Current Seminar:
• Augustine's De Trinitate
7/1/2006
Book II, Chapters 5-6 (Paragraphs 23-35) [6.]
Ann Vroom
In these latter twelve paragraphs of Book II of De Trinitate, Augustine continues his analysis
of several example Old Testament theophanies - appearances [7.] - in order to both
- distinguish these from the New Testament Incarnation; and,
- ascertain whether each was
- an instance of an appearance of God the Father, and/or God the Son, and/or God the Holy Spirit; or
- "whether, without any distinction of persons, as it is said, the one and only God, that is, the Trinity
itself." (De Trinitate, Bk. II, ¶ 35)
In the preceding paragraphs of Book II, Augustine has discussed the theophanies to Adam [¶ 17-18], Abraham [¶ 19-21] and Lot
[¶ 21-22]. In the remaining paragraphs of In the remaining paragraphs of Book II Augustine examines several
instances of the appearance of God to Moses and the Israelites in the course of the Exodus and the appearance of the "Ancient of Days"
to Daniel.
Mosaic Theophanies [8.]
Bk II ¶ 23 - The Burning Bush - "Angel of God"
Quoting the relevant segments [9.] of the Biblical description of this theophany in Exodus account, Augustine
focuses on the problem of whether the phrase "Angel of God" entails God taking on the appearance of an angel or an angel taking on the appearance of
God.
As is typical of Augustine's discussion of these OT theophanies, he does not attempt to state a "closed" critical
explanation of the text, rather he frames both sides of the inquiry but then actually leaves the presented question open.
Nevertheless Augustine - ever the adroit debater - appears to tend to find the balance of
consideration to be in favor of God using the appearance of an angel, going at the issue from an almost "reverse" logical
inferential direction [10.] of postulating that the consequent matter of which Person of the
Trinity is manifesting is more effectively able to be determined if the antecedent matter of God/angel is determined in favor
of God using the "creature". He argues that if it is taken to be the case that the creature is bearing the message of God - i.e.,
the self-identification "I am the God of thy father, the God of Abraham, The God of Isaac and the God of Jacob" - such message simply
cannot be attributed to any particular one of the Persons since the text is completely silent on how the angel was so instructed to speak.
Whereas, however, if it is the case that God is using the creature attributes of an Angel, then it can be more probably be determined
that the Person manifesting is either the Son or the Holy Spirit insofar as there are other Biblical examples of either of these Persons being
referred to or associated with angelic appearance as such.
But, as noted, in either event, instead of stating a conclusive reading of this issue, Augustine leaves the
dilemma presented for the further consideration of the reader and himself as author moves on to further instances of the appearances of
God to the Israelites in the course of the Exodus Biblical narrative.
Bk II ¶ 24 - The Pillar of Cloud and Fire
Since this theophany entails appearance of natural phenomenon - i.e., fire and cloud - Augustine concludes
that it "cannot be doubted" that in this instance, unlike the ambiguities entailed in the matter of the 'Angel of God" reference used
in the burning bush appearance - "God appeared to the eyes of mortal men by the corporeal creature made subject to Him."
And with reference to the ongoing inquiry into the question of which - or all - of the three Persons are
manifesting in this theophany, however, Augustine concludes that it simply is not apparent which is appearing in this instance.
Bk II ¶ 25 - Mt. Sinai
Here Augustine, after quoting the several instances of Moses' encounters with God on Mt. Sinai, moves first to
declare that it is "insane" [11.] smoke" on Mt. Sinai are to be taken as the "substance" of God - whether it
be God the Father, Son, Holy Spirit or Trinity - rather than natural ("creature") "appearances" used by God to manifest to the natural senses
of the Israelites.
Having asserted this general point so summarily, Augustine then goes on at some length addressing various
arguable nuances of this passage (Ex. 19:18-19) such as whether it might be interpreted that while the Israelites experienced only the
sensory "appearances" - the "clouds and voices and lightnings and trumpet and smoke", Moses himself entered into the "darkness"
and saw God in His "own substance" with "eyes of flesh". To this Augustine - somewhat obliquely - counters a later reference in
Exodus to the elders of Israel having "[seen] the place where the God of Israel had stood." (Ex. 24:10) [12.]
and emphatically challenges "are we therefore to believe that the word and wisdom of God, who "reaches from end to end", in His own
substance stood within the space of an earthly place" in a manner so changeable "as now to contract, now to expand Himself (to which
Augustine, ever the rhetorician, expostulates: "may the Lord cleanse the hearts of His faithful ones from such thoughts! (Mundet Dominus
a talibus cogitationibus corda fidelium suorum.)"
Bk II ¶ 26 - Parallelism of Mt. Sinai Theophanies and Pentecost
Leaving the matter of refuting the suggestion that while the Israelites saw only the outward sensory
"appearances" of the Sinai theophanies Moses himself went into the inner darkness of the cloud over Sinai and saw God with "eyes of
flesh", Augustine then returns to the main thread of his ongoing inquiry into the matter of the Exodus theophanies in terms of which
Person or Persons of the Trinity were made manifest in these instances.
And here again - as in the instance of the burning bush - Augustine broadly concludes that this question
cannot be definitively determined based solely on the Scriptural testimony. However, Augustine does allow himself to "venture
upon a modest and hesitating conjecture" that these Desert theophanies were of the Holy Spirit because of the parallelism between the
"Passover +50 days" and "fire" similarities between the Mt. Sinai appearances and the Pentecostal descent of the Holy Spirit upon the Apostles.
Bk II ¶ 27-32 - Seeing the "back" of God
At this point in his overall consideration of the Mosaic Exodus theophanies, Augustine devotes several lengthy
paragraphs to a detailed examination of the passage at Ex. 33:20-23:
"Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see my face, and live. And the Lord
said, Behold, there is a place by me, and thou shall stand upon a rock: and it shall come to pass, while my glory passeth by,
that I will put thee into a watch-tower of the rock, and will cover thee with my hand while I pass by:
and I will take away my hand, and thou shalt see my back; but my face shall
not be seen. Et tegam manu mea super te donec transeam,et auferam manum, et tunc videbis posteriora
mea; nam facies mea non apparebit tibi) "[Exodus 33:20-23]
In respect to this passage Augustine first clarifies that the statement, "thou shall see my back." is to be interpreted allegorically,
i.e., since God cannot be seen by the "eyes of the flesh" in His own substance, the scriptural testimony that His "back" may be seen can
most properly be understood as referring to seeing Christ in his "form of a servant", i.e., flesh, insofar as "flesh" is "posterior" to the
actual spirit of God. Augustine elaborates on this interpretation further by demonstrating the Catholic Church to be the "rock" on
which we will stand in our faith in the Incarnate and Resurrected Christ as God.
Daniel Theophany
Bk II ¶ 33-34 - "Ancient of Days"
The last OT theophany Augustine considers in Book II is that described in the Book of Daniel:
"I beheld," he says, "till the thrones were set, and
the Ancient of Days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of His head like the
pure wool: His throne was like the fiery flame, and His wheels as burning fire; a fiery stream issued and came forth from
before Him: thousand thousands ministered unto Him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before Him: the judgment
was set, and the books were opened," [Daniel 7:9-10] etc. And a little after,
"I saw," he says, "in the night visions, and behold,
one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the
Ancient of Days, and they brought Him near before Him. And there
was given Him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve Him: His
dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and His kingdom that which shall not be destroyed." [Daniel 7:13-14]
Compared to his treatment of the theophanies to Abraham and Moses, Augustine deals rather summarily with Daniel's experience referring to
it primarily to refute the contention that whereas God the Son and God the Holy Spirit are testified to have manifested to the OT fathers when
they were "awake", God the Father - identified here as the "Ancient of Days" - seems to have been somehow limited to appearing in
dreams. Augustine handily answers this by referring back to the appearance of the "three" men - "not
one, or two, but three Visus est Dominus Abrahae, non unus aut duo sed tres apparuerunt viri " to Abraham as studied in
several preceding paragraphs of Book II.
Bk II ¶ 35 - Book II Summation
"… now that we have examined, so far as appeared to be
sufficient what places of the Holy Scriptures we could, a modest and cautious consideration of divine mysteries leads, as far as
I can judge, to no other conclusion, unless that:
[We] may not rashly affirm which person
of the Trinity appeared to this or that of the fathers or the prophets in some body or likeness of body, unless when the context
attaches to the narrative some probable intimations on the subject.
For the nature itself, or substance, or essence,
or by whatever other name that very thing, which is God, whatever it be, is to be called, cannot
be seen corporeally [Ipsa enim natura vel substantia vel essentia vel quolibet alio nomine appellandum est idipsum
quod Deus est, quidquid illud est, corporaliter videri non potest.]:
but we must believe that by means of the creature made subject to Him,
not only the Son, or the Holy Spirit, but also the Father, may have given intimations of Himself to mortal
senses by a corporeal form or likeness [Per subiectam vero creaturam non solum Filium vel Spiritum
Sanctum sed etiam Patrem corporali specie sive similitudine mortalibus sensibus significationem sui dare
potuisse credendum est.]
And since the case stands thus, that this second book may not
extend to an immoderate length, let us consider what remains in those which follow."
Book II, Chapters 5-7 (Paragraphs 23-35)
Kieran Dickinson, kieranesq@gmail.com
Chapter 5
St. Augustine continues his exegesis of various Old Testament theophanies, asking in each case whether it was the Father, Son or
Holy Spirit who manifested himself. He finds it impossible to determine which Person appeared at the burning bush, but concludes
that, in light of the description in one place of the being as an angel of the Lord, it must have been the Son or the Holy Spirit but not
the Father (since the Father, unlike Son and Holy Spirit, has not been "sent"). Similarly, Augustine cannot single out one
particular Person as appearing in the pillar of cloud and pillar of fire in Exodus 13 or in the smoke, fire, and trumpet blasts on Mt. Sinai
of Exodus 19, though in the latter case St. Augustine says that it was probably the Holy Spirit. (Augustine reasons that the fire
on Mt. Sinai is like the fire at Pentecost, and there are also parallels in the image of the Holy Spirit as the "finger" of God who wrote
the Ten Commandments on the stone tablets.) The key point is that, whatever the physical manifestation, God never appeared in his
substance. Critics could point to Exodus 33:11, which states that the Lord spoke to Moses "face to face," to counter St. Augustine's
point. St. Augustine, however, points out that, two verses later, Exodus says that Moses begged the Lord to show himself openly
that Moses might see him. St. Augustine's gloss on the passages is that Moses probably heard God speaking in an intimate voice as
a friend, but that he did not receive any physical manifestation of God's substance. That is what Moses was left longing for.
Chapter 6
The episode described in Exodus 33, when the Lord speaks to Moses and permits Moses to see the Lord's back from a rock as the Lord
passes by, but not the Lord's face, merits special discussion. St. Augustine favors a symbolic interpretation. It is
Christ who passes by. The face of Christ is the divine substance or the "form of God," which men may not see. The back of
Christ is Christ's humanity – the "form of a servant." Men may see Christ from the rock, or the "place besides the Lord," that is
the Catholic Church. Christ wishes his back/humanity to be seen only after he has "passed by" or "pasched," i.e., died and rose
from the dead. St. Augustine argues that only a symbolic interpretation of the passage makes sense. A literal interpretation
would be nonsense. In the form of a servant, God has both face and back, but in the form of God he has neither.
Chapter 7
St. Augustine concludes his exegesis of the Old Testament theophanies by arguing that while in some passages it is probable that it
was Christ or the Holy Spirit who appeared, nevertheless it would be wrong to assert, as some critics do on the basis of a misinterpretation
of Scripture, that it was never the Father. In Daniel 7:9-14, it is quite clear that the Father (as the Ancient of Days) and Christ
(as the Son of man) appear, albeit in a dream. The most important lesson to draw from the exegesis, according to Augustine, is that
dogmatic assertions that it was one Person or another who appeared are unwarranted. God never appeared to men in his substance in the
Old Testament theophanies; rather he appeared through things he created in order to manifest aspects of himself.
Book II, Chapters 5-7
Br. Dunstan Robidoux OSB
In chapter 5, in turning to Augustine's discussion of theophanies, as these are given in Exodus, one find a continuation of
Augustine's criticism about the limitations of employing material analogies for coming to a better understanding God as three.
In looking at the story of the Burning Bush and the accounts about what happened in and about Mt. Sinai, we cannot be really sure if any
of these accounts refer to any particular person of the Trinity or to the Trinity as one, lacking in differentiation. God's divinity
cannot be apprehended by any act of sense and, because this is so, reports which speak about appearances can be given interpretations which
may be fitting but not conclusive. And so, one might argue with respect to the story about the Burning Bush that God the Son is being
represented. However, when one attends to the activity which occurs in the revelation that is given to Moses, one might argue that the
Holy Spirit is being represented even if the Son is also a likely candidate. The focus on activity takes away from any argument
which would try to argue that God the Father is being represented and not God the Son or God the Holy Spirit. As one turns, however,
to the stories that are given in connection with Mt. Sinai, one has stories which more obviously imply that God is using created, sensible
means as instruments for the communication of divine meanings. A Thomist note is struck if you will by Augustine since, according to
Aquinas, human knowing begins with human sensing, and because God has made human beings in the way that he has made them, God works with
what he has created to communicate spiritual and intelligible truths in a manner which employs a sacramental principle. Sensible signs
reveal a world of meaning which transcends sensible things.
In chapter 6, Augustine takes an appearance story from the story of Moses and Moses's meeting with God and tries to overcome its
empirical or sensible notes by giving an allegorical interpretation which refers to the belief and teaching of the Catholic Church.
Christ is seen or understood for who he is if he is seen or understood from a viewpoint that is determined by the Church's dogmatic teaching
on who Christ is and what he did. Chapter 6 concludes with words that call for rejecting any interpretations that rely on the
heuristic use of material analogies as a paradigm for thought about how we might conceive of the Christian God and his action within human
history.
In chapter 7, Augustine concludes the second book of his study on the Trinity by emphasizing a point that he has often noted with
respect to the ambiguity of most scriptural texts. Prior to Christ's incarnation, with respect to the language of the Old Testament,
one cannot usually be sure if any given text is about any particular person of the Trinity or the Trinity itself. But, in addition,
as Augustine concludes, scripture can be used to argue that theophanies are not limited to talk about God the Son or God the Holy Spirit.
The book of Daniel can be cited for an account which would appear to speak about a vision of God the Father who sits on a throne.
Scripture cannot be properly used to argue for any form of subordinationism. The divine nature is something that can never be seen.
It can never be sensed. It can only be known through some other kind of act within the context of one's present life as it
exists within the created order of things.
Notes:
[6.] Please note that I am using a version in English translation of Augustine's text available online at
www.CCEL.org taken from "Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Series I, Vol. III). This older translation uses a system of intra-Book
chapter divisions that differs somewhat from that used in the more recent New City Press edition of the De Trinitate although the
paragraph numberings appear to be the same in each version. Therefore I used the paragraph numberings for reference than referring to the
chapter numbers. The version I am using also uses a somewhat more dated style of English leading to primarily stylistic differences
in translation but where the actual reading may be significant I provide the original Latin as available, also online, at the excellent
comprehensive Italian website "Sant'Agostino" (www.sant-agostin0.it/latino/trinita).
[7.] Augustine does not himself use the theological term "theophany" in these sections.
Most usually he uses the Latin forms of "appearance". For example, "But why is He previously called the Angel of the Lord when
He appeared in a flame of fire out of the bush [cum de rubo in flamma ignis apparuit] ..." (De Trinitate, Bk. II,
¶ 35) or "… was something of the creature assumed by Him in order to bring about a visible appearance [visibiliter appareret]
for the business in hand, and that words might thence be audibly uttered, whereby the presence of the Lord might be shown, in such way as was
fitting, to the corporeal senses of man, by means of the creature made subject? [an assumptum erat aliquid creaturae quod ad praesens
negotium visibiliter appareret et unde voces sensibiliter ederentur quibus praesentia Domini per subiectam creaturam corporeis etiam sensibus
hominis sicut oportebat exhiberetur?] (De Trinitate, Bk. II, ¶ 35).
It might also be noted that in these sections Augustine does not use the Latin terms for denoting the distinction between "form" and
"figure" as might be used in a philosophically focused treatise. (forma meaning the essence or substance of a thing vs.
figura (or habitas/fashion) suggesting in contradistinction to forma something changeable, fleeting, unsubstantial
(See generally, J.B. Lightfoot, St. Paul's Epistle to the Phillipians, Zondervan 1953, p. 127 et seq.)
These choices of vocabulary - which, since Augustine was a renowned professional teacher of rhetoric, may be taken as significant -
might, in this instance, suggest as noteworthy first, that "stylistically" Augustine was here concerned not with setting forth a
specialized academic treatise, but rather with engaging in a "living" pastoral apologetic endeavor accessible to all interested
Catholic faithful and, second, in terms of substantive content, that Augustine chooses to use the general term "appearance" - rather than
figura - in order to emphasize that these Old Testament theophanies were actual sensory manifestations which were to be taken as
real - rather than, for example, allegorical - occurrences.
[8.] It should be borne in mind that the matter of seeking a Christian understanding of OT theophanies is
not new with Augustine. He is indeed writing against a background of numerous Apostolic and Patristic commentaries in this regard
(See, e.g., the online article "The Holy Trinity in the Old Testament" by Constance Woods, Ph.D. at
www.catholic.net/rcc/Periodicals/Faith/1998-01-02/trinity.html.) One of the most notable of these is that of Justin Martyr (b. c. 100
AD, d. c. 170) in his foundational classic apologetic Dialogues with Trypho (available online at www.CCEL.org) which Archbishop Wuerl
has described as "… an account of Justin's attempt to convert his friend Trypho" (Donald W. Wuerl, Fathers of the Church, Daughters
of St. Paul 1986, p. 33 [out of print]. Trypho was Jewish, living in Ephesus (c. 135) and apparently had a knowledge of both Hebrew
scripture and commentary as well as secular philosophic writings (W.H.C. Frend, The Rise of Christianity, Fortress Press, Philadelphia
1984, p. 239-240). Therefore Justin's work is framed as an ongoing conversational encounter with Trypho and first addresses in a
formal apologetic format many of the OT theophanies considered by Augustine here again nearly 300 years later including, for example, the
matter of the "Angel of the Lord" reference in the burning bush theophany (Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter LIX ["God
distinct from the Father conversed with Moses"] et seq.)
[9.] As in the case of the implications of Augustine's choice of vocabulary (see footnote supra),
here again Augustine's selective use of Biblical text segments may be noteworthy as illuminative of Augustine's intentions as an author
pastorally shepherding his flock in the project of seeking faith through understanding. Augustine is not here primarily concerned
with "doing" a closed Biblical exegesis per se, instead he "cuts and pastes" into his argument only those segments necessary to
notate his overall rather open-ended meditation on the general question of the distinction between the OT theophanies and the NT
Incarnation as well as to provide his readers with material for apologetic dialectic concerning the which Person or Persons of the Trinity
may be manifested in particular instances and the implications thereof for the greater understanding of the Trinitarian mystery by the
faithful.
[10.] Compare Augustine's remarks concerning the use of logical inference as a tool of faith seeking
understanding in his treatise On Christian Doctrine, in Four Books (available online at www. CCEL.org) where he notes, for
example: "The science of reasoning is a very great service in searching into and unraveling all sorts of questions that come up
in Scripture, only in the use of it we must guard against the love of wrangling, and the childish vanity of entrapping an adversary."
(Book II, Chapter 31 ["Use of dialectics. Of fallacies"], ¶ 48) and "[T]he validity of logical sequences is not a thing devised
by men, but is observed and noted by them that they may be able to learn and teach it; for it exists eternally in the reason of things,
and has its origin with God … he who says, ‘When the consequent is false, the antecedent must also be false,' says what is most true."
(Book II, Chapter 32 ["Valid logical sequence is not devised but only observed by men."], ¶ 50)
[11.] "What shall I say about this, save that no one can be so insane as to believe the smoke, and the
fire, and the cloud, and the darkness, and whatever there was of the kind, to be the substance of the word and wisdom of God
which is Christ, or of the Holy Spirit? [Quid hinc dicam nisi quod nemo tam vecors est qui credat fumum, ignem, nubes et
nebulam et si qua huiusmodi Verbi et Sapientiae Dei quod est Christus vel Spiritus sancti esse substantiam?]."
(De Trinitate, Book II, ¶ 25)
[12.] It should be recalled that the Exodus account entails a long multi-episodic narrative of
wandering in the desert blending numerous encounters with God in not only the ongoing presence of the leading columns of fire and cloud
but also the several encounters between Moses and God on Mt. Sinai, as well as in the Tent of the Tabernacle. So in this instance,
Augustine draws from two distinct narrative episodes - Ex. 19:18-19, a prelude Mt. Sinai encounter to Moses' first "Ten Commandments"
event and the subsequent Ex. 24:10 episode in which Moses and seventy elders "went up" to confirm the Covenant of observance of the
Commandments.
|
