Back
on 10 July 2016, I published one of my personal, favorite posts:
In
that post I provided a number of examples which prove beyond any doubt that
Augustine clearly taught the Son owes his existence to God the Father.
Today, I am publishing yet one more example of causality from Augustine; note the following:
We can ask whether we
should understand the words "In the beginning God made heaven and
earth" only in accord with history, or whether they also signify something
in figures, and how they conform to the gospel and for what reason this book
begins in this way. According to history one asks whether "In the beginning"
means in the beginning of time in the principle, in the very Wisdom of God. For
the Son of God said that he was the principle. When he was asked, "Who are
you?" he said, "The principle; that is why I am speaking to
you." For there is a principle without principle, and there is a principal
along with another principal. The principle without principle is the Father
alone, and thus we believe that all things are from one principle. But
the Son is a principle in such a way that he is from the Father. (Augustine,
On the Literal Translation of Genesis, in Fathers of the Church, vol. 84, p. 148 - bold emphasis mine.)
The maxim that 'the
principle without principle is the Father alone', employed by Augustine,
became an important component of Catholic dogma, being adopted by Church
councils, and theologians (most notably, Thomas
Aquinas). Directly related to this dictum is the monarchy of God the Father, as
well as the often neglected teaching that it
is the Father alone who is autotheos.
Hope to have more on 'the
principle without principle is the Father alone', in the near future (the
Lord willing).
Grace and peace,
Interesting indeed. Its great to see Augustine embraced that element of Nicene Orthodoxy. While in confessing this point of doctrine he stands in agreement with those prior to him, I think ultimately his view is worlds away from those prior to him in that he treats the Trinity as a whole as a single person, and identifies it as the "one God", whereas the earlier fathers are nearly unanimous in identifying the one God specifically as being the person of the Father.
ReplyDeleteFor example:
“That one God, therefore, the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, who will not appear, except for joy which cannot be taken away from the just…” (On the Trinity, Book 1, Ch. 13)
“…neither here does it appear plainly whether it was any person of the Trinity that appeared to Abraham, or God Himself the Trinity, of which one God it is said, You shall fear the Lord your God, and Him only shall you serve.” (Book 2, Ch. 10)
“O Lord the one God, God the Trinity, whatever I have said in these books that is of Yours, may they acknowledge who are Yours; if anything of my own, may it be pardoned both by You and by those who are Yours. Amen.” (Book 15, Ch. 28)
Hi Andrew,
ReplyDeleteSo good to hear from you again. You wrote:
==Its great to see Augustine embraced that element of Nicene Orthodoxy. While in confessing this point of doctrine he stands in agreement with those prior to him, I think ultimately his view is worlds away from those prior to him in that he treats the Trinity as a whole as a single person, and identifies it as the "one God", whereas the earlier fathers are nearly unanimous in identifying the one God specifically as being the person of the Father.==
I pretty much agree with the above, with the exception of, "he treats the Trinity as a whole as a single person". IMO, I think it is more accurate to say, "he treats the Trinity as a whole as a single nature/essence".
As for Augustine's statement that, "this Trinity is one God", see my musings in the following post:
Which Augustine ???
Hope to hear more from you on these topics.
Grace and peace,
David
I revisited the article you linked, and its more of the same I think in terms of him being essentially in agreement there with the Greek tradition and earlier nicene articulations of the Trinity, which is good to see. And I definately agree that Augustine saw the Trinity as one substance/essence. But what I hoped to show with the quotes I cited above is that it appears that he went beyond articulating the persons to be one essence to ultimately treat them as a single person. What I mean by that isn't that he uses the term "person" for the Trinity, but in using singular personal pronouns for the Trinity, and praying to it as though a person, it seems like a difficult conclusion to avoid that he treated the Trinity as a person, conceptually. In doing so I think he went to a place beyond where the Nicene and pre-nicene fathers went.
ReplyDeleteWhat do you make of the singular personal language in his prayer quoted above from the end of On the Trinity?
Hello again Andrew,
ReplyDeleteVery busy day for me, not much time for the internet and study; will attempt to address your last post-and question-tomorrow.
Grace and peace,
David
Hi Andrew,
ReplyDeleteFrom your 21 Feb. 2018 comment, we read:
==But what I hoped to show with the quotes I cited above is that it appears that he went beyond articulating the persons to be one essence to ultimately treat them as a single person. What I mean by that isn't that he uses the term "person" for the Trinity, but in using singular personal pronouns for the Trinity, and praying to it as though a person, it seems like a difficult conclusion to avoid that he treated the Trinity as a person, conceptually. In doing so I think he went to a place beyond where the Nicene and pre-nicene fathers went.==
That Augustine, "went to a place beyond where the Nicene and pre-nicene fathers went", has been the general consensus of scholars on Augustine prior to the end of the 20th century, and beginning of the 21st. However, this conception is being challenged by number of current scholars—e.g. Lewis Ayres, Michel Barnes, Mary Clark, Richard Cross—who maintain that Augustine remained faithful to Nicene Trinitarianism, though using new concepts and terminology to express it. Literally hundreds of pages have been written by this group of scholars who oppose the 'old view', but the most comprehensive, single treatment is Lewis Ayres', Augustine and the Trinity (link to Google PreviewHERE).
Though not entirely convinced yet by the new scholarship, I am currently leaning in that direction.
==What do you make of the singular personal language in his prayer quoted above from the end of On the Trinity?==
In the past, I found it problematic, but once I began to understand that Augustine used the term "God" (Deus) in more that one sense, not so much anymore. This weekend, I hope to start working on a new post that will delve more deeply into Augustine's use of such phrases as Trinitas quae Deus est, Trinitas sit unus et solus et verus Deus, unus et solus et verus Deus, ipsa Trinitas, etc. For now, I would like to suggest that you reflect a bit on why the Bible uses the singular noun 'name' (ὄνομα), with reference to the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit (Matt. 28:19).
Thanks much for your question. Hope to have the new post up early next week.
Grace and peace,
David