SANCTI HILARII PICTAVENSIS EPISCOPI DE TRINITATE LIBRI DUODECIM.
14. Christi fides et mortis metum et vitae tollit taedium. 0036A
15. Haereticorum ingenium. ---Sed inter haec emerserunt 0036B supple,
36. Liber XII quae de Spiritu sancto confitenda sunt aperit. 0048C
28. Christus gestis Deum egit. ---Par etiam reliquae 0069A
7. Vox HOMOUSION qua necessitate suscepta. 0100C
10. Filii honor nil detrahit Patri. ---Dicturi autem 0103A
19. Jacob in lucta Deum vidit, non oculis corporis 0141B sed fidei. 0141C 0142A
8. Quid jam sibi tractandum proponat Hilarius. --- 0162A 0162B
19. Quid Scripturis de Deo edoctus sit Hilarius. --- 0171B 0171C 0172A al.
4. Quod natus homo Deus maneat, sensus jam non 0283B refugit. 0283C 0284A
262 6. Alia sunt dicta Christi nondum nati, alia 0285A nati et morituri, alia aeterni. 0285B
37. Unitas Patris et Filii non humano more cogitanda. 0308C Filii nativitas. 0309A
52. Fides vera haereticae adversa. ---Sed inter 0384B 0384C
10. Dictum est EX UTERO ad verae nativitatis ostensionem. 0439C 0440A
21. Filius etsi natus, semper tamen est, quia de 0446A Patre qui semper est. 0446B 0446C
27. De nato ante tempora dici nequit, ANTE QUAM NATUS EST, nec 0450B
32. Semper natus, semper esse animo sentitur. --- 0452C 0453A
40. Mundum Deus ab aeterno simul ac semet praeparavit. 0458B 0458C 0459A
55. Spiritus sanctus non est creatura. ---Et mihi quidem 0469A 0469B
28. But perhaps He feared the pain of wounds. Say then, What terror had the thrust of the nail for Him Who merely by His touch restored the ear that was cut off? You who assert the weakness of the Lord, explain this work of power at the moment when His flesh was weak and suffering. Peter drew his sword and smote: the High Priest’s servant stood there, lopped of his ear. How was the flesh of the ear restored from the bare wound by the touch of Christ? Amidst the flowing blood, and the wound left by the cleaving sword, when the body was so maimed, whence sprang forth an ear which was not there? Whence came that which did not exist before? Whence was restored that which was wanting? Did the hand, which created an ear, feel the pain of the nails? He prevented another from feeling the pain of a wound: did He feel it Himself? His touch could restore the flesh that was cut off; was He sorrowful because He feared the piercing of His own flesh? And if the body of Christ had this virtue, dare we allege infirmity in that nature, whose natural force could counteract all the natural infirmities of man?
28. An doloris.---Sed forte dolorem vulnerum timuit. Quem, rogo, penetrantis in carnem clavi habuit horrorem , qui excisae auris carnem solo restituit attactu (Luc. XXII, 51)? Expone nobis tu, dominicae infirmitatis assertor, hoc in ipso passionis tempore infirmatae opus carnis. Exserente enim Petro atque adigente gladium, truncus aure servus sacerdotis adstabat. Quomodo ex decisae auris vulnere, contingente Christo, restituta caro auris 0367C est? Unde inter fluentem sanguinem et post ipsa 0368A discindentis gladii vestigia, et in ipsa trunci corporis calumnia, exiit quod non est, et sequitur quod non exstat, et rependitur quod caretur? Producens haec ergo aurem manus, clavum dolet? et sentit sibi vulnus, qui alteri dolorem vulneris non relinquit? Compungendae carnis metu tristis est, cujus attactui licet carnem donare post caedem? Quod si haec in Christi corpore virtus fuit, qua, rogo, fide naturaliter infirmus fuisse defenditur, cui naturale fuit omnem humanarum infirmitatum inhibere naturam?