St. Augustine, Of the citie of God vvith the learned comments of Io. Lod. Viues. Englished by I.H.

Of the Platonists principle in their purgation of the soule. CHAP. 23.

POrphyry saith that the Oracles sayd that neyther the Sunnes nor Moones Te∣letae could purge vs, and consequently, the Teletae of no goddes can. For if the Sunnes and Moones (the cheefe gods) cannot, whose is more powerfull? But the Oracles answered (quoth hee) that the beginnings may: least one should thinke that vppon the denyall of this power to the Sunne and Moone, some other God of the multitude might doe it. But what beginnings hee hath as a Platonist, wee * 1.1 know. For hee speakes (a) of God the father, the Son called in greeke the Fathers intellect: but of the spirit, not a word: at least not a playne one: though what he meaneth, by a meane betweene the two, I cannot tell: for if he follow (c) Plotin•…•… in his discourse of the three priuie essences, and would haue this third, the soules nature: hee should not haue put it as the meane betweene the father and the son. For Plotine puts it after the fathers intellect, but Porphyry in calling it the meane, interposeth it betweene them. And this hee sayth as well as hee could, or would: but we cal it neither the fathers spirit alone, nor the sonnes, but both. The Philo∣sophers speake freely, neuer fearing to offend religious eares in those incompre∣hensible misteries: but wee must lay our wordes to a (d) line, that wee produce no impious error, by our freedome of speech concerning these matters. Wher∣fore * 1.2 when we speake of God, we neither talke of two principles, nor three as •…•…e may not say there were two goddes or three, though when wee speake of the fa∣ther, the sonne or the holy ghost, we say that each of these is God. Nor say we with the Sabellian heretikes, that he that is the father is the sonne, and hee that is the holy ghost is the father and the sonne, but the father is the sons father, and the * 1.3 sonne the fathers sonne, and the holy spirit both the fathers and the sonne•…•…, but neyther father nor sonne. True then it is that man is purged by none but the •…•…∣ginning, but this beginning is by them too variably taken.

L. VIVES.

OF (a) God the] It is a question that hath troubled many, Whether the Phylosopher * 1.4 had any notion of the▪ Trinity? First, we our selues, to whome the mistery of redemp•…•…∣on is reuealed, haue but a small glance (God knowes) of that radiant light. But what the Phy∣losophers of old wrote hereof is easily apparant that they spoke it▪ rather then knew what they spoke, it is so obscure. These secrets belonged not to their discouery. It sufficed them to at∣taine the vnity of God: And if (by Gods inspiration) they spoke oughtt concerning the Trini∣ty, it was rather to serue as a testimony of the future truth against their maisters op•…•…ns▪ then to expres any vnderstanding they had therof them-selues. Aristotle writes (de 〈◊〉〈◊〉 et mund•…•… l. 2) y^• the Pythagorists placed perfection in three, the beginning, midst, and end: and this nu•…•… b•…•… they vsed in religion. Thence some hold that Theocritus his witch said,

To three I offer, three I holy call: But Virgill more plaine: Terna tibi haec primum triplici diuersa colore Lycia circundo, ter{que} haec altaria circum Effigiem duco•…•…numero deus impare gaudet

First wrap I these three thornes (to frame my spel) Three times about the shape: the altars then We compasse thrice: God loues od numbers well.

And Zeno calleth Logos, fate, necessity, God, and Ioues soule. But Plato seemes farre more plain: for (Socrates in his de Re p l. 6.) hauing disputed sufficiently of the nature of good, and affirmed that he held it too great a theame for any mans discourse to containe, saith thus: But O you happy men, let vs leaue to say what is good vntill another time: For I hold it vtterly incom∣prehensible of mans minde. But my desire at this time is to expresse what the son of this good is, which is most like to good it selfe: If you wil I wil proceed, if not let it alone. Then Glaucus replied that hee should go on with the son and leaue the father till another time. So he proceeds to discourse of the birth, and sonne of good, and after some questions, saith: that good, is as the sun, and the son is as the light we haue from the sun. And in his Epistle to Hermias he speaketh of such as were sworne to fit studies, and (the Muses sister) lerning by God, the guide & father of al things past, and to come. And in his Epinomis hee saith that by that most diuine Word, was the world and al therin created. This word, did so rauish the wise man with diuine loue, that he conceiued the meanes of beatitude. For many say that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, is meant of the Word, not of the world, and so wee haue vsed it in the eighth book, speaking of Plato's opinion of beatitude. So that Plato menti∣ons the father and the son expresly, mary the third he thought was indeclareable. Though hee hold that in the degrees of Diuinity, the soule of the world, the third proceedeth from the be∣ginning, and the begininnings sonne, Mens▪ which soule (if one would stand for Plato) might easily be defended to be that spirit that mooued upon the waters, which they seeme to diffuse through the whole masse, and to impart life and being to euery particular. And this is the Trine in diuinity of which he writeth to Dionysius aenigmatically, as him-selfe saith. Al thinges are about the King of al, and by him haue existence: the seconds about the second, and y^• thirds about the third. I omit to write what Trismegistus saith, & Iamblichus from him: we are all for the Platonist: but I cannot omitte Serapis his answer to Thules (the King of Egipt in the Troian wars) who inquyring of him who was most blessed, had this answer.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. &c.

First God and then the sonne, and next the spirit, All coëternall, one in act, and merit. * 1.5

(b) The son] Porphyry (explaning Plato's opinion, as Cyril saith against Iultan) puts three essences in the Deity: 1 God almighty. 2. the Creator. 3. the soule of the world: nor is the deity extended any further. Plato & he both, cal the Creator 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the fathers intellect, w^t the Poets (though obscurely) touch at, calling Minerua 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, borne without a mother, the wisedom brought forth out of the fathers brain▪ (c) Plotine] he w•…•…ote a book of the three persons or substances: y^•. first hee maketh absolute, and father to the second, that is also eternall and perfect. * 1.6 Hee calleth the father Mens also in another place, as Plato doth: but the word arose from him: For hee sayth (De prou•…•…d. lib. 2.) in the begining all this whole vniuerse was created by the Mens (the father) and his Worde. (d) Alme] religion tyeth vs to haue a care

how wee speake herein. (e) Sabellians] They said that the person of the father, and •…•…f the Son * 1.7 was all one, because the scripture saith: I and the Father am one

Notes

• * 1.1

  Porphyry his opinion of the Tri∣nity.
• * 1.2

  Heed must bee had of discourse of the Trinity.
• * 1.3

  The Sabel∣lian Here∣tikes.
• * 1.4

  Whether the Phylo∣sophers kne•…•… the •…•…inity.
• * 1.5

  Serapis his answere.
• * 1.6

  Plotine.
• * 1.7

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. 〈◊〉〈◊〉▪ 24.