Theologicae regulae

This name, principle, sometimes predicates paternity, sometimes spiration, sometimes the relation of Creator to creatures.

As when it is said: The Father is the principle of the Son, here he predicates paternity, namely the relation of the Father to the Son. When it is said, the Father is the principle of the Holy Spirit, here spiration is predicated, which is common to the Father and the Son, according to which the Father and the Son breathe forth the Holy Spirit. Whence this name, principle, seems to be said equivocally, when the Father is called the principle of the Son, and the principle of the Holy Spirit: for here paternity, there indeed spiration is predicated. Whence it does not seem that it can truly be said in a single utterance: The Father is the principle of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit: but, The Father is the principle of the Son. The Father is the principle of the Holy Spirit, according to that signification by which, in this name, Father, spiration is predicated. According to this it can also be affirmed that the Father is the principle of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit: yet it can be said that nothing but origin, which pertains in a certain way to paternity and spiration, is predicated by this term, principle, so that the sense is: The Father is the principle of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, that is, origin. And according to this there will be no equivocation in this name, principle, when the Father is said to be the principle of the Son and of the Holy Spirit: and according to this the Father is the principle both of the Son and of the Holy Spirit; but he is not the principle of both the Son and the Holy Spirit in the same way: just as, granted that Socrates will be white at two moments, it must be granted that Socrates, at either of the two moments, will be white by some whiteness, but not that by some one whiteness he will be white at both of the two moments. Similarly the Father and the Son are called one principle of the Holy Spirit, because by one spiration they breathe forth the Holy Spirit. But when it is said: The Father, and the Son are one principle of the Holy Spirit, each of these terms, "one principle," is held adjectivally, as far as signification goes; although this name, principle, is held substantively as far as the word goes: for this name, "one," denotes the unity of the spiration; "principle," however, denotes the spiration, and yet it cannot truly be said: they are one spirator; for "one" pertains to the person; but the Father and the Son are not one spirating person. Nor can they be said to be one spirating thing; for "one" pertains to the essence; but the Father and the Son are not one spirating essence; for essence does not breathe forth. But they can be said to be two spirating ones, so that "two" is placed substantively, and "spirating" adjectivally, that is, two who breathe forth: yet not two spirators. For "spirators" would be placed substantively, and thus a plurality of spirations would be denoted. Hilary, however, says that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son as authors; but "authors" is put in place of "spirating ones," a substantive, namely, for an adjective, for figurative expressions are to be tolerated, not extended. But although it be granted that the Father and the Son are one principle, it is not, however, to be granted that they are the same principle. For "same" implies an intrinsic relation, and thus, since the Father would be one principle of the Holy Spirit, the Son would be the same principle, and thus there would seem to be identity not only of spiration, but also of person, in the Father and the Son. Moreover it is not to be granted that the Father and the Son are some principle of the Holy Spirit; for "some" is partitive, just as it is not admitted, The Father and the Son are some God. To a term improperly placed, relation is not admitted, as when it is said, it is the same, or, it is not, or, that is, or, some is. Whence some do not admit it, on the side of the subject, that it be said: The principle of the Holy Spirit is the Father, and the Son: for a term thus improperly taken cannot be taken on the side of the subject, although it may improperly be placed on the side of the predicate. Others say: it cannot be taken on the side of the subject for this reason, because it is held adjectivally; but an adjective held adjectivally cannot supposit. But this seems no reason at all. For although it is an adjective in signification, it is nevertheless a substantive in word: just as this name, Lord, this name, author. Others admit: The principle of the Holy Spirit is the Father and the Son, saying that discourse is there made concerning the spiration, which is the Father and the Son. But if this is so, spiration is the principle of the Holy Spirit; and thus it breathes forth the Holy Spirit. But in no way ought this to be admitted: The principle of the Holy Spirit is the Father, and the Son, or, both the Father and the Son, since either supposition would there be made for the essence, and thus the expression would be false, or for several persons, and thus this name, principle, would be held collectively: but there is no reason why this name should be taken for several persons. Whence we grant: One principle of the Holy Spirit is the Father: one principle of the Holy Spirit is the Son: but not "the same," lest identity of person be understood: nor "another," lest a plurality of spiration be denoted. Whence it must be granted: The principle of the Holy Spirit is the Father, and the same is not the Son. The principle of the Holy Spirit is the Father, and is not the Son. Not, however: The principle of the Holy Spirit is not the Son. For it would seem that not only the person, but also the spiration, is removed from the Son. Therefore, since the Holy Spirit is breathed forth by one spiration from the Father and the Son, it can be maintained, what is said in the hymn: "One with the Father, together with the Son," that is, proceeding by one spiration from the Father and the Son, so that "one" denotes the unity of spiration. If, however, "of the Father" were found there, the expression would be clear; so that the sense would be: one Spirit of the Father and of the Son. There are, however, those who correct it, saying: "One with the Father," that is, of one essence with the Father, and the Son. Relations of Creator to creatures, however, "principle" predicates, when it is said: God is the Father of creatures.