Fifteen Books of Aurelius Augustinus,

 Chapter 1.—This Work is Written Against Those Who Sophistically Assail the Faith of the Trinity, Through Misuse of Reason. They Who Dispute Concerning

 Chapter 2.—In What Manner This Work Proposes to Discourse Concerning the Trinity.

 Chapter 3.—What Augustin Requests from His Readers. The Errors of Readers Dull of Comprehension Not to Be Ascribed to the Author.

 Chapter 4.—What the Doctrine of the Catholic Faith is Concerning the Trinity.

 Chapter 5.—Of Difficulties Concerning the Trinity: in What Manner Three are One God, and How, Working Indivisibly, They Yet Perform Some Things Severa

 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 Thin

 Chapter 7.—In What Manner the Son is Less Than the Father, and Than Himself.

 Chapter 8.—The Texts of Scripture Explained Respecting the Subjection of the Son to the Father, Which Have Been Misunderstood. Christ Will Not So Give

 Chapter 9.—All are Sometimes Understood in One Person.

 Chapter 10.—In What Manner Christ Shall Deliver Up the Kingdom to God, Even the Father. The Kingdom Having Been Delivered to God, Even the Father, Chr

 Chapter 11.—By What Rule in the Scriptures It is Understood that the Son is Now Equal and Now Less.

 Chapter 12.—In What Manner the Son is Said Not to Know the Day and the Hour Which the Father Knows. Some Things Said of Christ According to the Form o

 Chapter 13.—Diverse Things are Spoken Concerning the Same Christ, on Account of the Diverse Natures of the One Hypostasis [Theanthropic Person]. Why I

 Book II.

 Preface.

 Chapter 1.—There is a Double Rule for Understanding the Scriptural Modes of Speech Concerning the Son of God. These Modes of Speech are of a Threefold

 Chapter 2.—That Some Ways of Speaking Concerning the Son are to Be Understood According to Either Rule.

 Chapter 3.—Some Things Concerning the Holy Spirit are to Be Understood According to the One Rule Only.

 Chapter 4.—The Glorification of the Son by the Father Does Not Prove Inequality.

 Chapter 5.—The Son and Holy Spirit are Not Therefore Less Because Sent. The Son is Sent Also by Himself. Of the Sending of the Holy Spirit.

 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 9.—Against Those Who Believed the Father Only to Be Immortal and Invisible. The Truth to Be Sought by Peaceful Study.

 Chapter 10—Whether God the Trinity Indiscriminately Appeared to the Fathers, or Any One Person of the Trinity. The Appearing of God to Adam. Of the Sa

 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 15.—Of the Appearance on Sinai. Whether the Trinity Spake in that Appearance or Some One Person Specially.

 Chapter 16.—In What Manner Moses Saw God.

 Chapter 17.—How the Back Parts of God Were Seen. The Faith of the Resurrection of Christ. The Catholic Church Only is the Place from Whence the Back P

 Chapter 18.—The Vision of Daniel.

 Book III.

 Preface.—Why Augustin Writes of the Trinity. What He Claims from Readers. What Has Been Said in the Previous Book.

 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 4.—God Uses All Creatures as He Will, and Makes Visible Things for the Manifestation of Himself.

 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.

 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

 Book IV.

 Preface.—The Knowledge of God is to Be Sought from God.

 Chapter 1.—We are Made Perfect by Acknowledgement of Our Own Weakness. The Incarnate Word Dispels Our Darkness.

 Chapter 2.—How We are Rendered Apt for the Perception of Truth Through the Incarnate Word.

 Chapter 3.—The One Death and Resurrection of The Body of Christ Harmonizes with Our Double Death and Resurrection of Body and Soul, to the Effect of S

 Chapter 4.—The Ratio of the Single to the Double Comes from the Perfection of the Senary Number. The Perfection of The Senary Number is Commended in t

 Chapter 5.—The Number Six is Also Commended in the Building Up of the Body of Christ and of the Temple at Jerusalem.

 Chapter 6.—The Three Days of the Resurrection, in Which Also the Ratio of Single to Double is Apparent.

 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 13.—The Death of Christ Voluntary. How the Mediator of Life Subdued the Mediator of Death. How the Devil Leads His Own to Despise the Death of

 Chapter 14.—Christ the Most Perfect Victim for Cleansing Our Faults. In Every Sacrifice Four Things are to Be Considered.

 Chapter 15.—They are Proud Who Think They are Able, by Their Own Righteousness, to Be Cleansed So as to See God.

 Chapter 16.—The Old Philosophers are Not to Be Consulted Concerning the Resurrection and Concerning Things to Come.

 Chapter 17.—In How Many Ways Things Future are Foreknown. Neither Philosophers, Nor Those Who Were Distinguished Among the Ancients, are to Be Consult

 Chapter 18.—The Son of God Became Incarnate in Order that We Being Cleansed by Faith May Be Raised to the Unchangeable Truth.

 Chapter 19.—In What Manner the Son Was Sent and Proclaimed Beforehand. How in the Sending of His Birth in the Flesh He Was Made Less Without Detriment

 Chapter 20.—The Sender and the Sent Equal. Why the Son is Said to Be Sent by the Father. Of the Mission of the Holy Spirit. How and by Whom He Was Sen

 Chapter 21.—Of the Sensible Showing of the Holy Spirit, and of the Coeternity of the Trinity. What Has Been Said, and What Remains to Be Said.

 Book V.

 Chapter 1.—What the Author Entreats from God, What from the Reader. In God Nothing is to Be Thought Corporeal or Changeable.

 Chapter 2.—God the Only Unchangeable Essence.

 Chapter 3.—The Argument of the Arians is Refuted, Which is Drawn from the Words Begotten and Unbegotten.

 Chapter 4.—The Accidental Always Implies Some Change in the Thing.

 Chapter 5.—Nothing is Spoken of God According to Accident, But According to Substance or According to Relation.

 Chapter 6.—Reply is Made to the Cavils of the Heretics in Respect to the Same Words Begotten and Unbegotten.

 Chapter 7.—The Addition of a Negative Does Not Change the Predicament.

 Chapter 8.—Whatever is Spoken of God According to Substance, is Spoken of Each Person Severally, and Together of the Trinity Itself. One Essence in Go

 Chapter 9.—The Three Persons Not Properly So Called [in a Human Sense].

 Chapter 10.—Those Things Which Belong Absolutely to God as an Essence, are Spoken of the Trinity in the Singular, Not in the Plural.

 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.

 Book VI.

 Chapter 1.—The Son, According to the Apostle, is the Power and Wisdom of the Father. Hence the Reasoning of the Catholics Against the Earlier Arians.

 Chapter 2 .—What is Said of the Father and Son Together, and What Not.

 Chapter 3.—That the Unity of the Essence of the Father and the Son is to Be Gathered from the Words, “We are One.” The Son is Equal to the Father Both

 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 10.—Of the Attributes Assigned by Hilary to Each Person. The Trinity is Represented in Things that are Made.

 Book VII.

 Chapter 1.—Augustin Returns to the Question, Whether Each Person of the Trinity by Itself is Wisdom. With What Difficulty, or in What Way, the Propose

 Chapter 2.—The Father and the Son are Together One Wisdom, as One Essence, Although Not Together One Word.

 Chapter 3.—Why the Son Chiefly is Intimated in the Scriptures by the Name of Wisdom, While Both the Father and the Holy Spirit are Wisdom. That the Ho

 Chapter 4.—How It Was Brought About that the Greeks Speak of Three Hypostases, the Latins of Three Persons. Scripture Nowhere Speaks of Three Persons

 Chapter 5.—In God, Substance is Spoken Improperly, Essence Properly.

 Chapter 6.—Why We Do Not in the Trinity Speak of One Person, and Three Essences. What He Ought to Believe Concerning the Trinity Who Does Not Receive

 Book VIII.

 Preface.—The Conclusion of What Has Been Said Above. The Rule to Be Observed in the More Difficult Questions of the Faith.

 Chapter 1.—It is Shown by Reason that in God Three are Not Anything Greater Than One Person.

 Chapter 2.—Every Corporeal Conception Must Be Rejected, in Order that It May Be Understood How God is Truth.

 Chapter 3.—How God May Be Known to Be the Chief Good. The Mind Does Not Become Good Unless by Turning to God.

 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 7.—Of True Love, by Which We Arrive at the Knowledge of the Trinity. God is to Be Sought, Not Outwardly, by Seeking to Do Wonderful Things wit

 Chapter 8.—That He Who Loves His Brother, Loves God Because He Loves Love Itself, Which is of God, and is God.

 Chapter 9.—Our Love of the Righteous is Kindled from Love Itself of the Unchangeable Form of Righteousness.

 Chapter 10.—There are Three Things in Love, as It Were a Trace of the Trinity.

 Book IX.

 Chapter 1.—In What Way We Must Inquire Concerning the Trinity.

 2. And this being so, let us direct our attention to those three things which we fancy we have found. We are not yet speaking of heavenly things, nor

 Chapter 3.—The Image of the Trinity in the Mind of Man Who Knows Himself and Loves Himself. The Mind Knows Itself Through Itself.

 Chapter 4.—The Three are One, and Also Equal, Viz The Mind Itself, and the Love, and the Knowledge of It. That the Same Three Exist Substantially, and

 Chapter 5.—That These Three are Several in Themselves, and Mutually All in All.

 Chapter 6.—There is One Knowledge of the Thing in the Thing Itself, and Another in Eternal Truth Itself. That Corporeal Things, Too, are to Be Judged

 Chapter 7.—We Conceive and Beget the Word Within, from the Things We Have Beheld in the Eternal Truth. The Word, Whether of the Creature or of the Cre

 Chapter 8.—In What Desire and Love Differ.

 Chapter 9.—In the Love of Spiritual Things the Word Born is the Same as the Word Conceived. It is Otherwise in the Love of Carnal Things.

 Chapter 10.—Whether Only Knowledge that is Loved is the Word of the Mind.

 Chapter 11.—That the Image or Begotten Word of the Mind that Knows Itself is Equal to the Mind Itself.

 Chapter 12.—Why Love is Not the Offspring of the Mind, as Knowledge is So. The Solution of the Question. The Mind with the Knowledge of Itself and the

 Book X.

 Chapter 1.—The Love of the Studious Mind, that Is, of One Desirous to Know, is Not the Love of a Thing Which It Does Not Know.

 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 5.—Why the Soul is Enjoined to Know Itself. Whence Come the Errors of the Mind Concerning Its Own Substance.

 Chapter 6.—The Opinion Which the Mind Has of Itself is Deceitful.

 Chapter 7.—The Opinions of Philosophers Respecting the Substance of the Soul. The Error of Those Who are of Opinion that the Soul is Corporeal, Does N

 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 10.—Every Mind Knows Certainly Three Things Concerning Itself—That It Understands, that It Is, and that It Lives.

 Chapter 11.—In Memory, Understanding [or Intelligence], and Will, We Have to Note Ability, Learning, and Use. Memory, Understanding, and Will are One

 Chapter 12.—The Mind is an Image of the Trinity in Its Own Memory, and Understanding, and Will.

 Book XI.

 Chapter 1.—A Trace of the Trinity Also In the Outer Man.

 Chapter 2.—A Certain Trinity in the Sight. That There are Three Things in Sight, Which Differ in Their Own Nature. In What Manner from a Visible Thing

 Chapter 3.—The Unity of the Three Takes Place in Thought, Viz Of Memory, of Ternal Vision, and of Will Combining Both.

 Chapter 4.—How This Unity Comes to Pass.

 Chapter 5.—The Trinity of the Outer Man, or of External Vision, is Not an Image of God. The Likeness of God is Desired Even in Sins. In External Visio

 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 10.—The Imagination Also Adds Even to Things We Have Not Seen, Those Things Which We Have Seen Elsewhere.

 Chapter 11.—Number, Weight, Measure.

 Book XII.

 Chapter 1.—Of What Kind are the Outer and the Inner Man.

 Chapter 2.—Man Alone of Animate Creatures Perceives the Eternal Reasons of Things Pertaining to the Body.

 Chapter 3.—The Higher Reason Which Belongs to Contemplation, and the Lower Which Belongs to Action, are in One Mind.

 Chapter 4.—The Trinity and the Image of God is in that Part of the Mind Alone Which Belongs to the Contemplation of Eternal Things.

 Chapter 5.—The Opinion Which Devises an Image of the Trinity in the Marriage of Male and Female, and in Their Offspring.

 Chapter 6. —Why This Opinion is to Be Rejected.

 Chapter 7.—How Man is the Image of God. Whether the Woman is Not Also the Image of God. How the Saying of the Apostle, that the Man is the Image of Go

 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 13.—The Opinion of Those Who Have Thought that the Mind Was Signified by the Man, the Bodily Sense by the Woman.

 Chapter 14.—What is the Difference Between Wisdom and Knowledge. The Worship of God is the Love of Him. How the Intellectual Cognizance of Eternal Thi

 Chapter 15.—In Opposition to the Reminiscence of Plato and Pythagoras. Pythagoras the Samian. Of the Difference Between Wisdom and Knowledge, and of S

 Book XIII.

 Chapter 1.—The Attempt is Made to Distinguish Out of the Scriptures the Offices of Wisdom and of Knowledge. That in the Beginning of John Some Things

 Chapter 2.—Faith a Thing of the Heart, Not of the Body How It is Common and One and the Same in All Believers. The Faith of Believers is One, No Othe

 Chapter 3.—Some Desires Being the Same in All, are Known to Each. The Poet Ennius.

 Chapter 4.—The Will to Possess Blessedness is One in All, But the Variety of Wills is Very Great Concerning that Blessedness Itself.

 Chapter 5.—Of the Same Thing.

 Chapter 6.—Why, When All Will to Be Blessed, that is Rather Chosen by Which One Withdraws from Being So.

 Chapter 7.—Faith is Necessary, that Man May at Some Time Be Blessed, Which He Will Only Attain in the Future Life. The Blessedness of Proud Philosophe

 Chapter 8.—Blessedness Cannot Exist Without Immortality.

 Chapter 9.—We Say that Future Blessedness is Truly Eternal, Not Through Human Reasonings, But by the Help of Faith. The Immortality of Blessedness Bec

 Chapter 10.—There Was No Other More Suitable Way of Freeing Man from the Misery of Mortality Than The Incarnation of the Word. The Merits Which are Ca

 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 16.—The Remains of Death and the Evil Things of the World Turn to Good for the Elect. How Fitly the Death of Christ Was Chosen, that We Might

 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 20.—What Has Been Treated of in This Book. How We Have Reached by Steps to a Certain Trinity, Which is Found in Practical Knowledge and True F

 Book XIV.

 Chapter 1.—What the Wisdom is of Which We are Here to Treat. Whence the Name of Philosopher Arose. What Has Been Already Said Concerning the Distincti

 Chapter 2.—There is a Kind of Trinity in the Holding, Contemplating, and Loving of Faith Temporal, But One that Does Not Yet Attain to Being Properly

 Chapter 3.—A Difficulty Removed, Which Lies in the Way of What Has Just Been Said.

 Chapter 4.—The Image of God is to Be Sought in the Immortality of the Rational Soul. How a Trinity is Demonstrated in the Mind.

 Chapter 5.—Whether the Mind of Infants Knows Itself.

 Chapter 6.—How a Kind of Trinity Exists in the Mind Thinking of Itself. What is the Part of Thought in This Trinity.

 Chapter 7.—The Thing is Made Plain by an Example. In What Way the Matter is Handled in Order to Help the Reader.

 Chapter 8.—The Trinity Which is the Image of God is Now to Be Sought in the Noblest Part of the Mind.

 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 12.—The Trinity in the Mind is the Image of God, in that It Remembers, Understands, and Loves God, Which to Do is Wisdom.

 Chapter 13.—How Any One Can Forget and Remember God.

 Chapter 14.—The Mind Loves God in Rightly Loving Itself And If It Love Not God, It Must Be Said to Hate Itself. Even a Weak and Erring Mind is Always

 Chapter 15.—Although the Soul Hopes for Blessedness, Yet It Does Not Remember Lost Blessedness, But Remembers God and the Rules of Righteousness. The

 Chapter 16.—How the Image of God is Formed Anew in Man.

 Chapter 17.—How the Image of God in the Mind is Renewed Until the Likeness of God is Perfected in It in Blessedness.

 Chapter 18.—Whether the Sentence of John is to Be Understood of Our Future Likeness with the Son of God in the Immortality Itself Also of the Body.

 Chapter 19.—John is Rather to Be Understood of Our Perfect Likeness with the Trinity in Life Eternal. Wisdom is Perfected in Happiness.

 Book XV.

 Chapter 1.—God is Above the Mind.

 Chapter 2.—God, Although Incomprehensible, is Ever to Be Sought. The Traces of the Trinity are Not Vainly Sought in the Creature.

 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 6.—How There is a Trinity in the Very Simplicity of God. Whether and How the Trinity that is God is Manifested from the Trinities Which Have B

 Chapter 7.—That It is Not Easy to Discover the Trinity that is God from the Trinities We Have Spoken of.

 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 10.—Concerning the Word of the Mind, in Which We See the Word of God, as in a Glass and an Enigma.

 Chapter 11.—The Likeness of the Divine Word, Such as It Is, is to Be Sought, Not in Our Own Outer and Sensible Word, But in the Inner and Mental One.

 Chapter 12.—The Academic Philosophy.

 Chapter 13.—Still Further of the Difference Between the Knowledge and Word of Our Mind, and the Knowledge and Word of God.

 Chapter 14.—The Word of God is in All Things Equal to the Father, from Whom It is.

 Chapter 15.—How Great is the Unlikeness Between Our Word and the Divine Word. Our Word Cannot Be or Be Called Eternal.

 Chapter 16.—Our Word is Never to Be Equalled to the Divine Word, Not Even When We Shall Be Like God.

 Chapter 17.—How the Holy Spirit is Called Love, and Whether He Alone is So Called. That the Holy Spirit is in the Scriptures Properly Called by the Na

 Chapter 18.—No Gift of God is More Excellent Than Love.

 Chapter 19.—The Holy Spirit is Called the Gift of God in the Scriptures. By the Gift of the Holy Spirit is Meant the Gift Which is the Holy Spirit. Th

 Chapter 20.—Against Eunomius, Saying that the Son of God is the Son, Not of His Nature, But of His Will. Epilogue to What Has Been Said Already.

 Chapter 21.—Of the Likeness of the Father and of the Son Alleged to Be in Our Memory and Understanding. Of the Likeness of the Holy Spirit in Our Will

 Chapter 22.—How Great the Unlikeness is Between the Image of the Trinity Which We Have Found in Ourselves, and the Trinity Itself.

 Chapter 23.—Augustin Dwells Still Further on the Disparity Between the Trinity Which is in Man, and the Trinity Which is God. The Trinity is Now Seen

 Chapter 24.—The Infirmity of the Human Mind.

 Chapter 25.—The Question Why the Holy Spirit is Not Begotten, and How He Proceeds from the Father and the Son, Will Only Be Understood When We are in

 Chapter 26.—The Holy Spirit Twice Given by Christ. The Procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and from the Son is Apart from Time, Nor Can He B

 Chapter 27.—What It is that Suffices Here to Solve the Question Why the Spirit is Not Said to Be Begotten, and Why the Father Alone is Unbegotten. Wha

 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.