Dist. 2, Divisio Textus
Book I: On the Mystery of the Trinity · Distinction 2
## Commentarius in Distinctionem II
De Unitate et Trinitate secundum quod creditur.
«Hoc itaque vera ac pia fide tenendum est» etc.
Divisio Textus
Haec est secunda pars, in qua, primi libri materia indagata, incipit Magister prosequi; dividitur autem haec pars1 in duas partes, quoniam dupliciter est considerare res, quibus fruendum, scilicet in se, et in comparatione ad creaturas: in se ratione trinitatis et unitatis; in comparatione ad creaturas ratione scientiae, potentiae et voluntatis. Primo ergo agit2 de sancta Trinitate et Unitate; secundo de scientia et potentia et voluntate, infra distinctione trigesima quinta: Cumque supra disseruerimus.
De ipsa autem sacratissima Trinitate tripliciter contingit tractare, quoniam primo contingit ipsam credere, secundo creditam intelligere, tertio intellectum dicere sive enuntiare. Credere autem est per auctoritatem, intelligere per rationem, dicere per catholicam et rationalem3 locutionem. Ideo primo de ipsa Trinitate et Unitate agit, secundum quod creditur; secundo de ipsa, secundum quod credita per rationem intelligitur, ibi, distinctione tertia: Apostolus namque ait; tertio, secundum quod credita et intellecta rationaliter et catholice exprimitur, infra, distinctione vigesima secunda: Post praedicta dissertendum nobis videtur de nominum diversitate. Et patet ordo. Prius enim est credere, quam intelligere, et similiter prius est intelligere, quam sermone exprimere.
Prima pars, scilicet secundum quod creditur, continet praesentem distinctionem; et quoniam materia est difficillima, primo ponit modum procedendi; secundo vero exsequitur, ibi: Proponamus ergo in medium.
Item, prima pars secundum tria capitula4 habet tres partes. In prima tangit modum agendi, quoniam debet esse cum modestia, timore et diligentia, praemittens materiam, circa quam agere intendit. In secunda subiungit intentionem scribentium de Trinitate, ibi, secundo capitulo: Omnes autem catholici tractatores. Tertio tangit ordinem, ibi: Ceterum, ut in libro primo.
Modus scribendi de Trinitate debet esse fundatus supra intellectum fidei et cum modestia et timore propter periculum. Intentio scribentium de Trinitate est ostendere5, quod Pater et Filius et Spiritus sanctus sunt tres personae et unus Deus. Ordo scribendi est, primo per auctoritates ostendere veritatem, deinde per rationes et congruas similitudines.
Proponamus ergo in medium. Haec est secunda pars, in qua Magister auctoritatibus sacrae Scripturae intendit ostendere Trinitatem et Unitatem; et quoniam6 sacra Scriptura habet duas partes, scilicet novum et vetus Testamentum, ideo primo ostendit hoc per auctoritates veteris Testamenti, deinde per auctoritates novi, ibi: Nunc vero post testimonia etc. Et quoniam vetus Testamentum duas habet partes, scilicet Legem et Prophetas, in quibus fides explicatur, ideo ostendit primo per testimonia Legis, secundo per testimonia Prophetarum, ibi: Ille etiam maximus Prophetarum. Prima iterum pars, in qua probat per testimonia Legis, duas habet partes: primo enim probat essentiae unitatem; secundo unitatem simul et trinitatem, ibi: Personarum quoque pluralitatem. Similiter illa de testimoniis Prophetarum habet duas: in prima probat essentiae unitatem et personarum pluralitatem in communi; in secunda vero in speciali ostendit Filii generationem et Spiritus sancti processionem, ibi: David quoque aeternam Filii generationem. Similiter illa pars, in qua probat per auctoritates novi Testamenti, habet duas partes: primo enim probat per auctoritates sive per testimonia Iesu Christi; secundo per auctoritates Apostolorum, ibi: Ioannes quoque in Epistola canonica. Auctoritates et earum explanationes et numerus et diversitates satis patent in littera.
Tractatio Quaestionum
Ad declarationem eorum quae de sacra Trinitate et Unitate dicit Magister, quatuor possunt quaeri circa partem istam.
Primo quaeritur, utrum in Deo sit ponere essentiae sive naturae unitatem.
Secundo, utrum in Deo sit ponere personarum pluralitatem.
Tertio, utrum in divinis personis sit ponere infinitatem.
Quarto et ultimo, utrum in divinis personis sit ponere trinitatem.
---
## Commentary on Distinction II
On the Unity and Trinity according to what is believed.
«This therefore is to be held with true and pious faith» etc.
Division of the Text
This is the second part, in which the Master, having investigated the subject-matter of the first book, now begins to pursue it further; and this part1 is divided into two parts, since things that are to be enjoyed can be considered in two ways — namely, in themselves, and in comparison to creatures: in themselves, by reason of trinity and unity; in comparison to creatures, by reason of knowledge, power, and will. First, then, he treats2 of the holy Trinity and Unity; second, of knowledge and power and will, below at distinction thirty-five: And since above we have discussed.
Concerning the most sacred Trinity itself, one may treat of it in three ways, since first one can believe it, second understand what is believed, and third express or enunciate what is understood. Now, to believe is through authority, to understand is through reason, to express is through Catholic and rational3 speech. Therefore he first treats of the Trinity and Unity itself according to what is believed; second, of the same according to what is believed and understood through reason, at distinction three: For the Apostle says; third, according to what is believed and understood is expressed rationally and in a Catholic manner, below at distinction twenty-two: After the foregoing, it seems to us that we must discuss the diversity of names. And the order is clear. For it is prior to believe than to understand, and likewise it is prior to understand than to express in speech.
The first part — namely, according to what is believed — contains the present distinction; and since the subject-matter is most difficult, he first sets down the mode of proceeding; and second, carries it out, at: Let us therefore set forth in the midst.
Likewise, the first part according to the three chapters4 has three sub-parts. In the first, he touches on the mode of treatment — that it must be carried out with modesty, fear, and diligence — premising the material about which he intends to treat. In the second, he subjoins the intention of those who have written on the Trinity, in the second chapter: All the Catholic writers, however. Third, he touches on the order, at: Furthermore, as in the first book.
The mode of writing about the Trinity must be founded upon the understanding of faith and conducted with modesty and fear on account of the danger. The intention of those writing about the Trinity is to show5 that the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit are three persons and one God. The order of writing is, first, to show the truth through authorities, then through reasons and fitting analogies.
Let us therefore set forth in the midst. This is the second part, in which the Master intends to show the Trinity and Unity through the authorities of Sacred Scripture; and since6 Sacred Scripture has two parts — namely the New and the Old Testament — he therefore first shows this through the authorities of the Old Testament, then through those of the New, at: Now, after the testimonies, etc. And since the Old Testament has two parts — namely the Law and the Prophets, in which faith is unfolded — he therefore shows it first through the testimonies of the Law, and second through the testimonies of the Prophets, at: That greatest of prophets. The first part again, in which he proves through the testimonies of the Law, has two parts: for first he proves the unity of essence, and second unity together with trinity, at: The Lord also showed at once the plurality of persons. Likewise, the part on the testimonies of the Prophets has two: in the first he proves the unity of essence and the plurality of persons in general; in the second he shows in particular the generation of the Son and the procession of the Holy Spirit, at: David also openly hints at the eternal generation of the Son. Likewise, the part in which he proves through the authorities of the New Testament has two parts: for first he proves through the authorities or testimonies of Jesus Christ; second, through the authorities of the Apostles, at: John also in his canonical Epistle. The authorities and their explanations, their number and variety, are sufficiently clear in the text.
Treatment of the Questions
For the clarification of what the Master says about the holy Trinity and Unity, four questions can be raised concerning this part.
First, it is asked whether the unity of essence or nature is to be posited in God.
Second, whether a plurality of persons is to be posited in God.
Third, whether infinity is to be posited in the divine persons.
Fourth and finally, whether a trinity is to be posited in the divine persons.
---
- Nulla freta auctoritate mss. et ed. 1 Vat. textum exhibet sic perturbatum: Secunda pars Primi Libri, in qua materia... dividitur praesertim in.Relying on no authority of the manuscripts or of ed. 1, the Vatican edition presents the text in this disturbed form: The second part of the First Book, in which the matter... is divided especially into.
- Codd. V W agitur.Codd. V W read agitur ("is treated").
- Codd. I cc rationalem.Codd. I and cc read rationalem.
- Praeter fidem omnium codd. et ed. 1 omittit Vat. secundum tria capitula; mox post prima addit praemisso prooemio de mysterio Trinitatis et Unitatis, et infra post Trinitate ibi omittit secundo capitulo.Against the witness of all the codices and ed. 1, the Vatican edition omits secundum tria capitula ("according to the three chapters"); immediately after prima it adds praemisso prooemio de mysterio Trinitatis et Unitatis ("with a proem on the mystery of the Trinity and Unity placed first"), and below, after Trinitate, it there omits secundo capitulo.
- Adiecimus ex cod. I ostendere, quod sane subintelligendum est.We have added ostendere ("to show") from cod. I, which is certainly to be understood.
- Vat., nullo suffragante cod. nec ed. 1, omittendo verba Magistri: Proponamus ergo in medium, constructionem sequentis propositionis invertit ponendo Similiter pro Haec est ac habet duas partes secundum quod loco et quoniam. — Supple cum Vat. pars, quod Codd. et ed. 1 omittunt. Paulo infra Vat. praeter fidem mss. et ed. 1 post communi minus correcte ponit Secundo vero specialiter.The Vatican edition, with no codex nor ed. 1 in its favor, by omitting the Master's words Proponamus ergo in medium, inverts the construction of the following proposition by putting Similiter in place of Haec est and has "two parts according to quod" in place of et quoniam. — Supply pars with the Vatican ed., which the codices and ed. 1 omit. A little below, the Vatican ed., against the witness of the manuscripts and ed. 1, after communi less correctly has Secundo vero specialiter. ---