XV. Trinitarian Doctrine in West

8/12/2019 XV. Trinitarian Doctrine in West

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/xv-trinitarian-doctrine-in-west 1/9

X V

Trinitarian Doctrine in the West

In the West, Arianism was not as great a threat as it was in theEast. This seems to have been due to three main reasons: the

trinitarian tradition of Latin Christianity, its occupation withother, more practical matters which seemed more urgent, andthe influence of Stoicism. The first reason is obvious when oneremembers that with Tertullian the West had already developedthe trinitarian formula that would prevail throughout itshistory: “One substance and three persons.” This was coupledwith the practical inclination of the Latin West, thereby

preventing the Arian controversy from becoming as widespreadan issue as it was in the East. Finally, the fact that in the WestStoicism was the most common philosophy may well havecontributed to avoiding some o f the pitfalls o f the NeoplatonistEast. In earlier chapters we have seen how Western discussionsof the Trinity, in their concern to refute Modalism, usually wereinclined to subordinationism. But this never reached theextreme o f Arianism, and this may well have been due, at least in

part, to the fact that the influence o f Alexandrine theology, withits emphasis on the divine transcendence, was little felt in theWest. When God is conceived as an absolutely transcendentbeing, one is tempted to see the Word as an intermediate beingbetween God and the world, as is the case with Arianism. Stoicinfluence, with its emphasis on divine immanence, thuscontributed to saving the West from the ravages of Arianism.

326



T r i n i t a r i a n D o c t r i n e i n t h e W e s t 327

This does not mean, however, that Arianism and the

trinitarian controversy did not penetrate into the West. Therewere times and places in which Arianism made its influence felt.During the reign of Constantius, all the West felt the imperialpressure in support o f Arianism, and even Pope Liberius, as wellas the elderly Hosius of Cordova, were forced to sign documentsthat contradicted the Nicene faith. However, even during thisperiod, Arianism was able to make strong inroads only in theborder zones.1 Some years later, when Justina attempted toimpose Christianity in that part of the Empire which was ruledby her son Valentinian II, popular reaction—under the veryable leadership of Ambrose of Milan—clearly showed thatArianism had no inner vitality in the West.

In spite o f this, the West did produce a number o f works withwhich it attempted to reflect on the issues involved in the con-troversy that was raging in the East. At first, such works followed

the general outlines of those written in the East, and some ofthem were little more than revised versions o f Greek works. Butthe West did slowly develop its own forms of discussing andexpressing trinitarian doctrine, and this development reachedits climax in Saint Augustine’s treatise On the Trinity.

Early in the second half of the fourth century, Hilary ofPoitiers wrote twelve books On the Trinity, which clearly reflectthe influences that he received during his exile in the East.2His

discussion of the Trinity has no great originality, and itsimportance lies rather in having offered to the Latinspeakingworld a treatise that summarized the issues at stake in the Ariancontroversy and the arguments in favor of the Nicene faith.3

Nor does Saint Ambrose, the great champion of the Nicenefaith in Northern Italy, have anything new to contribute to

1 See M. Meslin, Les Ariens d’Occident, 335-430 (Paris: Editions du Seuil, 1967), who studies inparticular the Arian communities along the Danube border.

2 His literary and theological production, as well as his career, before his exile have been ablystudied by J. Doignon, Hilaire de Poitiers avant l’exil:Recherches sur la naissance, l’enseignement et l’épreuve

d’une foi épiscopale en Gaule au milieu du IVe siècle (Paris: Etudes augustiniennes, 1971).3 Pierre Smulders, L a doctrine trinitaire de S. H ilaire de Poitiers (Rome: Gregorian University Press,

1944); Jules Lebreton, “A propos de la doctrine Trinitaire de saint Hilaire de Poities,” RScRel, 33(1946), 48489; P. Loffler, “Die Trinitatslehre des Bischofs Hilarius von Poitiers zwischen Ost undWest,” ZschrKgesch, 71 (1960), 2636; C. F. A. Borchardt, Hilary of Poitier’s Role in the Arian Struggle

(Gravenhage: M. Nijhoff, 1966).



328 A H i s t o r y o f C h r i s t i a n T h o u g h t

trinitarian doctrine. He defended the Nicene faith mostly as a

very able church leader and a preacher. But when EmperorGratian asked him to compose a treatise on the Holy Spirit,Ambrose simply took Basil’s work on the same subject andproduced a free version and slight adaptation of it.4

Another Western opponent o f Arianism is Lucifer o f Calarisin Sardinia.5In his works, written in the Latin o f the people, heopenly attacks Emperor Constantius, and even makes someoffensive remarks about him. After his death those who did not

accept the ease with which the Church had reinstated formerArians took him as their symbol and were thus called“Luciferians.” Lacking in doctrinal content, this sect was notlong lived, although it did produce some able teachers andwriters—most noteworthy among them Gregory of Elvira, whowrote a treatise On the Orthodox Faith Against the Arians.6

It was early in the fifth century, with Augustine, that the Westshowed the depth and originality of which it was capable. In hisfifteen books On the Trinity (399419), Augustine determinedthe way that Western trinitarian theology would follow, so thatthe later differences between Eastern and Western trinitariantheology stem from this work. It is therefore necessary to discusshere Augustine’s trinitarian doctrine, although the globaldiscussion of this theology will be part of the second volume ofthis History.

Augustine accepted Trinitarian doctrine as a matter of faiththat is beyond every doubt. Therefore, his work On the Trinity isnot devoted, as most of its predecessors, to offer proofs of thedivinity of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, nor to prove theiressential unity with the Father. Basically, Augustine builds uponthe foundation laid by the three Cappadocians, although he didnot know their theology direcdy but only through Hilary.

4 Cf. Ludwig Her rmann , “Am brosius von Mailand alsTrinitatstheo loge,” ZeitschrKgesch, 69 (1958),197218, who claims that Ambrose leans toward a homoiousian understanding of the Trinity.

5 Th e m ost detailed b iograp hy that I know is that found in G. Cerretti, Lucífero vescovo di Cagliari ed

il suo "Moriendum esse pro Filio Dei” (Pisa: NistriLischi, 1940). On his trinitarin doctrine see: C. Zedda,“La dottrina trinitaria di Lucífero di Cagliari,” DivThom, 52 (1949), 276329.

6 The following are general introductions to his work and theology: A ngel Custodio Vega, “Una

gran Figura literaria españo la del siglo IV ,” CD, 156 (1944), 20558, J. Collantes Lozano, San Gregorio de Elvira: Estudio sobre su eclesiología (Granad a: Imp. F. Rom án Camacho, 1954); F. J. Buckley, Christ and the Church According to Gregory of Elvira (Rome: Gregorian University Press, 1964).






while each of these things is referred severally to each person. And

by this similitude it is in some degree discernible, that the Trinity,which is inseparable in itself, is manifested separably by theappearance of the visible creature; and that the operation of theTrinity is also inseparable in each severally o f those things whichare said to pertain properly to the manifesting of either theFather, or the Son, or the Holy Spirit.10

Although Augustine follows Greek theologians in his discus-sion of Trinitarian doctrine, theologians such as the Cappadocians tend to take as their point of departure the diversity o f thepersons or hypostases, and from it move to the unity of essenceor ousia, whereas Augustine, on the other hand, begins from theessential unity of God, and from it moves to the distinction ofpersons. He never quite understood what the Cappadociansmeant by hypostasis—which he translated as substantia,u But whatseparates him from Greek theologians is more than a purely

verbal difference. The difference is rather that Augustine willnot grant to the diversity o f persons the importance that it had inthe Cappadocians. His manner of understanding the divineunity and simplicity leads him to reject every attempt to speak ofGod as a “triple” being, as had been done by Marius Victorinus, afamous intellectual who had been converted to Christianity andwhom Augustine otherwise adm ired.12

Neither, since He is a Trinity, is He therefore to be thought triple;otherwise the Father alone, or the Son alone, will be less than theFather and Son together. Although, indeed, it is hard to see howwe can say, either the Father alone, or the Son alone; since both theFather is with the Son, and the Son with the Father, always andinseparably: not that both are the Father, or both are the Son; butbecause they are always one in relation to the other and neither theone nor the other alone.13

10 De Trin. 4. 21. 30 (NPNF, 1st series 3:8586).

11 Ibid., 5.8. 10 (NPNF, 1st series, 3:92): “Th ey ind eed use also the word hypostasis; but they intend

to put a difference, I know not what, between ovcria and hypostasis: so that most of ourselves who

treat these things in the Greek la ngu age, are accusto med to say, fiLav over Lav, rpei? vnooTacreis, or , inLatin, one essence, three substances.”

12 Cf. Paul Henry, “T h e Ad versu s Arium o f Marius Victorinus, the First Systematic Exposition o fthe Doctrine of the Trinity,” J T S , n.s. 1 (1950), 4255.

13 De Trin., 6. 7. 9 (NPNF, 1st series, 3:101).






This theory of the divine relations is Augustine’s point of

departure for his two great contributions to trinitarian thought:his theory of the procession of the Holy Spirit, and his doctrineof the vestiges of the Trinity in creatures.

Earlier theologians had found it difficult to express thedifference that exists between the generation of the Son and theprocession of the Holy Spirit. The Arians profited from thesedifficulties, asking how it is possible that, while both the Son andthe Holy Spirit derive their being from the Father, one is called

Son and the other is not. Augustine sets out by confessing hisignorance regarding the proper way to distinguish between the

generation of the Son and the procession of the Holy Spirit. Buthe later proposes the theory—which would become common inthe West—that the Holy Spirit is the bond of love that existsbetween the Father and the Son.

Therefore the Holy Spirit, whatever it is, is something common

both to the Father and Son. But that communion itself isconsubstanţial and coeternal; and if it may fitly be calledfriendship, let it be so called; but it is more aptly called love. Andthis is also a substance, since God is a substance, and “God is love,”as it is written.16

This understanding of the procession of the Holy Spirit isimportant for its later consequences, for the medieval debate

between Eastern and Western theologians regarding the Filioque clause had its roots in it.17

Augustine’s other contribution to the development oftrinitarian thought is his theory of the vestigia Trinitatis—thevestiges or signs of the Trinity to be found in its creatures. In allcreated things, and especially in the human soul, one can see theimprint of the Creator’s triune nature. This does not meansimply that certain things of the natural order can be used asmeans to explain or illustrate trinitarian doctrine—a rathercommon procedure in earlier theologians—but rather that all

16 Ibid., 6. 5. 7 (NPNF, 1st series, 3:100). Perhaps Augustine has drawn this doctrine from MariusVictorinus, for whom the Holy Spirit is such a bond. Cf. PL, 8:1146.

17 Infra, 2:12730.



T r i n i t a r i a n D o c t r i n e i n t h e W e s t 333

things, by the mere fact that they have been created by the triune

God, carry the imprint of the Trinity. Later this doctrine wouldbe systematically developed by medieval theologians, who woulddistinguish between shadows, vestiges, images, and likenesses ofthe Trinity in various creatures.18Augustine himself, however,centered his attention on the human creature, who according toScripture was made in the image and after the likeness of theTrinity—this being the reason why, in Genesis 1:26, the pluralform is used: “Let us make man.”19

Although Augustine uses several different trilogies to showthe imprint o f the Trinity in the human soul, the most common,and that which later had a more distinguished career through-out the history of Christian thought, is that which refers to thememory, the understanding, and the will.

Since, then, these three, memory, understanding, will, are notthree lives, but one life; nor three minds, but one mind; it follows

certainly that neither are they three substances, but one substance.Since memory, which is called life, and mind, and substance, is socalled in respect to itself; but it is called memory, relatively tosomething. And I should say the same also of understanding andof will, since they are called understanding and will relatively tosomething; but each in respect to itself is life, and mind, andessence. And hence these three are one, in that they are one life,one mind, one essence; and whatever else they are severally called

in respect to themselves, they are called also together, not plurally,but in the singular number. But they are three, in that whereinthey are mutually referred to each other; and if they were notequal, and this not only each to each, but also each to all, theycertainly could not mutually contain each other; for not only iseach contained by each, but also all by each. For I remember that Ihave memory and understanding, and will; and I understand thatI understand; and will, and remember; and I will that I will, andremember, and understand; and I remember together my wholememory, and understanding, and will. For that of my memory

18 See, fo r instance, S aint B onav ent ure’s Itinerarium mentis in Deum.

19 An interpretatio n which is not original with Saint A ugustine , but is rather com monp lace in

earlier Patristic literature. Cf. Irenaeus, Adv. haer. 4. proem.; Tertullian, De res. car. 6; Novatian, De

Trin. 17 ; 26. Am ong the earlier Gnostics, it was comm on to use this text as a pro of o f the participationof several angels or powers in the work of creation.




which I do not remember, is not in my memory; and nothing is so

much in the memory as memory itself. Therefore I remember thewhole memory.20

Thus, Augustine uses the inner relationships of the facultiesof the soul—and there is no doubt that the bishop of Hippo is aperson of deep psychologic sensibility—in order to attempt tounderstand, insofar as possible, the inner relationships withinthe Trinity.

In summary, one can say that Augustine pointed the way thatWestern trinitarian theology would later follow at least in threefundamental points: his insistence upon the divine unity abovethe diversity of persons; his doctrine of the procession of theSpirit; and his theory of the vestigia Trinitatis, especially in thefield o f human psychology.21

The first of these points, while avoiding the danger oftritheism which existed in other theologians, came very close to

that Sabellianism which earlier conservative Eastern bishops hadfeared would be the result of the Nicene homoousios.

The second point greatly contributed to clarifying andpointing the way for the Western doctrine o f the Holy Spirit, andits most important consequence would be the later controversyregarding the Filioque.

Finally, the third point was paramount in Western medievaltheology, and eventually became the basic framework of a

mystical theology that attempted to reach God through thecontemplation of the imprint of the Trinity in creatures.

While Augustine was working on the trinitarian problem, theEast was beginning to stir with a new subject of controversy: theperson of the Savior. What had been discussed up to this timewas mostly the divinity of the Son. Now the main question will behow that divinity relates to humanity in Jesus Christ. This is the

main theme of the christological controversies to which we mustnow turn.

20 De Trin. 10. 11. 18 (NPNF, Ist series, 3:142).

81 9^' Michael Schmaus, “Das Fortwirken der augustinischen Trinitätspsychologie bis zurkarolingischen Zeit,” Vitae etveritati: Festgabe fü r Karl Adam (Düsseldorf: PatmosVerlag, 1956), 4456.

Documents

XV. Trinitarian Doctrine in West