S. AURELII AUGUSTINI HIPPONENSIS EPISCOPI DE TRINITATE Libri quindecim .

 CAPUT PRIMUM.

 CAPUT II.

 CAPUT III.

 CAPUT IV.

 CAPUT V.

 CAPUT VI.

 CAPUT VII.

 CAPUT VIII.

 CAPUT IX.

 CAPUT X.

 CAPUT XI.

 CAPUT XII.

 CAPUT XIII.

 LIBER SECUNDUS. Rursum defendit Augustinus aequalitatem Trinitatis, et de Filii missione ac Spiritus sancti agens, variisque Dei apparitionibus, demon

 PROOEMIUM.

 CAPUT PRIMUM.

 CAPUT II.

 CAPUT III.

 CAPUT IV.

 CAPUT V.

 CAPUT VI.

 CAPUT VII.

 CAPUT VIII.

 CAPUT IX.

 CAPUT X.

 CAPUT XI.

 CAPUT XII.

 CAPUT XIII.

 CAPUT XIV.

 CAPUT XV.

 CAPUT XVI.

 CAPUT XVII.

 CAPUT XVIII.

 LIBER TERTIUS. In quo quaeritur, an in illis de quibus superiore libro dictum est, Dei apparitionibus, per corporeas species factis, tantummodo creatu

 PROOEMIUM.

 CAPUT PRIMUM.

 CAPUT II.

 CAPUT III.

 CAPUT IV.

 CAPUT V.

 CAPUT VI.

 CAPUT VII

 CAPUT VIII.

 CAPUT IX.

 CAPUT X.

 CAPUT XI.

 LIBER QUARTUS. Explicat ad quid missus sit Filius Dei: Christo videlicet pro peccatoribus moriente persuadendum nobis fuisse imprimis et quantum nos d

 PROOEMIUM.

 CAPUT PRIMUM.

 CAPUT II.

 CAPUT III.

 CAPUT IV.

 CAPUT V.

 CAPUT VI.

 CAPUT VII.

 CAPUT VIII.

 CAPUT IX.

 CAPUT X.

 CAPUT XI.

 CAPUT XII.

 CAPUT XIII.

 CAPUT XIV.

 CAPUT XV.

 CAPUT XVI.

 CAPUT XVII.

 CAPUT XVIII.

 CAPUT XIX.

 CAPUT XX.

 CAPUT XXI.

 LIBER QUINTUS. Venit ad haereticorum argumenta illa quae non ex divinis Libris, sed ex rationibus suis proferunt: et eos refellit, quibus ideo videtur

 CAPUT PRIMUM.

 CAPUT II.

 CAPUT III.

 CAPUT IV.

 CAPUT V.

 CAPUT VI.

 CAPUT VII.

 CAPUT VIII.

 CAPUT IX.

 CAPUT X.

 CAPUT XI.

 CAPUT XII.

 CAPUT XIII.

 CAPUT XIV.

 CAPUT XV.

 CAPUT XVI.

 LIBER SEXTUS. In quo proposita quaestione, quomodo dictus sit Christus ore apostolico, Dei virtus et Dei sapientia,

 CAPUT PRIMUM.

 CAPUT II.

 CAPUT III.

 CAPUT IV.

 CAPUT V.

 CAPUT VI.

 CAPUT VII.

 CAPUT VIII.

 CAPUT IX.

 CAPUT X.

 LIBER SEPTIMUS. In quo superioris libri quaestio, quae dilata fuerat, explicatur quod videlicet Deus Pater qui genuit Filium virtutem et sapientiam,

 CAPUT PRIMUM.

 CAPUT II.

 CAPUT III.

 CAPUT IV.

 CAPUT V.

 CAPUT VI.

 LIBER OCTAVUS. In quo ratione reddita monstrat, non solum Patrem Filio non esse majorem, sed nec ambos simul aliquid majus esse quam Spiritum sanctum,

 PROOEMIUM.

 CAPUT PRIMUM.

 CAPUT II.

 CAPUT III.

 CAPUT IV.

 CAPUT V.

 CAPUT VI.

 CAPUT VII.

 CAPUT VIII.

 CAPUT IX.

 CAPUT X.

 LIBER NONUS. Trinitatem in homine, qui imago Dei est, quamdam inesse mentem scilicet, et notitiam qua se novit, et amorem quo se notitiamque suam dil

 CAPUT PRIMUM.

 CAPUT II.

 CAPUT III.

 CAPUT IV.

 CAPUT V.

 CAPUT VI.

 CAPUT VII.

 CAPUT VIII.

 CAPUT IX.

 CAPUT X.

 CAPUT XI.

 CAPUT XII.

 LIBER DECIMUS, In quo trinitatem aliam in hominis mente inesse ostenditur, eamque longe evidentiorem apparere in memoria, intelligentia et voluntate.

 CAPUT PRIMUM.

 CAPUT II.

 CAPUT III.

 CAPUT IV.

 CAPUT V.

 CAPUT VI.

 CAPUT VII.

 CAPUT VIII.

 CAPUT IX.

 CAPUT X.

 CAPUT XI.

 CAPUT XII.

 LIBER UNDECIMUS. Trinitatis imago quaedam monstratur etiam in exteriore homine: primo quidem in his quae cernuntur extrinsecus ex corpore scilicet qu

 CAPUT PRIMUM.

 CAPUT II.

 CAPUT III.

 CAPUT IV.

 CAPUT V.

 CAPUT VI.

 CAPUT VII.

 CAPUT VIII.

 CAPUT IX.

 CAPUT X.

 CAPUT XI.

 LIBER DUODECIMUS. In quo praemissa distinctione sapientiae a scientia, in ea quae proprie scientia nuncupatur, quaeve inferior est, prius quaedam sui

 CAPUT PRIMUM.

 CAPUT II.

 CAPUT III.

 CAPUT IV.

 CAPUT V.

 CAPUT VI.

 CAPUT VII.

 CAPUT VIII.

 CAPUT IX.

 CAPUT X.

 CAPUT XI.

 CAPUT XII.

 CAPUT XIII.

 CAPUT XIV.

 CAPUT XV.

 LIBER TERTIUS DECIMUS. Prosequitur de scientia, in qua videlicet, etiam ut a sapientia distinguitur, trinitatem quamdam inquirere libro superiore coep

 CAPUT PRIMUM.

 CAPUT II.

 CAPUT III.

 CAPUT IV.

 CAPUT V.

 CAPUT VI.

 CAPUT VII.

 CAPUT VIII.

 CAPUT IX.

 CAPUT X.

 CAPUT XI.

 CAPUT XII.

 CAPUT XIII.

 CAPUT XIV.

 CAPUT XV.

 CAPUT XVI.

 CAPUT XVII.

 CAPUT XVIII.

 CAPUT XIX.

 CAPUT XX.

 LIBER QUARTUS DECIMUS. De sapientia hominis vera dicit, ostendens imaginem Dei, quod est homo secundum mentem, non proprie in transeuntibus, veluti in

 CAPUT PRIMUM.

 CAPUT II.

 CAPUT III.

 CAPUT IV.

 CAPUT V.

 CAPUT VI.

 CAPUT VII.

 CAPUT VIII.

 CAPUT IX.

 CAPUT X.

 CAPUT XI.

 CAPUT XII.

 CAPUT XIII.

 CAPUT XIV.

 CAPUT XV.

 CAPUT XVI.

 CAPUT XVII.

 CAPUT XVIII.

 CAPUT XIX.

 LIBER QUINTUS DECIMUS. Principio, quid in singulis quatuordecim superioribus libris dictum sit, exponit breviter ac summatim, eoque demum pervenisse d

 CAPUT PRIMUM.

 CAPUT II.

 CAPUT III.

 CAPUT IV.

 CAPUT V.

 CAPUT VI.

 CAPUT VII.

 CAPUT VIII.

 CAPUT IX.

 CAPUT X.

 CAPUT XI.

 CAPUT XII.

 CAPUT XIII.

 CAPUT XIV.

 CAPUT XV.

 CAPUT XVI.

 CAPUT XVII.

 CAPUT XVIII.

 CAPUT XIX.

 CAPUT XX.

 CAPUT XXI.

 CAPUT XXII.

 CAPUT XXIII.

 CAPUT XXIV.

 CAPUT XXV.

 CAPUT XXVI.

 CAPUT XXVII.

 CAPUT XXVIII.

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. 0884 Et 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, occidere filium 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, dispositum per 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.