Letter CLXIX.

(a.d. 415.)

Bishop Augustin to Bishop Evodius.

Chap. I.

1. If acquaintance with the treatises which specially occupy me, and from which I am unwilling to be turned aside to anything else, is so highly valued by your Holiness, let some one be sent to copy them for you. For I have now finished several of those which had been commenced by me this year before Easter, near the beginning of Lent. For, to the three books on the City of God, in opposition to its enemies, the worshippers of demons, I have added two others, and in these five books I think enough has been said to answer those who maintain that the [heathen] gods must be worshipped in order to secure prosperity in this present life, and who are hostile to the Christian name from an idea that that prosperity is hindered by us. In the sequel I must, as I promised in the first book,1348    De Civitate Dei, lib. I. ch. xxxvi. answer those who think that the worship of their gods is the only way to obtain that life after death with a view to obtain which we are Christians. I have dictated also, in volumes of considerable size, expositions of three Psalms, the 68th, the 72d, and the 78th. Commentaries on the other Psalms—not yet dictated, nor even entered on—are eagerly expected and demanded from me. From these studies I am unwilling to be called away and hindered by any questions thrusting themselves upon me from another quarter; yea, so unwilling, that I do not wish to turn at present even to the books on the Trinity, which I have long had on hand and have not yet completed, because they require a great amount of labour, and I believe that they are of a nature to be understood only by few; on which account they claim my attention less urgently than writings which may, I hope, be useful to very many.

2. For the words, “He that is ignorant shall be ignored,”1349    1 Cor. xiv. 38. were not used by the apostle in reference to this subject, as your letter affirms; as if this punishment were to be inflicted on the man who is not able to discern by the exercise of his intellect the ineffable unity of the Trinity, in the same way as the unity of memory, understanding, and will in the soul of man is discerned. The apostle said these words with a wholly different design. Consult the passage and you will see that he was speaking of those things which might be for the edification of the many in faith and holiness, not of those which might with difficulty be comprehended by the few, and by them only in the small degree in which the comprehension of so great a subject is attainable in this life. The positions laid down by him were,—that prophesying was to be preferred to speaking with tongues; that these gifts should not be exercised in a disorderly manner, as if the spirit of prophecy compelled them to speak even against their will; that women should keep silence in the Church; and that all things should be done decently and in order. While treating of these things he says: “If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him know the things which I write to you, for they are the commands of the Lord. If any man be ignorant, he shall be ignored;” intending by these words to restrain and call to order persons who were specially ready to cause disorder in the Church, because they imagined themselves to excel in spiritual gifts, although they were disturbing everything by their presumptions conduct. “If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him know,” he says, “the things which I write to you, for they are the commands of the Lord.” If any man thinks himself to be, and in reality is not, a prophet, for he who is a prophet undoubtedly knows and does not need admonition and exhortation, because “he judgeth all things, and is himself judged of no man.”1350    1 Cor. ii. 15. Those persons, therefore, caused confusion and trouble in the Church who thought themselves to be in the Church what they were not. He teaches these to know the commandments of the Lord, for he is not a “God of confusion, but of peace.”1351    1 Cor. xiv. 33. But “if any one is ignorant, he shall be ignored,” that is to say, he shall be rejected; for God is not ignorant—so far as mere knowledge is concerned—in regard to the persons to whom He shall one day say, “I know you not,”1352    Luke xiii. 27. but their rejection is signified by this expression.

3. Moreover, since the Lord says, “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God,”1353    Matt. v. 8. and that sight is promised to us as the highest reward at the last, we have no reason to fear lest, if we are now unable to see clearly those things which we believe concerning the nature of God, this defective apprehension should bring us under the sentence, “He that is ignorant shall be ignored.” For when “in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save those who believed.” This foolishness of preaching and “foolishness of God which is wiser than man”1354    1 Cor. i. 21, 25. draws many to salvation, in such a way that not only those who are as yet incapable of perceiving with clear intelligence the nature of God which in faith they hold, but even those who have not yet so learned the nature of their own soul as to distinguish between its incorporeal essence and the body as a whole with the same certainty with which they perceive that they live, understand, and will, are not on this account shut out from that salvation which that foolishness of preaching bestows on believers.

4. For if Christ died for those only who with clear intelligence can discern these things, our labour in the Church is almost spent in vain. But if, as is the fact, crowds of common people, possessing no great strength of intellect, run to the Physician in the exercise of faith, with the result of being healed by Christ and Him crucified, that “where sin has abounded, grace may much more abound,”1355    Rom. v. 20. it comes in wondrous ways to pass, through the depths of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God and His unsearchable judgments, that, on the one hand, some who do discern between the material and the spiritual in their own nature, while pluming themselves on this attainment, and despising that foolishness of preaching by which those who believe are saved, wander far from the only path which leads to eternal life; and, on the other hand, because not one perishes for whom Christ died,1356    John xvii. 12. many glorying in the cross of Christ, and not withdrawing from that same path, attain, notwithstanding their ignorance of those things which some with most profound subtlety investigate, unto that eternity, truth, and love,—that is, unto that enduring, clear, and full felicity,—in which to those who abide, and see, and love, all things are plain.

Chap. II.

5. Therefore let us with steadfast piety believe in one God, the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit; let us at the same time believe that the Son is not [the person] who is the Father, and the Father is not [the person] who is the Son, and neither the Father nor the Son is [the person] who is the Spirit of both the Father and the Son. Let it not be supposed that in this Trinity there is any separation in respect of time or place, but that these Three are equal and co-eternal, and absolutely of one nature: and that the creatures have been made, not some by the Father, and some by the Son, and some by the Holy Spirit, but that each and all that have been or are now being created subsist in the Trinity as their Creator; and that no one is saved by the Father without the Son and the Holy Spirit, or by the Son without the Father and the Holy Spirit, or by the Holy Spirit without the Father and the Son, but by the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, the only one, true, and truly immortal (that is, absolutely unchangeable) God. At the same time, we believe that many things are stated in Scripture separately concerning each of the Three, in order to teach us that, though they are an inseparable Trinity, yet they are a Trinity. For, just as when their names are pronounced in human language they cannot be named simultaneously, although their existence in inseparable union is at every moment simultaneous, even so in some places of Scripture also, they are by certain created things presented to us distinctively and in mutual relation to each other: for example, [at the baptism of Christ] the Father is heard in the voice which said, “Thou art my Son;” the Son is seen in the human nature which, in being born of the Virgin, He assumed; the Holy Spirit is seen in the bodily form of a dove,1357    Luke iii. 22.—these things presenting the Three to our apprehension separately, indeed, but in no wise separated.

6. To present this in a form which the intellect may apprehend, we borrow an illustration from the Memory, the Understanding, and the Will. For although we can speak of each of these faculties severally in its own order, and at a separate time, we neither exercise nor even mention any one of them without the other two. It must not, however, be supposed, from our using this comparison between these three faculties and the Trinity, that the things compared agree in every particular, for where, in any process of reasoning, can we find an illustration in which the correspondence between the things compared is so exact that it admits of application in every point to that which it is intended to illustrate? In the first place, therefore, the similarity is found to be imperfect in this respect, that whereas memory, understanding, and will are not the soul, but only exist in the soul, the Trinity does not exist in God, but is God. In the Trinity, therefore, there is manifested a singleness [simplicitas] commanding our astonishment, because in this Trinity it is not one thing to exist, and another thing to understand, or do anything else which is attributed to the nature of God; but in the soul it is one thing that it exists, and another thing that it understands, for even when it is not using the understanding it still exists. In the second place, who would dare to say that the Father does not understand by Himself but by the Son, as memory does not understand by itself but by the understanding, or, to speak more correctly, the soul in which these faculties are understands by no other faculty than by the understanding, as it remembers only by memory, and exercises volition only by the will? The point, therefore, to which the illustration is intended to apply is this,—that, whatever be the manner in which we understand, in regard to these three faculties in the soul, that when the several names by which they are severally represented are uttered, the utterance of each separate name is nevertheless accomplished only in the combined operation of all the three, since it is by an act of memory and of understanding and of will that it is spoken,—it is in the same manner that we understand, in regard to the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, that no created thing which may at any time be employed to present only one of the Three to our minds is produced otherwise than by the simultaneous, because essentially inseparable, operation of the Trinity; and that, consequently, neither the voice of the Father, nor the body and soul of the Son, nor the dove of the Holy Spirit, was produced in any other way than by the combined operation of the Trinity.

7. Moreover, that sound of a voice was certainly not made indissolubly one with the person of the Father, for so soon as it was uttered it ceased to be. Neither was that form of a dove made indissolubly one with the person of Holy Spirit, for it also, like the bright cloud which covered the Saviour and His three disciples on the mount,1358    Matt. xvii. 5. or rather like the tongues of flame which once represented the same Holy Spirit, ceased to exist as soon as it had served its purpose as a symbol. But it was otherwise with the body and soul in which the Son of God was manifested: seeing that the deliverance of men was the object for which all these things were done, the human nature in which He appeared was, in a way marvellous and unique, assumed into real union with the person of the Word of God, that is, of the only Son of God,—the Word remaining unchangeably in His own nature, wherein it is not conceivable that there should be composite elements in union with which any mere semblance of a human soul could subsist. We read, indeed, that “the Spirit of wisdom is manifold;”1359    Wisd. vii. 22. but it is as properly termed simple. Manifold it is, indeed, because there are many things which it possesses; but simple, because it is not a different thing from what it possesses, as the Son is said to have life in Himself, and yet He is Himself that life. The human nature came to the Word; the Word did not come, with susceptibility of change, into the human nature;1360    Homo autem Verbo accessit, non Verbum in hominem convertibiliter accesit. and therefore, in His union to the human nature which He has assumed, He is still properly called the Son of God; for which reason the same person is the Son of God immutable and co-eternal with the Father, and the Son of God who was laid in the grave,—the former being true of Him only as the Word, the latter true of Him only as a man.

8. Wherefore it behoves us, in reading any statements made concerning the Son of God, to observe in reference to which of these two natures they are spoken. For by His assumption of the soul and body of a man, no increase was made in the number of Persons: the Trinity remained as before. For just as in every man, with the exception of that one whom alone He assumed into personal union, the soul and body constitute one person, so in Christ the Word and His human soul and body constitute one person. And as the name philosopher, for example, is given to a man certainly with reference only to his soul, and yet it is nothing absurd, but only a most suitable and ordinary use of language, for us to say the philosopher was killed, the philosopher died, the philosopher was buried, although all these events befell him in his body, not in that part of him in which he was a philosopher; in like manner the name of God, or Son of God, or Lord of Glory, or any other such name, is given to Christ as the Word, and it is, nevertheless, correct to say that God was crucified, seeing that there is no question that He suffered this death in his human nature, not in that in which He is the Lord of Glory.1361    1 Cor. ii. 8.

9. As for the sound of the voice, however, and the bodily form of a dove, and the cloven tongues which sat upon each of them, these, like the terrible wonders wrought at Sinai,1362    Ex. xix. 18. and like the pillar of cloud by day and of fire by night,1363    Ex. xiii. 21. were produced only as symbols, and vanished when this purpose had been served. The thing which we must especially guard against in connection with them is, lest any one should believe that the nature of God—whether of the Father, or of the Son, or of the Holy Spirit—is susceptible of change or transformation. And we must not be disturbed by the fact that the sign sometimes receives the name of the thing signified, as when the Holy Spirit is said to have descended in a bodily form as a dove and abode upon Him; for in like manner the smitten rock is called Christ,1364    1 Cor. x. 4. because it was a symbol of Christ.

Chap. III.

10. I wonder, however, that, although you believe it possible for the sound of the voice which said, “Thou art my Son,” to have been produced through a divine act, without the intermediate agency of a soul, by something the nature of which was corporeal, you nevertheless do not believe that a bodily form and movements exactly resembling those of any real living creature whatsoever could be produced in the same way, namely, through a divine act, without the intermediate agency of a spirit imparting life. For if inanimate matter obeys God without the instrumentality of an animating spirit, so as to emit sounds such as are wont to be emited by animated bodies, in order to bring to the human ear words articulately spoken, why should it not obey Him, so as to present to the human eye the figure and motions of a bird, by the same power of the Creator without the instrumentalist of any animating spirit? The objects of both sight and hearing—the sound which strikes the ear and the appearance which meets the eye, the articulations of the voice and the outlines of the members, every audible and visible motion—are both alike produced from matter contiguous to us; is it, then, granted to the sense of hearing, and not to the sense of sight, to tell us regarding the body which is perceived by this bodily sense, both that it is a true body, and that it is nothing beyond what the bodily sense perceives it to be? For in every living creature the soul is, of course, not perceived by any bodily sense. We do not, therefore, need to inquire how the bodily form of the dove appeared to the eye, just as we do not need to inquire how the voice of a bodily form capable of speech was made to fall upon the ear. For if it was possible to dispense with the intermediate agency of a soul in the case in which a voice, not something like a voice, is said to have been produced, how much more easily was it possible in the case in which it is said that the Spirit descended “like a dove,” a phrase which signifies that a mere bodily form was exhibited to the eye, and does not affirm that a real living creature was seen! In like manner, it is said that on the day of Pentecost, “suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a mighty rushing wind, and there appeared to them cloven tongues like as of fire,”1365    Acts ii. 2, 3. in which something like wind and like fire, i.e. resembling these common and familiar natural phenomena, is said to have been perceived, but it does not seem to be indicated that these common and familiar natural phenomena were actually produced.

11. If, however, more subtle reasoning or more thorough investigation of the matter result in demonstrating that that which is naturally destitute of motion both in time and in space [i.e. matter] cannot be moved otherwise than through the intermediate agency of that which is capable of motion only in time, not in space [i.e. spirit], it will follow from this that all those things must have been done by the instrumentality of a living creature, as things are done by angels, on which subject a more elaborate discussion would be tedious, and is not necessary. To this it must be added, that there are visions which appear to the spirit as plainly as to the senses of the body, not only in sleep or delirium, but also to persons of sound mind in their waking hours,—visions which are due not to the deceitfulness of devils mocking men, but to some spiritual revelation accomplished by means of immaterial forms resembling bodies, and which cannot by any means be distinguished from real objects, unless they are by divine assistance more fully revealed and discriminated by the mind’s intelligence, which is done sometimes (but with difficulty) at the time, but for the most part after they have disappeared. This being the case in regard to these visions which, whether their nature be really material, or material only in appearance but really spiritual, seem to manifest themselves to our spirit as if they were perceived by the bodily senses, we ought not, when these things are recorded in sacred Scripture, to conclude hastily to which of these two classes they are to be referred, or whether, if they belong to the former, they are produced by the intermediate agency of a spirit; while, at the same time, as to the invisible and immutable nature of the Creator, that is, of the supreme and ineffable Trinity, we either simply, without any doubt, believe, or, in addition to this, with some degree of intellectual apprehension, understand that it is wholly removed and separated both from the senses of fleshly mortals, and from all susceptibility of being changed either for the worse or for the better, or to anything whatever of a variable nature.

Chap. IV.

12. These things I send you in reference to two of your questions,—the one concerning the Trinity, and the other concerning the dove in which the Holy Spirit, not in His own nature, but in a symbolical form, was manifested, as also the Son of God, not in His eternal Sonship (of which the Father said: “Before the morning star I have begotten Thee”1366    Ps. cx. 3, LXX.), but in that human nature which He assumed from the Virgin’s womb, was crucified by the Jews: observe that to you who are at leisure I have been able, notwithstanding immense pressure of business, to write so much. I have not, however, deemed it necessary to discuss everything which you have brought forward in your letter; but on these two questions which you wished me to solve, I think I have written as much as is exacted by Christian charity, though I may not have satisfied your vehement desire.

13. Besides the two books added to the first three in the City of God, and the exposition of three psalms, as above mentioned,1367    Par. 1, p. 539. I have also written a treatise to the holy presbyter Jerome concerning the origin of the soul,1368    Letter CLXVI. asking him, in regard to the opinion which, in writing to Marcellinus of pious memory, he avowed as his own, that a new soul is made for each individual at birth, how this can be maintained without overthrowing that most surely established article of the Church’s faith, according to which we firmly believe that all die in Adam,1369    1 Cor. xv. 22. and are brought down under condemnation unless they be delivered by the grace of Christ, which, by means of His sacrament, works even in infants. I have, moreover, written to the same person to inquire his opinion as to the sense in which the words of James, “Whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all,” are to be understood.1370    Letter CLXVII. In this letter I have also stated my own opinion: in the other, concerning the origin of the soul, I have only asked what was his opinion, submitting the matter to his judgment, and at the same time discussing it to some extent. I wrote these to Jerome because I did not wish to lose an opportunity of correspondence afforded by a certain very pious and studious young presbyter, Orosius, who, prompted only by burning zeal in regard to the Holy Scriptures, came to us from the remotest part of Spain, namely, from the shore of the ocean, and whom I persuaded to go on from us to Jerome. In answer to certain questions of the same Orosius, as to things which troubled him in reference to the heresy of the Priscillianists, and some opinions of Origen which the Church has not accepted, I have written a treatise of moderate size with as much brevity and clearness as was in my power. I have also written a considerable book against the heresy of Pelagius,1371    The work on Nature and Grace, addressed to Timasius and Jacobus—translated in the fourth volume of this series, Antipelagian Writings, i. 233. being constrained to do this by some brethren whom he had persuaded to adopt his fatal error, denying the grace of Christ. If you wish to have all these, send some one to copy them all for you. Allow me, however, to be free from distraction in studying and dictating to my clerks those things which, being urgently required by many, claim in my opinion precedence over your questions, which are of interest to very few.

EPISTOLA CLXIX . Augustinus Evodio, respondens ad duas quaestiones, de Trinitate, et de columba in qua Spiritus sanctus demonstratus est; docens difficiliorum hujuscemodi quaestionum intelligentiam minime necessariam esse ad salutem.

AUGUSTINUS episcopus, EVODIO episcopo.

CAP. PRIMUM.

1. Si ea quae me magis occupant, a quibus in aliud averti nolo, Sanctitas tua nosse tanti habet, mitte aliquem qui tibi describat. Jam enim plura perfecta sunt, quae hoc anno ante pascha propinquante quadragesima a nobis fuerant inchoata. Nam tribus illis libris de Civitate Dei, contra daemonicolas inimicos ejus, duos alios addidimus: quibus quinque libris satis disputatum arbitror adversus eos qui propter praesentis vitae felicitatem deos colendos putant, eamque felicitatem a nobis impediri opinantes, christiano nomini infesti sunt. Deinceps dicendum est, sicut primo libro polliciti sumus (De Civit. Dei, lib. I, c. 36), adversus eos qui propter vitam post mortem futuram necessarium existimant cultum deorum suorum, 0743 propter quam vitam nos christiani sumus. Dictavi etiam trium psalmorum expositiones, non parvis voluminibus, sexagesimi septimi, septuagesimi primi, septuagesimi septimi. Reliqui nondum dictati neque tractati, vehementer a nobis exspectantur atque flagitantur. Ab his me revocari et retardari, irruentibus de transverso quibuslibet quaestionibus, nolo: ita ut nec libros de Trinitate, quos diu in manibus verso nondumque complevi, modo attendere velim, quoniam nimis operosi sunt, et a paucis eos intelligi posse arbitror; unde magis urgent quae pluribus utilia fore speramus.

2. Non enim, ut scribis, Qui ignorat, ignorabitur (I Cor. XIV, 38), de hac re dixit Apostolus, tanquam ista poena ille plectendus sit, qui non valet intelligentia sic discernere ineffabilem Trinitatis unitatem, sicut discernitur in animo nostro memoria, intellectus, voluntas: aliunde hoc dicebat Apostolus. Lege, et videbis quod ea loquebatur, quae fidem vel mores multorum aedificarent, non quae vix ad paucorum, eamque exiguam, quantulacumque in hac vita de re tanta esse potest, intelligentiam pervenirent; id est, ut linguis prophetia praeponeretur, ut non perturbate illa gererentur, quasi prophetiae spiritus etiam invitos loqui cogeret, ut mulieres in ecclesia tacerent, ut omnia honeste et secundum ordinem fierent. Haec cum ageret, ait, Si quis videtur esse propheta, aut spiritualis, cognoscat quae scribo vobis, quia Domini est mandatum. Si quis autem ignorat, ignorabitur: his verbis coercens, et ad pacificum ordinem revocans inquietos, tanto ad seditionem faciliores, quanto sibi videbantur spiritu excellere, cum superbiendo cuncta turbarent. Si quis ergo videtur propheta esse, aut spiritualis, cognoscat, inquit, quae scribo vobis, quia Domini est mandatum. Si quis videtur esse, et utique non est: nam qui est, sine dubitatione cognoscit, nec admonitione et cohortatione opus habet, quia omnia judicat, et a nemine judicatur (Id. II, 15). Illi ergo seditiones et perturbationes in Ecclesia faciebant, qui videbantur esse in Ecclesia, quod non erant. Hos docet cognoscere Domini esse mandatum, quia non est seditionis Deus, sed pacis. Si quis autem ignorat, ignorabitur, id est, improbabitur. Non enim Deus, si ad scientiam referas, ignorat eos quibus dicturus est, Non novi vos (Luc. XIII, 27); sed eorum improbatio hoc verbo insinuata est.

3. Cum autem Dominus dicat, Beati mundo corde, quoniam ipsi Deum videbunt (Matth. V, 8), eaque visio nobis in fine summum praemium promittatur; non est metuendum, si nunc ad liquidum, quae de Dei natura credimus, conspicere non valemus, ne inde sit dictum, Qui ignorat, ignorabitur. Quia enim in sapientia Dei non cognovit mundus per sapientiam Deum, placuit Deo per stultitiam praedicationis salvos facere credentes. Haec stultitia praedicationis, ac stultum Dei, quod sapientius est hominibus (I Cor. I, 21, 25), multos contrahit ad salutem, ut non solum qui nondum certa valent intelligentia conspicere naturam Dei, quam fide tenent, verum etiam qui nondum in ipsa anima sua 0744 ita incorpoream substantiam a corporis generalitate discernunt, quemadmodum certi sunt se vivere, nosse, velle, ideo non sint alieni a salute, quam stultitia illa praedicationis fidelibus confert.

4. Nam si propter eos solos Christus mortuus est, qui certa intelligentia possunt ista discernere, pene frustra in Ecclesia laboramus. Si autem, quod veritas habet, infirmi populi credentium ad medicum currunt, sanandi per Christum, et hunc crucifixum, ut ubi abundavit peccatum, superabundet gratia (Rom. V, 20); miris fit modis per altitudinem divitiarum sapientiae et scientiae Dei, et per inscrutabilia judicia ejus (Id. XI, 33), ut et nonnulli a corporibus incorporea discernentes, cum sibi ex hoc magni videntur, et irrident stultitiam praedicationis, qua salvi fiunt credentes, ab unica via longe exerrent, quae ad vitam aeternam sola perducit: et multi in cruce Christi gloriantes, et ab eadem via non recedentes, etiamsi ista quae subtilissime disseruntur, ignorant, quia non perit unus ex illis pro quibus mortuus est (Joan. XVII, 12), ad eamdem perveniant aeternitatem, veritatem, charitatem, id est ad stabilem, certam, plenamque felicitatem, ubi manentibus, videntibus, amantibus sunt cuncta perspicua.

CAPUT II.

5. Proinde in unum Deum, Patrem et Filium et Spiritum sanctum firma pietate credamus; ita ut nec Filius credatur esse qui Pater est, nec Pater qui Filius est, nec Pater nec Filius qui utriusque Spiritus est. Nihil putetur in hac Trinitate temporibus locisve distare; sed haec tria aequalia esse et coaeterua, et omnino esse una natura: non a Patre aliam, et a Filio aliam, et a Spiritu sancto aliam conditam esse creaturam; sed omnia et singula quae creata sunt vel creantur, Trinitate creante subsistere, nec quemquam liberari a Patre sine Filio et Spiritu sancto, aut a Filio sine Patre et Spiritu sancto, aut a Spiritu sancto sine Patre et Filio; sed a Patre et Filio et Spiritu sancto, uno, vero, vereque immortali, id est omni modo incommutabili solo Deo. Multa autem etiam separatim in Scripturis de singulis dici, ut insinuetur, quamvis inseparabilis Trinitas, tamen Trinitas: ut quemadmodum simul dici non possunt cum sonis corporalibus commemorantur, quamvis simul sint inseparabiliter; ita et quibusdam Scripturarum locis, et per quasdam creaturas singillatim vicissimque monstrentur, sicut Pater in voce qua sonuit, Tu es Filius meus (Luc. III, 22); et Filius in homine quem suscepit ex Virgine (Id. II, 7); et Spiritus sanctus in columbae specie corporali (Matth. III, 16): haec separatim quidem, sed nullo modo separata tria illa demonstrant.

6. Ad hoc utcumque intelligendum assumimus memoriam, intelligentiam, voluntatem. Quamvis enim haec suis separatisque temporibus singillatim singula enuntiemus, nihil tamen horum sine aliis duobus agimus aut dicimus. Nec ideo putanda sunt haec tria 0745 Trinitati sic comparata, ut omni ex parte conveniant: cui enim similitudini in disputando convenientia tanta conceditur, ut ei rei cui adhibenda est, ex omni parte coaptetur? vel quando ex creatura ad Creatorem aliquid simile assumitur? Primo ergo in hoc invenitur ista similitudo dissimilis, quod tria haec, memoria intelligentia, voluntas, animae insunt; non eadem tria, est anima: illa vero Trinitas non inest, sed ipsa Deus est. Ideo ibi mirabilis simplicitas commendatur; quia non ibi aliud est esse, aliud intelligere, vel si quid aliud de Dei natura dicitur: anima vero quia est, etiam dum non intelligit, aliud est quod est, aliud quod intelligit. Deinde quis audeat dicere Patrem non intelligere per seipsum, sed per Filium, sicut memoria non intelligit per seipsam, sed per intellectum, vel potius anima ipsa, cui haec insunt, per intellectum tantummodo intelligit; sicut per memoriam tantummodo meminit, et per voluntatem tantummodo vult? Ad hoc ergo adhibetur ista similitudo, ut quoquo modo intelligatur, quemadmodum horum trium in anima cum singula nomina enuntiantur, quibus eadem singula demonstrantur, tamen unumquodque nomen his tribus cooperantibus enuntiatur, cum et reminiscendo, et intelligendo, et volendo dicitur; ita nullam esse creaturam, qua vel solus Pater, vel solus Filius, vel solus Spiritus sanctus demonstretur, quam non simul Trinitas operetur, quae inseparabiliter operatur: ac per hoc nec vocem Patris, nec animam et carnem Filii, nec columbam Spiritus sancti esse factam, nisi eadem cooperante Trinitate.

7. Nec sane sonus ille vocis, qui continuo esse destitit, coaptatus est in unitatem personae Patris, nec illa columbae species corporalis coaptata est in unitatem personae Spiritus sancti. Nam ipsa quoque, sicut nubes illa lucida quae operuit in monte cum tribus Discipulis Salvatorem (Matth. XVII, 5), vel potius sicut ille ignis qui eumdem Spiritum sanctum demonstravit (Act. II, 3), officio significationis impleto, mox esse desivit. Sed solus homo, quia propter ipsam naturam liberandam illa omnia fiebant, in unitatem personae Verbi Dei, hoc est unici Filii Dei mirabili et singulari susceptione coaptatus est, permanente tamen Verbo in sua natura incommutabiliter, in qua nihil compositi cum quo subsistat ulla phantasia humani animi suspicandum est. Legitur quidem, Et Spiritus sapientiae multiplex (Sap. VII, 22); sed recte dicitur etiam simplex. Multiplex enim, quoniam multa sunt quae habet; simplex autem, quia non aliud quam quod habet est: sicut dictus est Filius habere vitam in semetipso (Joan. V, 26), et eadem vita ipse est. Homo autem Verbo accessit, non Verbum in hominem convertibiliter accessit; atque ita et Filius Dei simul cum homine suscepto dicitur: unde idem Filius Dei incommutabilis est atque coaeternus Patri, sed in Verbo solo; et sepultus est Filius Dei, sed in carne sola.

8. Proinde quae de Filio Dei verba dicuntur, videndum est secundum quid dicantur. Non enim homine assumpto personarum numerus auctus est, sed eadem Trinitas mansit. Nam sicut in homine quolibet, praeter 0746 unum illum qui singulariter susceptus est, anima et corpus una persona est; ita in Christo Verbum et homo una persona est. Et sicut homo, verbi gratia, philosophus non utique nisi secundum animam dicitur, nec ideo tamen absurde, sed congruentissima et usitatissima locutione dicimus philosophum caesum, philosophum mortuum, philosophum sepultum, cum totum secundum carnem accidat, non secundum illud quod est philosophus: ita Christus Deus, Dei Filius, Dominus gloriae, et si quid hujusmodi secundum Verbum dicitur; et tamen recte dicitur Deus crucifixus, cum hoc eum secundum carnem passum esse, non secundum illud quo Dominus gloriae est, non habeatur incertum .

9. Sonitus autem ille vocis, et columbae species corporalis, et linguae divisae velut ignis qui insedit super unumquemque eorum, sicut illa in monte Sina quae terribili specie facta sunt (Exod. XIX, 18), et sicut columna illa nubis per diem, et flammae per noctem (Id. XIII, 21), significativa operatione acta atque transacta sunt. Illud in his maxime cavendum est, ne cuiquam Dei natura vel Patris, vel Filii, vel Spiritus sancti commutabilis et convertibilis esse credatur. Nec moveat quod aliquando res quae significat, nomen ejus rei quam significat, accipit. Spiritus sanctus dictus est corporali specie tanquam columba descendisse et mansisse super eum. Sic enim et petra Christus (I Cor. X, 4), quia significat Christum.

CAPUT III.

10. Miror autem tibi videri sonitum vocis illius qua dictum est, Tu es filius meus, non mediante anima, sed divino nutu sola corporali natura sic fieri potuisse; et non tibi videri eodem modo potuisse fieri animantis cujuslibet speciem corporalem motumque viventi similem, divino nutu, nullo animali interposito spiritu. Si enim obtemperat Deo creatura corporea sine vivificantis animae ministerio, ut edantur soni quales edi ex corpore animato solent, ut forma locutionis articulatae auribus inferatur; cur non obtemperet, ut sine animae vivificantis ministerio figura motusque volucris, eadem potentia Creatoris, ingeratur aspectibus? An sensus audiendi hoc mereri potest, videndi non potest, cum ex adjacenti materia corpus utrumque formetur, et quod insonat auribus et quod apparet aspectibus, et vocis articuli et lineamenta membrorum, et audibilis et visibilis motus, ut et verum sit corpus quod sentitur corporis sensu, et nihil sit amplius quam quod sentitur corporis sensu? Anima enim nullo sensu corporis vel in aliquo animante sentitur. Non igitur est opus quaerere quomodo apparuerit columbae species corporalis, sicut non quaerimus quomodo sonuerint voces articulati corporis. Si enim potuit anima non esse media, ubi vox, non quasi vox, dicitur facta; quanto magis potuit, ubi dicitur tanquam columba, hoc verbo significata sola specie corporali oculis reddita, non natura viventis animantis expressa? Hoc modo etiam illud dicitur, Factus est subito de coelo sonus, quasi ferretur flatus vehemens, et visae sunt illis linguae divisae velut 0747 ignis: ubi dicitur species quaedam quasi flatus, et velut ignis sensibilis usitatis similis notisque naturis, non ipsae usitatae notaeque naturae ad tempus factae significari videntur.

11. Si autem subtilior ratio, vel excellentior rei vestigatio demonstrat eam naturam quae nec temporaliter nec localiter movetur, non moveri nisi per illam quae temporaliter tantum, non localiter moveri potest; consequens erit ut omnia illa per ministerium creaturae viventis effecta sint, sicut per Angelos fiunt: unde diligentius disserere et longum est, et non necessarium. Huc accedit quia sunt visiones, quae apparent spiritui tanquam corporis sensibus, non solum dormientibus vel furentibus, sed aliquando sanae mentis vigilantibus; non per fallaciam illudentium daemonum, sed per aliquam revelationem spiritualem, quae fit per formas incorporeas corporibus similes; quae discerni omnino non possunt, nisi divino adjutorio plenius revelentur, et mentis intelligentia dijudicentur, vix aliquando cum fiunt , sed plerumque postea cum transierint. Quae cum ita sint, sive in naturis corporeis, sive sola specie corporali, natura autem spirituali, nostro spiritui tanquam sensibus corporis apparere videantur, quando haec sacra Scriptura commemorat, cujus istorum duorum generis sint, et utrum mediante viva creatura fiant, si corpore fiunt, judicare temere non debemus: dum tamen Creatoris, hoc est summae atque ineffabilis Trinitatis invisibilem incommutabilemque naturam, et a mortalium carnalium sensibus, et ab omni convertibilitate, sive in melius, sive in deterius, sive in quodlibet aliud atque aliud, remotam atque discretam, vel sine ulla dubitatione credamus, vel qualicumque etiam intelligentia capiamus.

CAPUT IV.

12. Haec tibi de duabus quaestionibus, hoc est, de Trinitate, et columba, in qua Spiritus sanctus non sua natura, sed significativa specie demonstratus est; sicut et Filius Dei non sua nativitate, de qua Pater dixit, Ante luciferum genui te (Psal. CIX, 3), sed in homine suscepto ex utero Virginis, a Judaeis crucifixus est; videris quam otioso ego tamen occupatissimus scribere potui. Nec putavi omnia pertractanda quae posuisti in litteris tuis; verum ad illa duo quae ex me audire voluisti, me respondisse, etsi non sufficienter aviditati tuae, tamen charitati obedienter existimo.

13. Praeter autem illos duos libros, quos tribus me adjunxisse supra commemoravi, et trium psalmorum expositionem (Supra, cap. 1, n. 1), scripsi etiam librum ad sanctum presbyterum Hieronymum de Animae Origine, consulens eum quomodo defendi possit illa sententia quam religiosae memoriae Marcellino suam esse scripsit, singulas animas novas nascentibus fieri, ut non labefactetur fundatissima Ecclesiae fides, qua inconcusse credimus quod in Adam omnes moriuntur (I Cor. XV, 22), et nisi per Christi gratiam 0748 liberentur, quod per suum Sacramentum etiam in parvulis operatur, in condemnationem trahuntur. Scripsi et alium ad eumdem , quomodo illi videatur accipiendum quod scriptum est in Epistola Jacobi, Quicumque autem totam Legem servaverit, offendat autem in uno, factus est omnium reus (Jacobi II, 10). Sed in hoc dixi etiam quid mihi videatur: in illo autem, de animae origine tantum quid ei videatur, consultatoria quadam disputatione quaesivi. Occasionem quippe cujusdam sanctissimi et studiosissimi juvenis presbyteri Orosii, qui ad nos ab ultima Hispania, id est, ab oceani littore, solo sanctarum Scripturarum ardore inflammatus advenit, amittere nolui; cui, ut ad illum quoque pergeret, persuasi. Huic etiam ipsi Orosio ad quaedam interrogata quae illum de Priscillianistarum haeresi, et Origenis quibusdam opinionibus quas non recepit Ecclesia, permovebant, uno libro non grandi, quanta potui brevitate et perspicuitate respondi. Scripsi etiam grandem quemdam librum adversus Pelagii haeresim , cogentibus nonnullis fratribus, quibus contra gratiam Christi opinionem perniciosissimam ille persuaserat. Haec omnia si habere volueris, aliquem mitte qui tibi cuncta describat. Me autem permitte his vacare quaerendis atque dictandis, quae quoniam multis sunt necessaria, praeponenda esse arbitror ad valde paucos pertinentibus inquisitionibus tuis.