos ea quae audivimus, ne forte defluamus: si enim qui per Angelos dictus est, sermo factus est firmus, et omnis praevaricatio et inobedientia justam accepit mercedis retributionem; quomodo nos effugiemus, tantam negligentes salutem? Et quasi quaereres quam salutem, ut ostenderet se de Novo Testamento jam dicere, id est, sermone qui non per Angelos, sed per Dominum factus est: Quae cum initium accepisset, inquit, ut enarraretur per Dominum, ab iis qui audierunt, in nos confirmata est, contestante Deo signis et portentis, et variis virtutibus, et Spiritus sancti divisionibus secundum suam voluntatem (Hebr. II, 1-4).
23. Sed, ait aliquis, cur ergo scriptum est, Dixit Dominus ad Moysen; et non potius, Dixit Angelus ad Moysen? Quia cum verba judicis praeco pronuntiat, non scribitur in gestis, Ille praeco dixit; sed, Ille judex: sic etiam loquente propheta sancto, etsi dicamus, Propheta dixit, nihil aliud quam Dominum dixisse intelligi volumus. Et si dicamus, Dominus dixit, prophetam non subtrahimus, sed quis per eum dixerit admonemus. Et illa quidem Scriptura saepe aperit angelum esse Dominum , quo loquente identidem 0883 dicitur, Dominus dixit, sicut jam demonstravimus. Sed propter eos, qui cum Scriptura illic angelum nominat, ipsum per se ipsum Filium Dei volunt intelligi, quia propter annuntiationem paternae ac suae voluntatis a propheta dictus est angelus: propterea volui ex hac epistola manifestius testimonium dare, ubi non dictum est, per Angelum; sed per Angelos.
24. Nam et Stephanus in Actibus Apostolorum eo more narrat haec, quo etiam in Libris veteribus conscripta sunt: Viri fratres et patres, audite, inquit: Deus gloriae apparuit Abrahae patri nostro, cum esset in Mesopotamia (Act. VII, 2). Ne quis autem arbitraretur tunc Deum gloriae, per id quod in se ipso est, cujusquam oculis apparuisse mortalium, in consequentibus dicit, quod Moysi angelus apparuerit. Fugit, inquit, Moyses in verbo isto, et factus est inquilinus in terra Madian, ubi genuit filios duos. Et completis illic quadraginta annis, apparuit illi in deserto montis Sina angelus Domini in flamma ignis in rubo. Moyses autem videns, mirabatur visum. Qui cum accederet considerare, facta est vox Domini dicens: Ego sum Deus patrum tuorum, Deus Abraham, et Deus Isaac, et Deus Jacob. Tremefactus autem Moyses, non audebat considerare. Dixitque illi Dominus, Solve calceamentum pedum tuorum (Exod. II, 15-III, 7), etc. Hic certe et angelum et Dominum dicit, eumdemque Deum Abraham, et Deum Isaac, et Deum Jacob, sicut in Genesi scriptum est.
25. An forte quisquam dicturus est quod Moysi per angelum apparuit Dominus, Abrahae vero per se ipsum? At hoc a Stephano non quaeramus: ipsum librum unde Stephanus ista narravit, interrogemus. Numquid enim quia scriptum est, Et dixit Dominus Deus ad Abraham (Gen. XII, 1); et paulo post, Et visus est Dominus Deus Abrahae (Id. XVII, 1): propterea ista non per Angelos facta sunt? Cum alio loco similiter dicat, Visus est autem ei Deus ad ilicem Mambre, sedenti ad ostium tabernaculi sui meridie; et tamen consequenter adjungat, Respiciens autem oculis suis vidit, et ecce tres viri stabant super eum ; de quibus jam diximus (Id. XVIII, 1, 2). Quomodo enim poterunt isti, qui vel a verbis ad intellectum nolunt assurgere, vel facile se ab intellectu in verba praecipitant, quomodo poterunt explicare visum esse Deum in viris tribus, nisi eos, sicut etiam consequentia docent, angelos fuisse fateantur? An quia non dictum est, Angelus ei locutus est, vel, apparuit; propterea dicere audebunt, Moysi quidem illam visionem ac vocem per angelum factam, quia ita scriptum est; Abrahae autem, quia commemoratio angeli non est facta, per substantiam suam Deum apparuisse atque sonuisse? Quid quod nec apud Abraham de angelo tacitum est? Nam ita legitur, cum immolandus filius ejus praeciperetur : Et factum est post haec verba, tentavit Deus Abraham, et dixit ad eum: Abraham, Abraham. 0884Et ille dixit: Ecce ego. Et dixit ei: Accipe filium tuum dilectum, quem diligis, Isaac, et vade in terram excelsam, et offer eum ibi in holocaustum super unum montium quem tibi dixero. Certe hic Deus, non angelus, commemoratus est. Paulo post vero ita se habet Scriptura: Extendens autem Abraham manum suam, sumpsit gladium, occiderefilium suum. Et vocavit eum angelus Domini de coelo, et dixit ei: Abraham, Abraham. Et dixit: Ecce ego. Et dixit: Ne injicias manum tuam super puerum, neque facias ei quidquam. Quid ad hoc respondetur? An dicturi sunt Deum jussisse ut occideretur Isaac, et angelum prohibuisse; porro ipsum patrem adversum Dei praeceptum, qui jusserat ut occideret, obtemperasse angelo ut parceret? Ridendus et abjiciendus hic sensus est. Sed neque huic tam crasso et abjecto ullum locum Scriptura esse permittit, continuo subjungens: Nunc enim cognovi quia times Deum tu, et non pepercisti filio tuo dilecto propter me. Quid est, propter me; nisi propter eum qui occidi jusserat? Idem igitur Deus Abrahae qui angelus, an potius per angelum Deus? Accipe sequentia: certe jam hic angelus manifestissime expressus est; attende tamen quid contexatur: Respiciens Abraham oculis suis vidit, et ecce aries unus tenebatur in arbore sabech cornibus; et abiit Abraham, et accepit arietem, et obtulit eum holocaustum pro Isaac filio suo. Et cognominavit Abraham nomen loci illius, Dominus vidit, ut dicant hodie quod in monte Dominus visus est: sicut paulo ante quod dixit Deus per angelum, Nunc enim cognovi quia times Deum; non quia tunc Deus cognovisse intelligendus est, sed egisse ut per Deum ipse Abraham cognosceret quantas haberet vires cordis ad obediendum Deo usque ad immolationem unici filii: illo modo locutionis quo significatur per efficientem id quod efficitur, sicut dicitur frigus pigrum, quod pigros facit; ut ideo cognovisse diceretur, quia ipsum Abraham cognoscere fecerat, quem poterat latere fidei suae firmitas, nisi tali experimento probaretur. Ita et hic cognominavit Abraham nomen loci illius, Dominus vidit: id est, quod videri se fecit. Nam continuo secutus ait, Ut dicant hodie quod in monte Dominus visus est. Ecce idem angelus Dominus dicitur: quare, nisi quia per angelum Dominus? Jam vero in eo quod sequitur, prophetice omnino loquitur angelus, et prorsus aperit quod per angelum Deus loquatur. Et vocavit, inquit, angelus Domini Abraham iterum de coelo, dicens: Per me juravi, dicit Dominus, pro eo quod fecisti hoc verbum, et non pepercisti filio tuo dilecto propter me (Id. XXII), etc. Haec certe verba, ut dicat ille per quem loquitur Dominus, Haec dicit Dominus, etiam Prophetae solent habere. An Filius Dei de Patre ait, Dicit Dominus, et ipse est ille Angelus Patris? Quid ergo? de illis tribus viris nonne respiciunt quomodo urgeantur, qui visi sunt Abrahae, cum praedictum esset, Visus est ei Dominus? An quia viri dicti sunt, non erant Angeli? Danielem legant dicentem, Ecce vir Gabriel (Dan. IX, 21).
0885 26. Sed quid ultra differimus ora eorum evidentissimo atque gravissimo alio documento oppilare, ubi non angelus singulariter, nec viri pluraliter, sed omnino Angeli dicuntur, per quos sermo non quilibet factus, sed lex ipsa data manifestissime ostenditur, quam certe nullus fidelium dubitat Deum dedisse Moysi ad subjugandum populum Israel, sed tamen per Angelos datam? Ita Stephanus loquitur: Dura cervice, inquit, et non circumcisi corde et auribus, vos semper Spiritui sancto restitistis, sicut et patres vestri. Quem Prophetarum non persecuti sunt patres vestri? Et occiderunt eos qui praenuntiabant de adventu Justi, cujus nunc vos proditores et interfectores fuistis, qui accepistis legem in edictis Angelorum, nec custodistis (Act. VII, 51-53). Quid hoc evidentius? quid tanta auctoritate robustius? In edictis quidem Angelorum lex illi populo data est: sed Domini Jesu Christi per eam disponebatur et praenuntiabatur adventus; et ipse tanquam Verbum Dei miro et ineffabili modo erat in Angelis, in quorum edictis lex ipsa dabatur. Unde dicit in Evangelio, Si crederetis Moysi, crederetis et mihi; de me enim ille scripsit (Joan. V, 46). Per Angelos ergo tunc Dominus loquebatur, per Angelos Filius Dei, mediator Dei et hominum futurus ex semine Abrahae suum disponebat adventum, ut inveniret a quibus reciperetur, confitentes se reos, quos lex non impleta fecerat transgressores. Unde et Apostolus ad Galatas dicit, Quid ergo lex? Transgressionis gratia posita est , donec veniret semen cui promissum est, dispositumper Angelos in manu Mediatoris (Galat III, 19): hoc est dispositum per Angelos in manu sua. Non enim natus est per conditionem, sed per potestatem. Quod autem non aliquem ex Angelis dicit mediatorem, sed ipsum Dominum Jesum Christum, in quantum homo fieri dignatus est, habes alio loco: Unus, inquit, Deus, et unus mediator Dei et hominum, homo Christus Jesus (I Tim. II, 5). Hinc illud Pascha in interfectione agni (Exod. XII): hinc illa omnia quae 0886 de Christo venturo in carne atque passuro, sed et resurrecturo in lege figurantur, quae data est in edictis Angelorum, in quibus Angelis erat utique et Pater, et Filius, et Spiritus sanctus; et aliquando Pater, aliquando Filius, aliquando Spiritus sanctus, aliquando sine ulla distinctione personae Deus per illos figurabatur, etsi visibilibus et sensibilibus formis apparens, per creaturam tamen suam, non per substantiam, cui videndae corda mundantur per haec omnia quae oculis videntur et auribus audiuntur.
27. Sed jam satis, quantum existimo, pro captu nostro disputatum et demonstratum est, quod in hoc libro susceperamus ostendere: constititque et probabilitate rationis quantum homo vel potius quantum ego potui, et firmitate auctoritatis quantum de Scripturis sanctis divina eloquia patuerunt, quod antiquis patribus nostris ante incarnationem Salvatoris, cum Deus apparere dicebatur, voces illae ac species corporales per Angelos factae sunt; sive ipsis loquentibus vel agentibus aliquid ex persona Dei, sicut etiam Prophetas solere ostendimus; sive assumentibus ex creatura quod ipsi non essent, ubi Deus figurate demonstraretur hominibus; quod genus significationum nec Prophetas omisisse, multis exemplis docet Scriptura. Superest igitur jam ut videamus, cum et nato per virginem Domino, et corporali specie sicut columba descendente Spiritu sancto (Matth. III, 16), visisque igneis linguis sonitu facto de coelo die Pentecostes post ascensionem Domini (Act. II, 1-4), non ipsum Dei Verbum per substantiam suam qua Patri aequale atque coaeternum est, nec Spiritus Patris et Filii per suam substantiam qua et ipse utrisque aequalis atque coaeternus est, sed utique creatura quae illis modis formari et existere potuit corporeis atque mortalibus sensibus apparuerit, quid inter illas demonstrationes et has proprietates Filii Dei et Spiritus sancti, quamvis per creaturam visibilem factas, intersit: quod ab alio volumine commodius ordiemur.