Fifteen Books of Aurelius Augustinus,

 Chapter 1.—This Work is Written Against Those Who Sophistically Assail the Faith of the Trinity, Through Misuse of Reason. They Who Dispute Concerning

 Chapter 2.—In What Manner This Work Proposes to Discourse Concerning the Trinity.

 Chapter 3.—What Augustin Requests from His Readers. The Errors of Readers Dull of Comprehension Not to Be Ascribed to the Author.

 Chapter 4.—What the Doctrine of the Catholic Faith is Concerning the Trinity.

 Chapter 5.—Of Difficulties Concerning the Trinity: in What Manner Three are One God, and How, Working Indivisibly, They Yet Perform Some Things Severa

 Chapter 6.—That the Son is Very God, of the Same Substance with the Father. Not Only the Father, But the Trinity, is Affirmed to Be Immortal. All Thin

 Chapter 7.—In What Manner the Son is Less Than the Father, and Than Himself.

 Chapter 8.—The Texts of Scripture Explained Respecting the Subjection of the Son to the Father, Which Have Been Misunderstood. Christ Will Not So Give

 Chapter 9.—All are Sometimes Understood in One Person.

 Chapter 10.—In What Manner Christ Shall Deliver Up the Kingdom to God, Even the Father. The Kingdom Having Been Delivered to God, Even the Father, Chr

 Chapter 11.—By What Rule in the Scriptures It is Understood that the Son is Now Equal and Now Less.

 Chapter 12.—In What Manner the Son is Said Not to Know the Day and the Hour Which the Father Knows. Some Things Said of Christ According to the Form o

 Chapter 13.—Diverse Things are Spoken Concerning the Same Christ, on Account of the Diverse Natures of the One Hypostasis [Theanthropic Person]. Why I

 Book II.

 Preface.

 Chapter 1.—There is a Double Rule for Understanding the Scriptural Modes of Speech Concerning the Son of God. These Modes of Speech are of a Threefold

 Chapter 2.—That Some Ways of Speaking Concerning the Son are to Be Understood According to Either Rule.

 Chapter 3.—Some Things Concerning the Holy Spirit are to Be Understood According to the One Rule Only.

 Chapter 4.—The Glorification of the Son by the Father Does Not Prove Inequality.

 Chapter 5.—The Son and Holy Spirit are Not Therefore Less Because Sent. The Son is Sent Also by Himself. Of the Sending of the Holy Spirit.

 Chapter 6.—The Creature is Not So Taken by the Holy Spirit as Flesh is by the Word.

 Chapter 7.—A Doubt Raised About Divine Appearances.

 Chapter 8.—The Entire Trinity Invisible.

 Chapter 9.—Against Those Who Believed the Father Only to Be Immortal and Invisible. The Truth to Be Sought by Peaceful Study.

 Chapter 10—Whether God the Trinity Indiscriminately Appeared to the Fathers, or Any One Person of the Trinity. The Appearing of God to Adam. Of the Sa

 Chapter 11.—Of the Same Appearance.

 Chapter 12.—The Appearance to Lot is Examined.

 Chapter 13.—The Appearance in the Bush.

 Chapter 14.—Of the Appearance in the Pillar of Cloud and of Fire.

 Chapter 15.—Of the Appearance on Sinai. Whether the Trinity Spake in that Appearance or Some One Person Specially.

 Chapter 16.—In What Manner Moses Saw God.

 Chapter 17.—How the Back Parts of God Were Seen. The Faith of the Resurrection of Christ. The Catholic Church Only is the Place from Whence the Back P

 Chapter 18.—The Vision of Daniel.

 Book III.

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

 Chapter 1.—What is to Be Said Thereupon.

 Chapter 2.—The Will of God is the Higher Cause of All Corporeal Change. This is Shown by an Example.

 Chapter 3.—Of the Same Argument.

 Chapter 4.—God Uses All Creatures as He Will, and Makes Visible Things for the Manifestation of Himself.

 Chapter 5.—Why Miracles are Not Usual Works.

 Chapter 6.—Diversity Alone Makes a Miracle.

 Chapter 7.—Great Miracles Wrought by Magic Arts.

 Chapter 8.—God Alone Creates Those Things Which are Changed by Magic Art.

 Chapter 9.—The Original Cause of All Things is from God.

 Chapter 10.—In How Many Ways the Creature is to Be Taken by Way of Sign. The Eucharist.

 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

 Book IV.

 Preface.—The Knowledge of God is to Be Sought from God.

 Chapter 1.—We are Made Perfect by Acknowledgement of Our Own Weakness. The Incarnate Word Dispels Our Darkness.

 Chapter 2.—How We are Rendered Apt for the Perception of Truth Through the Incarnate Word.

 Chapter 3.—The One Death and Resurrection of The Body of Christ Harmonizes with Our Double Death and Resurrection of Body and Soul, to the Effect of S

 Chapter 4.—The Ratio of the Single to the Double Comes from the Perfection of the Senary Number. The Perfection of The Senary Number is Commended in t

 Chapter 5.—The Number Six is Also Commended in the Building Up of the Body of Christ and of the Temple at Jerusalem.

 Chapter 6.—The Three Days of the Resurrection, in Which Also the Ratio of Single to Double is Apparent.

 Chapter 7.—In What Manner We are Gathered from Many into One Through One Mediator.

 Chapter 8.—In What Manner Christ Wills that All Shall Be One in Himself.

 Chapter 9.—The Same Argument Continued.

 Chapter 10.—As Christ is the Mediator of Life, So the Devil is the Mediator of Death.

 Chapter 11.—Miracles Which are Done by Demons are to Be Spurned.

 Chapter 12.—The Devil the Mediator of Death, Christ of Life.

 Chapter 13.—The Death of Christ Voluntary. How the Mediator of Life Subdued the Mediator of Death. How the Devil Leads His Own to Despise the Death of

 Chapter 14.—Christ the Most Perfect Victim for Cleansing Our Faults. In Every Sacrifice Four Things are to Be Considered.

 Chapter 15.—They are Proud Who Think They are Able, by Their Own Righteousness, to Be Cleansed So as to See God.

 Chapter 16.—The Old Philosophers are Not to Be Consulted Concerning the Resurrection and Concerning Things to Come.

 Chapter 17.—In How Many Ways Things Future are Foreknown. Neither Philosophers, Nor Those Who Were Distinguished Among the Ancients, are to Be Consult

 Chapter 18.—The Son of God Became Incarnate in Order that We Being Cleansed by Faith May Be Raised to the Unchangeable Truth.

 Chapter 19.—In What Manner the Son Was Sent and Proclaimed Beforehand. How in the Sending of His Birth in the Flesh He Was Made Less Without Detriment

 Chapter 20.—The Sender and the Sent Equal. Why the Son is Said to Be Sent by the Father. Of the Mission of the Holy Spirit. How and by Whom He Was Sen

 Chapter 21.—Of the Sensible Showing of the Holy Spirit, and of the Coeternity of the Trinity. What Has Been Said, and What Remains to Be Said.

 Book V.

 Chapter 1.—What the Author Entreats from God, What from the Reader. In God Nothing is to Be Thought Corporeal or Changeable.

 Chapter 2.—God the Only Unchangeable Essence.

 Chapter 3.—The Argument of the Arians is Refuted, Which is Drawn from the Words Begotten and Unbegotten.

 Chapter 4.—The Accidental Always Implies Some Change in the Thing.

 Chapter 5.—Nothing is Spoken of God According to Accident, But According to Substance or According to Relation.

 Chapter 6.—Reply is Made to the Cavils of the Heretics in Respect to the Same Words Begotten and Unbegotten.

 Chapter 7.—The Addition of a Negative Does Not Change the Predicament.

 Chapter 8.—Whatever is Spoken of God According to Substance, is Spoken of Each Person Severally, and Together of the Trinity Itself. One Essence in Go

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

 Chapter 10.—Those Things Which Belong Absolutely to God as an Essence, are Spoken of the Trinity in the Singular, Not in the Plural.

 Chapter 11.—What is Said Relatively in the Trinity.

 Chapter 12.—In Relative Things that are Reciprocal, Names are Sometimes Wanting.

 Chapter 13.—How the Word Beginning (Principium) is Spoken Relatively in the Trinity.

 Chapter 14.—The Father and the Son the Only Beginning (Principium) of the Holy Spirit.

 Chapter 15.—Whether the Holy Spirit Was a Gift Before as Well as After He Was Given.

 Chapter 16.—What is Said of God in Time, is Said Relatively, Not Accidentally.

 Book VI.

 Chapter 1.—The Son, According to the Apostle, is the Power and Wisdom of the Father. Hence the Reasoning of the Catholics Against the Earlier Arians.

 Chapter 2 .—What is Said of the Father and Son Together, and What Not.

 Chapter 3.—That the Unity of the Essence of the Father and the Son is to Be Gathered from the Words, “We are One.” The Son is Equal to the Father Both

 Chapter 4.—The Same Argument Continued.

 Chapter 5.—The Holy Spirit Also is Equal to the Father and the Son in All Things.

 Chapter 6.—How God is a Substance Both Simple and Manifold.

 Chapter 7.—God is a Trinity, But Not Triple (Triplex).

 Chapter 8.—No Addition Can Be Made to the Nature of God.

 Chapter 9.—Whether One or the Three Persons Together are Called the Only God.

 Chapter 10.—Of the Attributes Assigned by Hilary to Each Person. The Trinity is Represented in Things that are Made.

 Book VII.

 Chapter 1.—Augustin Returns to the Question, Whether Each Person of the Trinity by Itself is Wisdom. With What Difficulty, or in What Way, the Propose

 Chapter 2.—The Father and the Son are Together One Wisdom, as One Essence, Although Not Together One Word.

 Chapter 3.—Why the Son Chiefly is Intimated in the Scriptures by the Name of Wisdom, While Both the Father and the Holy Spirit are Wisdom. That the Ho

 Chapter 4.—How It Was Brought About that the Greeks Speak of Three Hypostases, the Latins of Three Persons. Scripture Nowhere Speaks of Three Persons

 Chapter 5.—In God, Substance is Spoken Improperly, Essence Properly.

 Chapter 6.—Why We Do Not in the Trinity Speak of One Person, and Three Essences. What He Ought to Believe Concerning the Trinity Who Does Not Receive

 Book VIII.

 Preface.—The Conclusion of What Has Been Said Above. The Rule to Be Observed in the More Difficult Questions of the Faith.

 Chapter 1.—It is Shown by Reason that in God Three are Not Anything Greater Than One Person.

 Chapter 2.—Every Corporeal Conception Must Be Rejected, in Order that It May Be Understood How God is Truth.

 Chapter 3.—How God May Be Known to Be the Chief Good. The Mind Does Not Become Good Unless by Turning to God.

 Chapter 4.—God Must First Be Known by an Unerring Faith, that He May Be Loved.

 Chapter 5.—How the Trinity May Be Loved Though Unknown.

 Chapter 6.—How the Man Not Yet Righteous Can Know the Righteous Man Whom He Loves.

 Chapter 7.—Of True Love, by Which We Arrive at the Knowledge of the Trinity. God is to Be Sought, Not Outwardly, by Seeking to Do Wonderful Things wit

 Chapter 8.—That He Who Loves His Brother, Loves God Because He Loves Love Itself, Which is of God, and is God.

 Chapter 9.—Our Love of the Righteous is Kindled from Love Itself of the Unchangeable Form of Righteousness.

 Chapter 10.—There are Three Things in Love, as It Were a Trace of the Trinity.

 Book IX.

 Chapter 1.—In What Way We Must Inquire Concerning the Trinity.

 2. And this being so, let us direct our attention to those three things which we fancy we have found. We are not yet speaking of heavenly things, nor

 Chapter 3.—The Image of the Trinity in the Mind of Man Who Knows Himself and Loves Himself. The Mind Knows Itself Through Itself.

 Chapter 4.—The Three are One, and Also Equal, Viz The Mind Itself, and the Love, and the Knowledge of It. That the Same Three Exist Substantially, and

 Chapter 5.—That These Three are Several in Themselves, and Mutually All in All.

 Chapter 6.—There is One Knowledge of the Thing in the Thing Itself, and Another in Eternal Truth Itself. That Corporeal Things, Too, are to Be Judged

 Chapter 7.—We Conceive and Beget the Word Within, from the Things We Have Beheld in the Eternal Truth. The Word, Whether of the Creature or of the Cre

 Chapter 8.—In What Desire and Love Differ.

 Chapter 9.—In the Love of Spiritual Things the Word Born is the Same as the Word Conceived. It is Otherwise in the Love of Carnal Things.

 Chapter 10.—Whether Only Knowledge that is Loved is the Word of the Mind.

 Chapter 11.—That the Image or Begotten Word of the Mind that Knows Itself is Equal to the Mind Itself.

 Chapter 12.—Why Love is Not the Offspring of the Mind, as Knowledge is So. The Solution of the Question. The Mind with the Knowledge of Itself and the

 Book X.

 Chapter 1.—The Love of the Studious Mind, that Is, of One Desirous to Know, is Not the Love of a Thing Which It Does Not Know.

 Chapter 2.—No One at All Loves Things Unknown.

 Chapter 3.—That When the Mind Loves Itself, It is Not Unknown to Itself.

 Chapter 4.—How the Mind Knows Itself, Not in Part, But as a Whole.

 Chapter 5.—Why the Soul is Enjoined to Know Itself. Whence Come the Errors of the Mind Concerning Its Own Substance.

 Chapter 6.—The Opinion Which the Mind Has of Itself is Deceitful.

 Chapter 7.—The Opinions of Philosophers Respecting the Substance of the Soul. The Error of Those Who are of Opinion that the Soul is Corporeal, Does N

 Chapter 8.—How the Soul Inquires into Itself. Whence Comes the Error of the Soul Concerning Itself.

 Chapter 9.—The Mind Knows Itself, by the Very Act of Understanding the Precept to Know Itself.

 Chapter 10.—Every Mind Knows Certainly Three Things Concerning Itself—That It Understands, that It Is, and that It Lives.

 Chapter 11.—In Memory, Understanding [or Intelligence], and Will, We Have to Note Ability, Learning, and Use. Memory, Understanding, and Will are One

 Chapter 12.—The Mind is an Image of the Trinity in Its Own Memory, and Understanding, and Will.

 Book XI.

 Chapter 1.—A Trace of the Trinity Also In the Outer Man.

 Chapter 2.—A Certain Trinity in the Sight. That There are Three Things in Sight, Which Differ in Their Own Nature. In What Manner from a Visible Thing

 Chapter 3.—The Unity of the Three Takes Place in Thought, Viz Of Memory, of Ternal Vision, and of Will Combining Both.

 Chapter 4.—How This Unity Comes to Pass.

 Chapter 5.—The Trinity of the Outer Man, or of External Vision, is Not an Image of God. The Likeness of God is Desired Even in Sins. In External Visio

 Chapter 6.—Of What Kind We are to Reckon the Rest (Requies), and End (Finis), of the Will in Vision.

 Chapter 7.—There is Another Trinity in the Memory of Him Who Thinks Over Again What He Has Seen.

 Chapter 8.—Different Modes of Conceiving.

 Chapter 9.—Species is Produced by Species in Succession.

 Chapter 10.—The Imagination Also Adds Even to Things We Have Not Seen, Those Things Which We Have Seen Elsewhere.

 Chapter 11.—Number, Weight, Measure.

 Book XII.

 Chapter 1.—Of What Kind are the Outer and the Inner Man.

 Chapter 2.—Man Alone of Animate Creatures Perceives the Eternal Reasons of Things Pertaining to the Body.

 Chapter 3.—The Higher Reason Which Belongs to Contemplation, and the Lower Which Belongs to Action, are in One Mind.

 Chapter 4.—The Trinity and the Image of God is in that Part of the Mind Alone Which Belongs to the Contemplation of Eternal Things.

 Chapter 5.—The Opinion Which Devises an Image of the Trinity in the Marriage of Male and Female, and in Their Offspring.

 Chapter 6. —Why This Opinion is to Be Rejected.

 Chapter 7.—How Man is the Image of God. Whether the Woman is Not Also the Image of God. How the Saying of the Apostle, that the Man is the Image of Go

 Chapter 8.—Turning Aside from the Image of God.

 Chapter 9.—The Same Argument is Continued.

 Chapter 10.—The Lowest Degradation Reached by Degrees.

 Chapter 11.—The Image of the Beast in Man.

 Chapter 12.—There is a Kind of Hidden Wedlock in the Inner Man. Unlawful Pleasures of the Thoughts.

 Chapter 13.—The Opinion of Those Who Have Thought that the Mind Was Signified by the Man, the Bodily Sense by the Woman.

 Chapter 14.—What is the Difference Between Wisdom and Knowledge. The Worship of God is the Love of Him. How the Intellectual Cognizance of Eternal Thi

 Chapter 15.—In Opposition to the Reminiscence of Plato and Pythagoras. Pythagoras the Samian. Of the Difference Between Wisdom and Knowledge, and of S

 Book XIII.

 Chapter 1.—The Attempt is Made to Distinguish Out of the Scriptures the Offices of Wisdom and of Knowledge. That in the Beginning of John Some Things

 Chapter 2.—Faith a Thing of the Heart, Not of the Body How It is Common and One and the Same in All Believers. The Faith of Believers is One, No Othe

 Chapter 3.—Some Desires Being the Same in All, are Known to Each. The Poet Ennius.

 Chapter 4.—The Will to Possess Blessedness is One in All, But the Variety of Wills is Very Great Concerning that Blessedness Itself.

 Chapter 5.—Of the Same Thing.

 Chapter 6.—Why, When All Will to Be Blessed, that is Rather Chosen by Which One Withdraws from Being So.

 Chapter 7.—Faith is Necessary, that Man May at Some Time Be Blessed, Which He Will Only Attain in the Future Life. The Blessedness of Proud Philosophe

 Chapter 8.—Blessedness Cannot Exist Without Immortality.

 Chapter 9.—We Say that Future Blessedness is Truly Eternal, Not Through Human Reasonings, But by the Help of Faith. The Immortality of Blessedness Bec

 Chapter 10.—There Was No Other More Suitable Way of Freeing Man from the Misery of Mortality Than The Incarnation of the Word. The Merits Which are Ca

 Chapter 11.—A Difficulty, How We are Justified in the Blood of the Son of God.

 Chapter 12.—All, on Account of the Sin of Adam, Were Delivered into the Power of the Devil.

 Chapter 13.—Man Was to Be Rescued from the Power of the Devil, Not by Power, But by Righteousness.

 Chapter 14.—The Unobligated Death of Christ Has Freed Those Who Were Liable to Death.

 Chapter 15.—Of the Same Subject.

 Chapter 16.—The Remains of Death and the Evil Things of the World Turn to Good for the Elect. How Fitly the Death of Christ Was Chosen, that We Might

 Chapter 17.—Other Advantages of the Incarnation.

 Chapter 18.—Why the Son of God Took Man Upon Himself from the Race of Adam, and from a Virgin.

 Chapter 19.—What in the Incarnate Word Belongs to Knowledge, What to Wisdom.

 Chapter 20.—What Has Been Treated of in This Book. How We Have Reached by Steps to a Certain Trinity, Which is Found in Practical Knowledge and True F

 Book XIV.

 Chapter 1.—What the Wisdom is of Which We are Here to Treat. Whence the Name of Philosopher Arose. What Has Been Already Said Concerning the Distincti

 Chapter 2.—There is a Kind of Trinity in the Holding, Contemplating, and Loving of Faith Temporal, But One that Does Not Yet Attain to Being Properly

 Chapter 3.—A Difficulty Removed, Which Lies in the Way of What Has Just Been Said.

 Chapter 4.—The Image of God is to Be Sought in the Immortality of the Rational Soul. How a Trinity is Demonstrated in the Mind.

 Chapter 5.—Whether the Mind of Infants Knows Itself.

 Chapter 6.—How a Kind of Trinity Exists in the Mind Thinking of Itself. What is the Part of Thought in This Trinity.

 Chapter 7.—The Thing is Made Plain by an Example. In What Way the Matter is Handled in Order to Help the Reader.

 Chapter 8.—The Trinity Which is the Image of God is Now to Be Sought in the Noblest Part of the Mind.

 Chapter 9.—Whether Justice and the Other Virtues Cease to Exist in the Future Life.

 Chapter 10.—How a Trinity is Produced by the Mind Remembering, Understanding, and Loving Itself.

 Chapter 11.—Whether Memory is Also of Things Present.

 Chapter 12.—The Trinity in the Mind is the Image of God, in that It Remembers, Understands, and Loves God, Which to Do is Wisdom.

 Chapter 13.—How Any One Can Forget and Remember God.

 Chapter 14.—The Mind Loves God in Rightly Loving Itself And If It Love Not God, It Must Be Said to Hate Itself. Even a Weak and Erring Mind is Always

 Chapter 15.—Although the Soul Hopes for Blessedness, Yet It Does Not Remember Lost Blessedness, But Remembers God and the Rules of Righteousness. The

 Chapter 16.—How the Image of God is Formed Anew in Man.

 Chapter 17.—How the Image of God in the Mind is Renewed Until the Likeness of God is Perfected in It in Blessedness.

 Chapter 18.—Whether the Sentence of John is to Be Understood of Our Future Likeness with the Son of God in the Immortality Itself Also of the Body.

 Chapter 19.—John is Rather to Be Understood of Our Perfect Likeness with the Trinity in Life Eternal. Wisdom is Perfected in Happiness.

 Book XV.

 Chapter 1.—God is Above the Mind.

 Chapter 2.—God, Although Incomprehensible, is Ever to Be Sought. The Traces of the Trinity are Not Vainly Sought in the Creature.

 Chapter 3.—A Brief Recapitulation of All the Previous Books.

 Chapter 4.—What Universal Nature Teaches Us Concerning God.

 Chapter 5.—How Difficult It is to Demonstrate the Trinity by Natural Reason.

 Chapter 6.—How There is a Trinity in the Very Simplicity of God. Whether and How the Trinity that is God is Manifested from the Trinities Which Have B

 Chapter 7.—That It is Not Easy to Discover the Trinity that is God from the Trinities We Have Spoken of.

 Chapter 8.—How the Apostle Says that God is Now Seen by Us Through a Glass.

 Chapter 9.—Of the Term “Enigma,” And of Tropical Modes of Speech.

 Chapter 10.—Concerning the Word of the Mind, in Which We See the Word of God, as in a Glass and an Enigma.

 Chapter 11.—The Likeness of the Divine Word, Such as It Is, is to Be Sought, Not in Our Own Outer and Sensible Word, But in the Inner and Mental One.

 Chapter 12.—The Academic Philosophy.

 Chapter 13.—Still Further of the Difference Between the Knowledge and Word of Our Mind, and the Knowledge and Word of God.

 Chapter 14.—The Word of God is in All Things Equal to the Father, from Whom It is.

 Chapter 15.—How Great is the Unlikeness Between Our Word and the Divine Word. Our Word Cannot Be or Be Called Eternal.

 Chapter 16.—Our Word is Never to Be Equalled to the Divine Word, Not Even When We Shall Be Like God.

 Chapter 17.—How the Holy Spirit is Called Love, and Whether He Alone is So Called. That the Holy Spirit is in the Scriptures Properly Called by the Na

 Chapter 18.—No Gift of God is More Excellent Than Love.

 Chapter 19.—The Holy Spirit is Called the Gift of God in the Scriptures. By the Gift of the Holy Spirit is Meant the Gift Which is the Holy Spirit. Th

 Chapter 20.—Against Eunomius, Saying that the Son of God is the Son, Not of His Nature, But of His Will. Epilogue to What Has Been Said Already.

 Chapter 21.—Of the Likeness of the Father and of the Son Alleged to Be in Our Memory and Understanding. Of the Likeness of the Holy Spirit in Our Will

 Chapter 22.—How Great the Unlikeness is Between the Image of the Trinity Which We Have Found in Ourselves, and the Trinity Itself.

 Chapter 23.—Augustin Dwells Still Further on the Disparity Between the Trinity Which is in Man, and the Trinity Which is God. The Trinity is Now Seen

 Chapter 24.—The Infirmity of the Human Mind.

 Chapter 25.—The Question Why the Holy Spirit is Not Begotten, and How He Proceeds from the Father and the Son, Will Only Be Understood When We are in

 Chapter 26.—The Holy Spirit Twice Given by Christ. The Procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and from the Son is Apart from Time, Nor Can He B

 Chapter 27.—What It is that Suffices Here to Solve the Question Why the Spirit is Not Said to Be Begotten, and Why the Father Alone is Unbegotten. Wha

 Chapter 28.—The Conclusion of the Book with a Prayer, and an Apology for Multitude of Words.

Chapter 6.—That the Son is Very God, of the Same Substance with the Father. Not Only the Father, But the Trinity, is Affirmed to Be Immortal. All Things are Not from the Father Alone, But Also from the Son. That the Holy Spirit is Very God, Equal with the Father and the Son.

9. They who have said that our Lord Jesus Christ is not God, or not very God, or not with the Father the One and only God, or not truly immortal because changeable, are proved wrong by the most plain and unanimous voice of divine testimonies; as, for instance, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” For it is plain that we are to take the Word of God to be the only Son of God, of whom it is afterwards said, “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us,” on account of that birth of His incarnation, which was wrought in time of the Virgin. But herein is declared, not only that He is God, but also that He is of the same substance with the Father; because, after saying, “And the Word was God,” it is said also, “The same was in the beginning with God: all things were made by Him, and without Him was not anything made.”27    John i. 1, 14, 2, 3 Not simply “all things;” but only all things that were made, that is; the whole creature. From which it appears clearly, that He Himself was not made, by whom all things were made. And if He was not made, then He is not a creature; but if He is not a creature, then He is of the same substance with the Father. For all substance that is not God is creature; and all that is not creature is God.28    [Augustin here postulates the theistic doctrines of two substances—infinite and finite; in contradiction to the postulate of pantheism, that there is only one substance—the infinite.—W.G.T.S.] And if the Son is not of the same substance with the Father, then He is a substance that was made: and if He is a substance that was made, then all things were not made by Him; but “all things were made by Him,” therefore He is of one and the same substance with the Father. And so He is not only God, but also very God. And the same John most expressly affirms this in his epistle: “For we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know the true God, and that we may be in His true Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life.”29    1 John v. 20

10. Hence also it follows by consequence, that the Apostle Paul did not say, “Who alone has immortality,” of the Father merely; but of the One and only God, which is the Trinity itself. For that which is itself eternal life is not mortal according to any changeableness; and hence the Son of God, because “He is Eternal Life,” is also Himself understood with the Father, where it is said, “Who only hath immortality.” For we, too, are made partakers of this eternal life, and become, in our own measure, immortal. But the eternal life itself, of which we are made partakers, is one thing; we ourselves, who, by partaking of it, shall live eternally, are another. For if He had said, “Whom in His own time the Father will show, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; who only hath immortality;” not even so would it be necessarily understood that the Son is excluded. For neither has the Son separated the Father from Himself, because He Himself, speaking elsewhere with the voice of wisdom (for He Himself is the Wisdom of God),30    1 Cor. i. 24 says, “I alone compassed the circuit of heaven.”31    Ecclus. xxiv. 5 And therefore so much the more is it not necessary that the words, “Who hath immortality,” should be understood of the Father alone, omitting the Son; when they are said thus: “That thou keep this commandment without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ: whom in His own time He will show, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honor and power everlasting. Amen.”32    1 Tim. vi. 14–16 In which words neither is the Father specially named, nor the Son, nor the Holy Spirit; but the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; that is, the One and only and true God, the Trinity itself.

11. But perhaps what follows may interfere with this meaning; because it is said, “Whom no man hath seen, nor can see:” although this may also be taken as belonging to Christ according to His divinity, which the Jews did not see, who yet saw and crucified Him in the flesh; whereas His divinity can in no wise be seen by human sight, but is seen with that sight with which they who see are no longer men, but beyond men. Rightly, therefore, is God Himself, the Trinity, understood to be the “blessed and only Potentate,” who “shows the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ in His own time.” For the words, “Who only hath immortality,” are said in the same way as it is said, “Who only doeth wondrous things.”33    Ps. lxxii. 18 And I should be glad to know of whom they take these words to be said. If only of the Father, how then is that true which the Son Himself says, “For what things soever the Father doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise?” Is there any, among wonderful works, more wonderful than to raise up and quicken the dead? Yet the same Son saith, “As the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them, even so the Son quickeneth whom He will.”34    John v. 19, 21 How, then, does the Father alone “do wondrous things,” when these words allow us to understand neither the Father only, nor the Son only, but assuredly the one only true God, that is, the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit?35    [Nothing is more important, in order to a correct interpretation of the New Testament, than a correct explanation of the term God. Sometimes it denotes the Trinity, and sometimes a person of the Trinity. The context always shows which it is. The examples given here by Augustin are only a few out of many.—W.G.T.S.]

12. Also, when the same apostle says, “But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by Him,”36    1 Cor. viii. 6 who can doubt that he speaks of all things which are created; as does John, when he says, “All things were made by Him”? I ask, therefore, of whom he speaks in another place: “For of Him, and through Him, and in Him, are all things: to whom be glory for ever. Amen.”37    Rom. xi. 36 For if of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, so as to assign each clause severally to each person: of Him, that is to say, of the Father; through Him, that is to say, through the Son; in Him, that is to say, in the Holy Spirit,—it is manifest that the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit is one God, inasmuch as the words continue in the singular number, “To whom38    Ipsi. be glory for ever.” For at the beginning of the passage he does not say, “O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge” of the Father, or of the Son, or of the Holy Spirit, but “of the wisdom and knowledge of God!” “How unsearchable are His judgments, and His ways past finding out! For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been His counsellor? Or who hath first given to Him and it shall be recompensed unto him again? For of Him, and through Him, and in Him, are all things: to whom be glory for ever. Amen.”39    Rom. xi. 33–36 But if they will have this to be understood only of the Father, then in what way are all things by the Father, as is said here; and all things by the Son, as where it is said to the Corinthians, “And one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things,”40    1 Cor. viii. 6 and as in the Gospel of John, “All things were made by Him?” For if some things were made by the Father, and some by the Son, then all things were not made by the Father, nor all things by the Son; but if all things were made by the Father, and all things by the Son, then the same things were made by the Father and by the Son. The Son, therefore, is equal with the Father, and the working of the Father and the Son is indivisible. Because if the Father made even the Son, whom certainly the Son Himself did not make, then all things were not made by the Son; but all things were made by the Son: therefore He Himself was not made, that with the Father He might make all things that were made. And the apostle has not refrained from using the very word itself, but has said most expressly, “Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God;”41    Phil. ii. 6 using here the name of God specially of the Father;42    [It is not generally safe to differ from Augustin in trinitarian exegesis. But in Phil. ii. 6 “God” must surely denote the Divine Essence, not the first Person of the Essence. St. Paul describes “Christ Jesus” as “subsisting” (ὑπάρχων) originally, that is prior to incarnation, “in a form of God”(ἐν μορφῇ θεοῦ), and because he so subsisted, as being “equal with God.” The word μορφῇ is anarthrous in the text: a form, not the form, as the A.V and R.V. render. St. Paul refers to one of three “forms” of God—namely, that particular form of Sonship, which is peculiar to the second person of the Godhead. Had the apostle employed the article with μορφῆ, the implication would be that there is only one “form of God”—that is, only one person in the Divine Essence.   If then θεοῦ, in this place, denotes the Father, as Augustin says, St. Paul would teach that the Logos subsisted “in a form of the Father,” which would imply that the Father had more than one “form,” or else (if μορφῆ be rendered with the article) that the Logos subsisted in the “form” of the Father, neither of which is true. But if “God,” in this place, denotes the Divine Essence, then St. Paul teaches that the unincarnate Logos subsisted in a particular “form” of the Essence—the Father and Spirit subsisting in other “forms” of it.   The student will observe that Augustin is careful to teach that the Logos, when he took on him “a form of a servant,” did not lay aside “a form of God.” He understands the kenosis (ἐκένωσε) to be, the humbling of the divinity by its union with the humanity, not the exinanition of it in the extremest sense of entirely divesting himself of the divinity, nor the less extreme sense of a total non-use of it during the humiliation.—W.G.T.S.] as elsewhere, “But the head of Christ is God.”43    1 Cor. xi. 3

13. Similar evidence has been collected also concerning the Holy Spirit, of which those who have discussed the subject before ourselves have most fully availed themselves, that He too is God, and not a creature. But if not a creature, then not only God (for men likewise are called gods44    Ps. lxxxii. 6), but also very God; and therefore absolutely equal with the Father and the Son, and in the unity of the Trinity consubstantial and co-eternal. But that the Holy Spirit is not a creature is made quite plain by that passage above all others, where we are commanded not to serve the creature, but the Creator;45    Rom. i. 25 not in the sense in which we are commanded to “serve” one another by love,46    Gal. v. 13 which is in Greek δουλεύειν, but in that in which God alone is served, which is in Greek λατρεύειν. From whence they are called idolaters who tender that service to images which is due to God. For it is this service concerning which it is said, “Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and Him only shalt thou serve.”47    Deut. vi. 13 For this is found also more distinctly in the Greek Scriptures, which have λατρεύσεις. Now if we are forbidden to serve the creature with such a service, seeing that it is written, “Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and Him only shalt thou serve” (and hence, too, the apostle repudiates those who worship and serve the creature more than the Creator), then assuredly the Holy Spirit is not a creature, to whom such a service is paid by all the saints; as says the apostle, “For we are the circumcision, which serve the Spirit of God,”48    Phil. iii. 3 (Vulgate, etc.). which is in the Greek λατρεύοντες. For even most Latin copies also have it thus, “We who serve the Spirit of God;” but all Greek ones, or almost all, have it so. Although in some Latin copies we find, not “We worship the Spirit of God,” but, “We worship God in the Spirit.” But let those who err in this case, and refuse to give up to the more weighty authority, tell us whether they find this text also varied in the mss.: “Know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost, which is in you, which ye have of God?” Yet what can be more senseless or more profane, than that any one should dare to say that the members of Christ are the temple of one who, in their opinion, is a creature inferior to Christ? For the apostle says in another place, “Your bodies are members of Christ.” But if the members of Christ are also the temple of the Holy Spirit, then the Holy Spirit is not a creature; because we must needs owe to Him, of whom our body is the temple, that service wherewith God only is to be served, which in Greek is called λατρεία. And accordingly the apostle says, “Therefore glorify God in your body.”49    1 Cor. vi. 19, 15, 20

CAPUT VI.

9. Filium esse verum Deum ejusdem cum Patre substantiae. Non solus Pater, sed Trinitas dicta immortalis. Non ex solo Patre omnia, sed etiam ex Filio. Spiritum sanctum esse verum Deum Patri et Filio aequalem. Qui dixerunt Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum non esse Deum, aut non esse verum Deum, aut non cum Patre unum et solum Deum, aut non vere immortalem, quia mutabilem, manifestissima divinorum testimoniorum et consona voce convicti sunt; unde sunt illa: In principio erat Verbum, et Verbum erat apud Deum, et Deus erat Verbum. Manifestum est enim quod Verbum Dei, Filium Dei unicum accipimus, de quo post dicit, Et Verbum caro factum est, et habitavit in nobis, propter nativitatem incarnationis ejus, quae facta est in tempore ex Virgine. In eo autem declarat, non tantum Deum esse, sed etiam ejusdem cum Patre substantiae, quia cum dixisset, Et Deus erat Verbum: Hoc erat, inquit, in principio apud Deum; omnia per ipsum facta sunt, et sine ipso factum est nihil (Joan. I, 1, 14, 2, 3). Neque enim dicit, omnia; nisi quae facta sunt, id est omnem creaturam. Unde liquido apparet ipsum factum non esse per quem facta sunt omnia. Et si factus non est, creatura non est: si autem creatura non est, ejusdem cum Patre substantiae est. Omnis enim substantia quae Deus non est, creatura est; et quae creatura non est, Deus est. Et si non est Filius ejusdem substantiae cujus Pater; ergo facta substantia est: si facta substantia est, non omnia per ipsum facta sunt: at omnia per ipsum facta sunt; unius igitur ejusdemque cum Patre substantiae est. Et ideo non tantum Deus, sed et verus Deus. Quod idem Joannes apertissime in Epistola sua dicit: Scimus quod Filius Dei venerit, et dederit nobis intellectum ut cognoscamus verum Deum, et simus in vero Filio ejus Jesu Christo. Hic est verus Deus, et vita aeterna (I Joan. V, 20).

0826 10. Hinc etiam consequenter intelligitur non tantummodo de Patre dixisse apostolum Paulum, Qui solus habet immortalitatem; sed de uno et solo Deo quod est ipsa Trinitas. Neque enim ipsa vita aeterna mortalis est secundum aliquam mutabilitatem: ac per hoc Filius Dei, quia vita aeterna est, cum Patre etiam ipse intelligitur, ubi dictum est, Qui solus habet immortalitatem. Ejus enim vitae aeternae et nos participes facti, pro modulo nostro immortales efficimur. Sed aliud est ipsa cujus participes efficimur, vita aeterna; aliud nos qui ejus participatione vivemus in aeternum. Si enim dixisset, Quem temporibus propriis ostendet Pater beatus et solus potens, Rex regum et Dominus dominantium, qui solus habet immortalitatem, nec sic inde separatum Filium oporteret intelligi. Neque enim, quia ipse Filius alibi loquens voce Sapientiae (ipse est enim Dei Sapientia [I Cor. I, 24]) ait, Gyrum coeli circuivi sola (Eccli. XXIV, 8), separavit a se Patrem: quanto magis ergo non est necesse ut tantummodo de Patre praeter Filium intelligatur, quod dictum est, Qui solus habet immortalitatem, cum ita dictum sit: Ut serves, inquit, mandatum sine macula, irreprehensibile, usque in adventum Domini nostri Jesu Christi: quem temporibus propriis ostendet beatus et solus potens, Rex regum et Dominus dominantium; qui solus habet immortalitatem, et lucem habitat inaccessibilem; quem nemo hominum vidit, nec videre potest; cui est honor et gloria in saecula saeculorum. Amen (I Tim. VI, 14-16). In quibus verbis, nec Pater proprie nominatus est, nec Filius, nec Spiritus sanctus; sed beatus et solus potens, Rex regum et Dominus dominantium, quod est unus et solus et verus Deus ipsa Trinitas.

11. Nisi forte quae sequuntur, perturbabunt hunc intellectum, quia dixit, Quem nemo hominum vidit, nec videre potest: cum hoc etiam ad Christum pertinere secundum ejus divinitatem accipiatur, quam non viderunt Judaei, qui tamen carnem viderunt et crucifixerunt. Videri autem divinitas humano visu nullo modo potest: sed eo visu videtur, quo jam qui vident, non homines sed ultra homines sunt. Recte ergo ipse Deus Trinitatis intelligitur beatus et solus potens, ostendens adventum Domini nostri Jesu Christi temporibus propriis. Sic enim dictum est, Solus habet immortalitatem; quomodo dictum est, Qui facit mirabilia solus (Psal. LXXI, 18). Quod velim scire de quo dictum accipiant: si de Patre tantum, quomodo ergo verum est, quod ipse Filius dicit, Quaecumque enim Pater facit, haec eadem et Filius facit similiter? An quidquam est inter mirabilia mirabilius quam resuscitare et vivificare mortuos? Dicit autem idem Filius, Sicut Pater suscitat mortuos et vivificat, sic et Filius quos vult vivificat (Joan. V, 19, 21). Quomodo ergo solus Pater facit mirabilia, cum haec verba nec Patrem tantum, nec Filium tantum permittant intelligi, sed utique Deum unum verum solum, id est, Patrem et Filium et Spiritum sanctum?

0827 12. Item cum dicit idem apostolus, Nobis unus Deus Pater, ex quo omnia, et nos in ipso; et unus Dominus Jesus Christus, per quem omnia, et nos per ipsum (I Cor. VIII, 6); quis dubitet eum omnia quae creata sunt dicere, sicut Joannes, Omnia per ipsum facta sunt? Quaero itaque de quo dicat alio loco, Quoniam ex ipso, et per ipsum, et in ipso sunt omnia: ipsi gloria in saecula saeculorum. Amen. Si enim de Patre et Filio et Spiritu sancto, ut singulis personis singula tribuantur; Ex ipso, ex Patre; per ipsum, per Filium; in ipso, in Spiritu sancto: manifestum quod Pater et Filius et Spiritus sanctus unus Deus est, quando singulariter intulit, Ipsi gloria in saecula saeculorum. Unde enim coepit hunc sensum, non ait, O altitudo diviliarum sapientiae et scientiae Patris, aut Filii, aut Spiritus sancti; sed, sapientiae et scientiae Dei! Quam inscrutabilia sunt judicia ejus, et investigabiles viae ejus! Quis enim cognovit mentem Domini? Aut quis consiliarius ejus fuit? Aut quis prior dedit illi, et retribuetur ei? Quoniam ex ipso, et per ipsum, et in ipso sunt omnia: ipsi gloria in saecula saeculorum. Amen (Rom. XI, 33-36). Si autem hoc de Patre tantummodo intelligi volunt, quomodo ergo omnia per Patrem sunt, sicut hic dicitur; et omnia per Filium, sicut ad Corinthios ubi ait, Et unus Dominus Jesus Christus, per quem omnia; et sicut in Evangelio Joannis, Omnia par ipsum facta sunt? Si enim alia per Patrem, alia per Filium, jam non omnia per Patrem, nec omnia per Filium. Si autem omnia per Patrem, et omnia per Filium; eadem per Patrem, quae per Filium. Aequalis est ergo Patri Filius, et inseparabilis operatio est Patris et Filii. Quia si vel Filium fecit Pater quem non fecit ipse Filius, non omnia per Filium facta sunt: at omnia per Filium facta sunt; ipse igitur factus non est, ut cum Patre faceret omnia quae facta sunt. Quanquam nec ab ipso verbo tacuerit Apostolus, et apertissime omnino dixerit, Qui cum in Dei forma esset, non rapinam arbitratus est esse aequalis Deo (Philipp. II, 6): hic Deum proprie Patrem appellans, sicut alibi, Caput autem Christi, Deus (I Cor. XI, 3).

13. Similiter et de Spiritu sancto collecta sunt testimonia, quibus ante nos qui haec disputaverunt, abundantius usi sunt, quia et ipse Deus, et non creatura. Quod si non creatura, non tantum (Deus nam et homines dicti sunt dii [Psal. LXXXI, 6]), sed etiam verus Deus. Ergo Patri et Filio prorsus aequalis, et in Trinitatis unitate consubstantialis et coaeternus. Maxime vero illo loco satis claret, quod Spiritus sanctus non sit creatura, ubi jubemur non servire creaturae, sed Creatori (Rom. I, 25): non eo modo quo jubemur per charitatem servire invicem (Galat. V, 13), quod est graece δουλεύειν; sed eo modo quo tantum Deo servitur, quod est graece λατρεύειν. Unde idololatrae dicuntur qui simulacris eam servitutem exhibent quae debetur Deo. Secundum hanc enim servitutem dictum est, Dominum Deum tuum adorabis, et illi soli servies (Deut. VI, 13). Nam et hoc distinctius in graeca Scriptura invenitur; λατρεύσεις enim habet. Porro si tali servitute creaturae servire prohibemur, quandoquidem 0828 dictum est, Dominum Deum tuum adorabis, et illi soli servies; unde et Apostolus detestatur eos qui coluerunt, et servierunt creaturae, potius quam Creatori: non est utique creatura Spiritus sanctus, cui ab omnibus sanctis talis servitus exhibetur dicente Apostolo, Nos enim sumus circumcisio, Spiritui Dei servientes (Philipp. III, 3), quod est in graeco, λατρεύοντες. Plures enim codices etiam latini sic habent, qui Spiritui Dei servimus: graeci autem omnes, aut pene omnes. In nonnullis autem exemplaribus latinis invenimus non, Spiritui Dei servimus; sed, spiritu Deo servimus . Sed qui in hoc errant, et auctoritati graviori cedere detrectant, numquid et illud varium in codicibus reperiunt: Nescitis quia corpora vestra templum in vobis estSpiritus sancti, quem habetis a Deo? Quid autem insanius magisque sacrilegum est, quam ut quisquam dicere audeat membra Christi templum esse creaturae minoris secundum ipsos, quam Christus est? Alio enim loco dicit: Corpora vestra membra sunt Christi. Si autem quae membra sunt Christi, templum est Spiritus sancti, non est creatura Spiritus sanctus: quia cui corpus nostrum templum exhibemus, necesse est ut huic eam servitutem debeamus, qua nonnisi Deo serviendum est, quae graece appellatur λατρεία. Unde consequenter dicit: Glorificate ergoDeum in corpore vestro (I Cor. VI, 19, 15, 20).