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

But because with us the usage has already obtained, that by essence we understand the same thing which is understood by substance; we do not dare to say one essence, three substances, but one essence or substance and three persons: as many writers in Latin, who treat of these things, and are of authority, have said, in that they could not find any other more suitable way by which to enunciate in words that which they understood without words. For, in truth, as the Father is not the Son, and the Son is not the Father, and that Holy Spirit who is also called the gift of God is neither the Father nor the Son, certainly they are three. And so it is said plurally, “I and my Father are one.”575    John x. 30    Rom. i. 20 For He has not said, “is one,” as the Sabellians say; but, “are one.” Yet, when the question is asked, What three? human language labors altogether under great poverty of speech. The answer, however, is given, three “persons,” not that it might be [completely] spoken, but that it might not be left [wholly] unspoken.

CAPUT IX.

Personae tres non proprie dictae. Sed quia nostra loquendi consuetudo jam obtinuit, ut hoc intelligatur cum dicimus essentiam, quod intelligitur 0918 cum dicimus substantiam: non audemus dicere unam essentiam tres substantias; sed unam essentiam vel substantiam, tres autem personas; quemadmodum multi Latini ista tractantes et digni auctoritate dixerunt, cum alium modum aptiorem non invenirent, quo enuntiarent verbis quod sine verbis intelligebant. Revera enim cum Pater non sit Filius, et Filius non sit Pater, et Spiritus sanctus ille qui etiam donum Dei vocatur, nec Pater sit nec Filius, tres utique sunt. Ideoque pluraliter dictum est, Ego et Pater unum sumus (Joan. X, 30). Non enim dixit, Unum est, quod Sabelliani dicunt; sed, unum sumus. Tamen cum quaeritur quid tres, magna prorsus inopia humanum laborat eloquium. Dictum est tamen, Tres personae, non ut illud diceretur, sed ne taceretur.