Sentences, Books I–II

Chapter 1 (84).

1. Having shown that none of the persons surpasses another in greatness, he now shows that none excels another in power. Just as the greatness of the three is one and undifferentiated, so their power is one and undifferentiated.

2. The Father is not more powerful than the Son, nor the Son or Father than the Holy Spirit; nor do two or three together have greater power than any one of them. The Father and Son together cannot do more than the Holy Spirit alone, nor can the three together do more than any one of them, because the omnipotence which the Father has, the Son received by being born, and the Holy Spirit by proceeding. Augustine supports this in Against Maximinus, who said that the Father was more powerful and better than the Son.

Chapter 2 (85).

The Son is not less powerful than the Father. “He who says, ‘All that the Father has is mine,’ has nothing less than the Father. If he had something less in power than the Father, all that the Father has would not be his; but all that the Father has is his. Therefore he has as much power as the Father.” “He is therefore equal to the Father”: “for he who received cannot be unequal to him who gave.”

Chapter 3 (86).

1. Here he presents the heretic’s false teaching. “You think that the Son is powerful but the Father more powerful, so that one powerful being could beget another powerful being, but not one omnipotent being another omnipotent being. The Father therefore has omnipotence, which the Son does not have; and if this is so, the Son’s saying, “All that the Father has is mine,” is false.

¹ accipit LMR; 23–24 rubric omitted PRW; 29 suam] ut added BMNTVW; 32 genuit sibi OPT, transposed by other witnesses; 33 genuit Filium OPT, transposed by other witnesses.]

^{2 3 4 5 6}

2. The heretic admitted this truth and proceeded from it to falsehood. “The Father received power from no one, whereas the Son received it from the Father.” We too admit that the Son received power from him of whom he was born powerful; but no one gave power to the Father, because no one begot him. By begetting, the Father gave power, and everything he has in his substance, to him whom he begot from his substance.

3. Augustine’s question that constrains the heretic. “Did the Father give the Son as much power as he himself has, or less? If as much, the omnipotent Father is understood to have begotten one who is omnipotent; if less, how are all that the Father has the Son’s? If the Father’s omnipotence is not the Son’s, then all that the Father has is not the Son’s.” But all things are the Son’s; therefore the Father’s omnipotence is also the Son’s, and the Father is not more powerful than the Son.

4. He proves in another way that the Son is equal to the Father. “You say that the Father begot the Son less than himself, thereby dishonoring the Father, who, if he begot an only Son less than himself, either could not or would not beget an equal.” “If he would not, you have called him envious; but if he could not, where is the omnipotence of God the Father?”

5. If the Father could not or would not beget an equal Son, he is found weak or envious. “The issue comes down to this: God the Father either could not or would not beget a Son equal to himself. If he could not, he is weak; if he would not, he is envious. But both are false; therefore the Son is truly equal to the Father.” The Father therefore begot a Son equal to himself, and from both proceeds the Holy Spirit, equal to both. Since the Father could beget his complete likeness in his only Son, he must not be called envious; therefore he begot a complete God, equal to himself.

6. He shows by analogy that the Father did not beget a Son less than himself. He demonstrates this by a human analogy, saying: “A human, father, if he could, would have begotten an equal son. Who, then, dares say that the Almighty could not do this? I add that, if a man could, he would beget a son greater and better than himself; but nothing can be greater or better than God.” “Why, then, did God not beget, as you say, an equal Son, when he needed neither years by which equality might be completed nor lacked omnipotence? Or perhaps he did not wish to? Then, God forbid, he was envious. But he was not envious; therefore he begot an equal.” “Let us therefore believe that the Son is equal to him.”

⁷ potuit PRT; 16 etiam] et MOP; 23–24 rubric omitted PRW; 29 suam] ut added BMNTVW; 32 genuit sibi OPT, transposed by other witnesses; 33 genuit Filium OPT, transposed by other witnesses.]

^{8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15}

7. He presents the heretic’s opinion in order to destroy it. “But perhaps you will say: the Father is greater than the Son precisely because, though begotten by no one, he nevertheless begot an equal. I shall answer quickly: rather, the Father is not greater than the Son because he begot an equal. The question of origin asks who is from whom; the question of equality asks what sort or size each is.” That is, the question of origin concerns who is from whom, while the question of equality concerns what sort or how great each is. When it is said that the Son was begotten by the Father, this shows “not an inequality of substance, but an order of nature—not that one was prior to the other, but that one is from the other.” Therefore equality or inequality does not arise from the fact that the Father begets, the Son is begotten, or the Holy Spirit proceeds from both; according to this, one person is not said to be equal or unequal to another.

8. “The equality of the Trinity and its one identical substance has been demonstrated above as briefly as we could,” namely, that none of the three persons surpasses any other in eternity, greatness, or power.