Current Seminar:
• Augustine's De Trinitate
6/17/2006
Book II, Chapters 3-4 (Paragraphs 12-22)
Kieran Dickinson, kieranesq@gmail.com
Chapter 3
After explaining that the Holy Spirit is said to have been sent because of the bodily forms in which he appeared in New Testament times and further
explaining that the Holy Spirit, like the Son, has the form of a servant but is nevertheless the equal of the Father, St. Augustine asks a number of
questions which he then attempts to answer in the rest of Book II:
- How is it that we say the Father was not sent despite the fact that it seems he appeared in physical manifestations several times in the Old Testament,
such as at the burning bush and lightning on the mountain ("theophanies")?
- Why is it said of the Son and Holy Spirit that they were not sent until New Testament times despite the fact that it seems that they were present in
the Old Testament theophanies?
- Why is it said of the Holy Spirit that he was sent despite the fact that he was never incarnated as was the Son?
Before answering these questions, St. Augustine pauses to dismiss certain critics. They argue that the Old Testament theophanies, taken together
with the Incarnation of the Son and the appearance of the Holy Spirit in the NT as dove and then as tongues of fire, show that the Son and Holy Spirit
are changeable and, consequently, mortal. St. Augustine answers them by stating that when God has shown himself to men in bodily form, those bodily
substances were created substances at the service of God's power. These bodily forms have changed, but God himself has not changed.
Accordingly, the critics' argument that the Son and Holy Spirit are mortal because changeable falls apart.
Chapter 4
In Chapter 4, St. Augustine takes up the questions he asked in Book 3 by analyzing several Old Testament theophanies. He finds, however, that
there are sufficient ambiguities in the passages to make it difficult to give certain answers.
Genesis describes Adam as hearing the voice of God and hiding from God's face. We assume that it was the Father who so appeared to Adam, but
this assumption is by no means certain. Perhaps it was the Son. In fact, the text does not even permit us to say with certainty in what
sense Adam may have seen God, since it also says that Adam's eyes were not opened until he ate the forbidden fruit. St. Augustine suggests that
God may not have appeared to Adam in bodily form at all, but only as a voice. That voice may not have been the voice of any single Person of the
Trinity but rather the voice of all of them.
Genesis also recounts an episode in the life of Abraham that bears on St. Augustine's questions. Genesis 12:1 states that "The Lord said to
Abraham, Come away from your country." Again, though, it is unclear whether the Lord appeared in bodily form; Abraham may only have heard a
voice. Some might think that since the name "Lord" is used, and that name is used of the Son in the New Testament, that it must have been the
Son who spoke to Abraham. Yet in other Scriptural passages the name "Lord" refers clearly to the Father or the Holy Spirit.
In contrast to these first two passages, where little light is shed on the questions at stake, St. Augustine finds more light in a third passage,
though few certainties. Genesis 18 describes an episode in which Abraham entertained three unknown men. Abraham washes their feet and
serves them. They promise Abraham a son and foretell the destruction of Sodom. Curiously, the passage speaks of the three men as "the Lord"
in the singular, and Abraham refers to them as "the Lord." St. Augustine sees in this episode a visible intimation of the Triune God.
6/17/2006
Book II, Chapters 3-4 (Paragraphs 12-22)
Br. Dunstan Robidoux, OSB
In chapter 3, Augustine delves more deeply into the question of how best we are to understand the sending of the Son and the sending of the
Holy Spirit since, on the one hand, questions can be asked about appearances or theophanies which had occurred in Old Testament times and, on the other
hand, one can ask questions about who was really being represented by these theophanies. Father, Son, or Holy Spirit, or God without distinction
of person? A troublesome problem is the fact that many persons have used material analogies to try to understand this sending and, as a result, the
unchanging immortality of the Father is distinguished from the changeableness of the Son and Holy Spirit. The changeableness is then used to argue
that Son and Holy Spirit are not truly divine. Both are mortal not because of any necessary connection with any matter or flesh that human eyes
can behold but because they have undergone some kind of change which is visible to themselves but which, as change, is incompatible with the meaning of
what it means to divine. If both Son and Holy Spirit were immortal, they would not be able to change. Hence, if sending implies change
where change refers to some kind of bodily shift or some kind of bodily transition which is inherently visible (even if not visible from the viewpoint
of human eyes), then this sending implies that Son and Holy Spirit are not fully or truly divine. While Augustine does not directly refer here
to the materialism of stoic epistemology, the influence of stoic materialism is unmistakable when Augustine refers to divine self-knowledge in empirical
terms. In such a context, the Son is not visible in terms of his incarnation (which human beings once beheld), but he is visible in himself
(cf. paragraph 15).
In chapter 4, Augustine turns to how one might interpret stories about theophanies in connection with stories about the first man, Adam, and Abraham
who received a number of revelations from God. With reference to the stories that are told about God and Adam, Augustine argues that, if one
gathers all the references together and as one looks at all the possible nuances of meaning and at different possible meanings for "seeing," one cannot
really determine for sure if any kind of seeing really happened. One cannot determine for sure if the references to God necessarily refer to one
person or another although most exegetes have traditionally tended to think that the God of Adam, as spoken in scripture, is best associated with God
the Father. But, as Augustine notes, nothing in the text argues against believing that the God of Adam refers to God in a generic sense, God
without distinction of person. In scripture in general, one can only refer a particular theophany to God the Father if the words and context
clearly indicate that no other interpretation is possible. In general, with respect to most accounts, no clear identification is possible even
if one might choose to indulge in speculations. In turning to accounts of theophanies in relation to God and Abraham, Augustine similarly notes
that no unambiguous meaning exists for "appearing." From the texts given, one cannot prove if one particular person of the Trinity is manifesting
himself to us as God or if God is making himself known in an undifferentiated way. While, in a particular instance, one might argue that God the
Son is presenting himself in a visible way to a human being and at a time prior to the Incarnation, a careful look at the scriptural texts indicates that
one cannot make an affirmative determination. One can hypothesize and suggest but one cannot come up with conclusive proof. There is too
much ambiguity. Nothing prevents one from trying to argue, for instance, that the appearance of three men should be interpreted in a Trinitarian
sense. In another story, one might try to argue that two figures signify God the Son and God the Holy Spirit since they are both sent by a third
figure but, again, other interpretations can be offered and the multiplicity of possible interpretations suggests that scriptural citations are not
conclusive for any particular argument. Some exegetical problems cannot be solved in a purely exegetical fashion.
|
