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

1. I Would have them believe, who are willing to do so, that I had rather bestow labor in reading, than in dictating what others may read. But let those who will not believe this, but are both able and willing to make the trial, grant me whatever answers may be gathered from reading, either to my own inquiries, or to those interrogations of others, which for the character I bear in the service of Christ, and for the zeal with which I burn that our faith may be fortified against the error of carnal and natural men,343    [The English translator renders “animalium” by “psychical,” to agree with ψυχικός in 1 Cor. ii. 14. The rendering “natural” of the A.V. is more familiar.—W.G.T.S.] I must needs bear with; and then let them see how easily I would refrain from this labor, and with how much even of joy I would give my pen a holiday. But if what we have read upon these subjects is either not sufficiently set forth, or is not to be found at all, or at any rate cannot easily be found by us, in the Latin tongue, while we are not so familiar with the Greek tongue as to be found in any way competent to read and understand therein the books that treat of such topics, in which class of writings, to judge by the little which has been translated for us, I do not doubt that everything is contained that we can profitably seek;344    [This is an important passage with reference to Augustin’s learning. From it, it would appear that he had not read the Greek Trinitarians in the original, and that only “a little” of these had been translated, at the time when he was composing this treatise. As this was from A.D. 400 to A.D. 416—, the treatises of Athanasius (d. 373), Basil (d. 379), Gregory of Nyssa (d. 400?), and Gregory of Nazianzum (d. 390?) had been composed and were current in the Eastern church. That Augustin thought out this profound scheme of the doctrine of the Trinity by the close study of Scripture alone, and unassisted by the equally profound trinitarianism of the Greek church, is an evidence of the depth and strength of his remarkable intellect.—W.G.T.S.] while yet I cannot resist my brethren when they exact of me, by that law by which I am made their servant, that I should minister above all to their praiseworthy studies in Christ by my tongue and by my pen, of which two yoked together in me, Love is the charioteer; and while I myself confess that I have by writing learned many things which I did not know: if this be so, then this my labor ought not to seem superfluous to any idle, or to any very learned reader; while it is needful in no small part, to many who are busy, and to many who are unlearned, and among these last to myself. Supported, then, very greatly, and aided by the writings we have already read of others on this subject, I have undertaken to inquire into and to discuss, whatever it seems to my judgment can be reverently inquired into and discussed, concerning the Trinity, the one supreme and supremely good God; He himself exhorting me to the inquiry, and helping me in the discussion of it; in order that, if there are no other writings of the kind, there may be something for those to have and read who are willing and capable; but if any exist already, then it may be so much the easier to find some such writings, the more there are of the kind in existence.

2. Assuredly, as in all my writings I desire not only a pious reader, but also a free corrector, so I especially desire this in the present inquiry, which is so important that I would there were as many inquirers as there are objectors. But as I do not wish my reader to be bound down to me, so I do not wish my corrector to be bound down to himself. Let not the former love me more than the catholic faith, let not the latter love himself more than the catholic verity. As I say to the former, Do not be willing to yield to my writings as to the canonical Scriptures; but in these, when thou hast discovered even what thou didst not previously believe, believe it unhesitatingly; while in those, unless thou hast understood with certainty what thou didst not before hold as certain, be unwilling to hold it fast: so I say to the latter, Do not be willing to amend my writings by thine own opinion or disputation, but from the divine text, or by unanswerable reason. If thou apprehendest anything of truth in them, its being there does not make it mine, but by understanding and loving it, let it be both thine and mine; but if thou convictest anything of falsehood, though it have once been mine, in that I was guilty of the error, yet now by avoiding it let it be neither thine nor mine.

3. Let this third book, then, take its beginning at the point to which the second had reached. For after we had arrived at this, that we desired to show that the Son was not therefore less than the Father, because the Father sent and the Son was sent; nor the Holy Spirit therefore less than both, because we read in the Gospel that He was sent both by the one and by the other; we undertook then to inquire, since the Son was sent thither, where He already was, for He came into the world, and “was in the world;”345    John i. 10 since also the Holy Spirit was sent thither, where He already was, for “the Spirit of the Lord filleth the world, and that which containeth all things hath knowledge of the voice;”346    Wisd. i. 7 whether the Lord was therefore “sent” because He was born in the flesh so as to be no longer hidden, and, as it were, came forth from the bosom of the Father, and appeared to the eyes of men in the form of a servant; and the Holy Spirit also was therefore “sent,” because He too was seen as a dove in a corporeal form,347    Matt. iii. 16 and in cloven tongues, like as of fire;348    Acts ii. 3 so that, to be sent, when spoken of them, means to go forth to the sight of mortals in some corporeal form from a spiritual hiding-place; which, because the Father did not, He is said only to have sent, not also to be sent. Our next inquiry was, Why the Father also is not sometimes said to be sent, if He Himself was manifested through those corporeal forms which appeared to the eyes of the ancients. But if the Son was manifested at these times, why should He be said to be “sent” so long after, when the fullness of time was come that He should be born of a woman;349    Gal. iv. 4 since, indeed, He was sent before also, viz., when He appeared corporeally in those forms? Or if He were not rightly said to be “sent,” except when the Word was made flesh;350    John i. 14 why should the Holy Spirit be read of as “sent,” of whom such an incarnation never took place? But if neither the Father, nor the Son, but the Holy Spirit was manifested through these ancient appearances; why should He too be said to be “sent” now, when He was also sent before in these various manners? Next we subdivided the subject, that it might be handled most carefully, and we made the question threefold, of which one part was explained in the second book, and two remain, which I shall next proceed to discuss. For we have already inquired and determined, that not only the Father, nor only the Son, nor only the Holy Spirit appeared in those ancient corporeal forms and visions, but either indifferently the Lord God, who is understood to be the Trinity itself, or some one person of the Trinity, whichever the text of the narrative might signify, through intimations supplied by the context.

PROOEMIUM.

1. Cur de Trinitate scribat. Quid a lectoribus desideret. Quid dictum sit in superiore libro. Credant, qui volunt, malle me legendo quam legenda dictando laborare. Qui autem hoc nolunt credere, experiri autem et possunt et volunt, dent quae legendo vel meis inquisitionibus respondeantur vel interrogationibus aliorum, quas pro mea persona quam in servitio Christi gero, et pro studio quo fidem nostram adversum errorem carnalium et animalium 0868 hominum muniri inardesco, necesse est me pati: et videant quam facile ab isto labore me temperem, et quanto etiam gaudio stilum possim habere feriatum. Quod si ea quae legimus de his rebus, sufficienter edita in latino sermone aut non sunt, aut non inveniuntur, aut certe difficile a nobis inveniri queunt, graecae autem linguae non sit nobis tantus habitus, ut talium rerum libris legendis et intelligendis ullo modo reperiamur idonei, quo genere litterarum ex iis quae nobis 0869 pauca intepretata sunt, non dubito cuncta quae utiliter quaerere possumus contineri; fratribus autem non valeam resistere, jure quo eis servus factus sum flagitantibus, ut eorum in Christo laudabilibus studiis lingua ac stilo meo, quas bigas in me charitas agitat, maxime serviam, egoque ipse multa quae nesciebam, scribendo me didicisse confitear: non debet hic labor meus cuiquam pigro, aut multum docto videri superfluus, cum multis impigris multisque indoctis, inter quos etiam mihi, non parva ex parte sit necessarius. Ex his igitur quae ab aliis de hac re scripta jam legimus, plurimum adminiculati et adjuti, ea quae de Trinitate, uno summo summeque bono Deo, pie quaeri et disseri posse arbitror, ipso exhortante quaerenda atque adjuvante disserenda suscepi: ut si alia non sunt hujusmodi scripta, sit quod habeant et legant qui voluerint et valuerint; si autem jam sunt, tanto facilius aliqua inveniantur, quanto talia plura esse potuerint.

2. Sane cum in omnibus litteris meis non solum pium lectorem, sed etiam liberum correctorem desiderem, multo maxime in his, ubi ipsa magnitudo quaestionis utinam tam multos inventores habere posset, quam multos contradictores habet. Verumtamen sicut lectorem meum nolo mihi esse deditum , ita correctorem nolo sibi. Ille me non amet amplius quam catholicam fidem, iste se non amet amplius quam catholicam veritatem. Sicut illi dico, Noli meis litteris quasi Scripturis canonicis inservire; sed in illis et quod non credebas, cum inveneris, incunctanter crede, in istis autem quod certum non habebas, nisi certum intellexeris, noli firmiter retinere: ita illi dico, Noli meas litteras ex tua opinione vel contentione, sed ex divina lectione vel inconcussa ratione corrigere. Si quid in eis veri comprehenderis, existendo non est meum, at intelligendo et amando et tuum sit et meum: si quid autem falsi conviceris, errando fuerit meum, sed jam cavendo nec tuum sit nec meum.

3. Hinc itaque tertius hic liber sumat exordium, quousque secundus pervenerat. Cum enim ad id ventum esset, ut vellemus ostendere non ideo minorem Patre Filium, quia ille misit, hic missus est, nec ideo minorem utroque Spiritum sanctum, quia et ab illo et ab illo missus in Evangelio legitur: suscepimus hoc quaerere, cum illuc missus sit Filius, ubi erat, quia in hunc mundum venit, et in hoc mundo erat (Joan. I, 10); cum illuc etiam Spiritus sanctus, ubi et ipse erat, quoniam Spiritus Domini replevit orbem terrarum, et hoc quod continet omnia scientiam habet vocis (Sap. I, 7): utrum propterea missus sit Dominus, quia ex occulto in carne natus est, et de sinu Patris ad oculos hominum in forma servi tanquam egressus apparuit; ideo etiam Spiritus sanctus, quia et ipse corporali specie quasi columba visus est (Matth. III, 16), et linguis divisis velut ignis (Act. II, 3): ut hoc eis fuerit mitti, ad aspectum mortalium in aliqua forma corporea de spirituali secreto procedere; quod Pater quoniam non fecit, tantummodo misisse, non etiam 0870 missus esse dictus sit. Deinde quaesitum est cur et Pater non aliquando dictus sit missus, si per illas species corporales quae oculis antiquorum apparuerunt ipse demonstrabatur. Si autem Filius tunc demonstrabatur, cur tanto post missus diceretur, cum plenitudo temporis venit, ut ex femina nasceretur (Galat. IV, 4); quandoquidem et antea mittebatur, cum in illis formis corporaliter apparebat. Aut si non recte missus diceretur, nisi cum Verbum caro factum est (Joan. I, 14); cur Spiritus sanctus missus legatur, cujus incarnatio talis non facta est. Si vero per illas antiquas demonstrationes, nec Pater, nec Filius, sed Spiritus sanctus ostendebatur; cur etiam ipse nunc diceretur missus, cum illis modis et antea mitteretur. Deinde subdivisimus, ut haec diligentissime tractarentur, et tripartitam fecimus quaestionem, cujus una pars in secundo libro explicata est, duae sunt reliquae, de quibus deinceps disserere aggrediar. Jam enim quaesitum atque tractatum est, in illis antiquis corporalibus formis et visis, non tantummodo Patrem, nec tantummodo Filium, nec tantummodo Spiritum sanctum apparuisse, sed aut indifferenter Dominum Deum qui Trinitas ipsa intelligitur, aut quamlibet ex Trinitate personam, quam lectionis textus indiciis circumstantibus significaret.