en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en id en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en sv fr en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en la en en en en en en en en en nl en de da en en en en es en nl en en en it en la en en en en en de en en en en en en en en en en de en en en es en it en en it en en en en es en en en en ceb es en de en en fr en en en de es en en en en en en en en de en la en en en en en en en en de de en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en fr la en fr la la la en en en la la la la en en en en en en en en fr en en en en en en en en pt en la en en en en en en en en war en la en en en en en en fr en en en en en en es la es en it en uk la es es es en en en la en la la la de de de it la en en es en it la en en en la de la en en en en la en la en en la la fr en en en la la en es la es la en en en en en en en en en en la es es la la la la la en la en en en it la en en en en en en en en es en fr la en en en en en en en en en en en en de en en it en la la la la la fr en ceb fr en en de de en la la la la en es en en en en en en en it fi en en en en en en en la es es la la en en en es en en en en en fr la it la it en es en es en es la it la en en en en la en la la la la la fr en en en en en en en it en fr en en en en en ca en de en en en en eo en en en it es en en la en en en en en en en en en it en la en es es la en en en la en en de en en en de en en pl la en en en en en en en en en en en en en fr en es la en en en en en en en en en en en en la en en en en en la en en en en en en en la la en en en en en en en en en en en en es es en en en es de de la la de de tr en en la la en en en en en fr en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en nl de en ceb en en en en en en de en de en de en en en en en en en la en fr de es es fr en en la la en en en en en en it fr en en fr de en it pt sv en fr en en en en en en en en la la en en en en en en la la en en en en en en en la de en en la de en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en es en en de en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en it en la fr la la en en en en en en en de en en en en en en en en en vi fr la la la fr la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la fr la fr la la la la la en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en ceb en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en vi en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en es la en en en en en en en en en en en en en en hbs_lat en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en fr en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en la la ba en en en en en la en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en nl en en fr en en en en en el en en el en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en fr sv en en en fr de en la en en en fr en it la en en en en en en ru de en en en en en en en en en es en en en la en fr en en en sv en vi en it en la ceb es en en en en en en en en en ja es ro en en en en en en en en it en es la en en en en en en en en en en en en en it en en en ro en en en en en en en en en en en en en en it en de en en es de de la la en en en en en en de la fr en en it la la en la en en en en en en en en de la es la en la en en en sv en en ro en en it en de en en en ru en en en en en en sv fr en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en pt en ru
medieval Latin scholars accept and discuss the heavenly witnesses | Pure Bible Forum (and see www.sinaiticus.net )
Everywhere Threads This forum This thread
Medieval and Ante-Reformation church writers
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
medieval Latin scholars accept and discuss the heavenly witnesses
Start date Apr 26, 2019
An earlier list now integrated - more needed.
Can these be documented well with additional footnote texts?
Latin commentaries In this period, the greater portion of Bible commentary was written in Latin. The references in this era are extensive and wide-ranging. Some of the better-known writers who utilized the Comma as scripture, in addition to Peter Lombard and Joachim of Fiore, include Gerbert of Aurillac (Pope Sylvester), Peter Abelard, Bernard of Clairvaux, Duns Scotus, Roger of Wendover (historian, including the Lateran Council), Thomas Aquinas (many verse uses, including one which has Origen relating to "the three that give witness in heaven"), William of Ockham (of razor fame), Nicholas of Lyra and the commentary of the Glossa Ordinaria.
Burgess short list after 1000AD
Post annum 1000 Radulphus Ardens, Rupertus Tuitiensis, Bemardus, Hugo Victorious, Lombardus, Aquinas, Scotus,
In a commentary upon the Scriptures, by Nicholas De Lyra, this verse is found, accompanied by the learned author’s annotations without expressing any suspicion of its authenticity. In the thirteenth century, the commentary of St. Thomas appeared on this epistle, in which this verse is expounded without any insinuation of interpolation. In the same century, this text is found in the Rationale of divine offices, composed by the Bishops of Mende.(This may be under William Durand.) In the twelfth century, Lombard, Bishop of Paris, expressly cites this verse, in the first book of his Sentences. It is quoted in the same century, by an eminent divine, in a treatise on the glorification of the Trinity. St Bernard, in the eleventh century, insists on the verse, in several of his discourses. In, or about this age, Radulphus, Ardens, Hugo Victorinus, with other authors, whose works have survived to the present time, referred to the text in question. The Glossa Ordinaria, was composed by a learned writer in the ninth century. In it, this verse is found, and commented upon with admirable force and perspicuity. (continues)
Some may have utilized the Bengel list:
And these lists of individuals are generally not doing much with special refs that are in:
Autpert (not Ansbert) on Revelation
Thomas Aquinas (and how it relates to Joachim Fiore) and the:
Alexander Neckam -, 99 "welter" of interpretations
plan to go through all the pre-Reformation entries
Green are generally Greek writers, where most do not have the verse, however a couple have special possibilities.
e.g. - Maurop, Oecumenius, Zigabenus
Bryennius and Calecas are Greek with Latin connections
List of fully confirmed from below, added to Grantley refs:
Florus of Lyon (Lugdunensis) (d. c. 860) - quotes Cyprian Unity of the Church
Aenae of Paris (d. 879)
Altmann, Bishop of Passau (1015-1091)
Bruno Astensis - (1047-1123) Bishop of Segni
Hildebert of Lavardin (or Hildebert of Tours) (c. 1055 – 1133) Cenomanensis
Robertus Pullus (1080-1150 AD) Robert Pullen
Gerhoh of Reichersberg (1093-1169 AD)
Petrus Comestor (d 1178 AD)
Roland of Sienna - (pope) Alexander III (c.1103–1181)
Aelred of Rievaulx - (1110–1167)
Bandinus Magister (auctor fl.1150) (1218)
Martinus Legionensis (1130-1203 AD) Martin of Leon
Gualterus de Castellione (1135-1202 AD)
Adamus Scotus (1140-1212 AD) Adam of Dryburgh
Praepositinus - (1150-1210) - (Gilbert Prevostin of Cremona, Prevostinus Cremonensis )
Sicardus Cremonensis (1155-1215 AD) Sicard of Cremona
Hugh of Flavigny (b. 1064)
Anselm of Havelberg (ca. 1100-1158) - allusion
Thomas Cisterciensis Ioannes Algrinus (1190-1237 AD) ? Thomas_of_Perseigne
Alanus de Insulis (c. 1128-1203) - Alain de Lille
Peter of Blois - (c. 1135 – c. 1211) Petrus Blesensis
William of Auxerre (1160-1229) or 1231 (strong allusion, Grantley biblography p. 396)
Hugh of Saint-Cher - (1200-1263) St. Caro - Hugo Charensis
Meister Eckhart (1260-1327) Eckhart von Hochheim
Haitho, Synod of Sis, Synod of Adana and Gregory Sisensis
John Wycliffe - (c.1320 -1384) English Bible with Latin background
Langland, William - (1332-1386) (check text)
Heymeric de Campo - (1395-1460)
Paschasius (c. 790-860) - "correct text"
Amulo Lugdunensis (also known as: Amalo, Amulon, Amolo, Amularius) served as Archbishop of Lyons from 841 to 852 AD.[1] As a Gallic prelate, Amulo is best known for his letters concerning two major themes: Christian-Jewish relations in the Frankish kingdom and the Carolingian controversy over predestination. He was ordained as archbishop in January 841.[2]
Aenae of Paris (d. 879)
Sed et Spiritus sanctus in Patre et Filio et in se consistens, sicut Ioannes evangelista in Epistola sua tam absolute testatur: Et tres unum sunt.
The Papacy and the Orthodox: Sources and History of a Debate
Has Synopsis of Scripture (Porson, noted by Henry Armfield)
Euthymius Zigabenus - (d 1118) - Greek
Article for which Mike Ferrando may have update
This will require its own page.
Burgess, Ben David, London Quarterly Review and others were involved, note especially that Charles Forster gives a number of references, especially this one to start (is the ms. disputed in the discussions of Ekaterini G. Tsalampouni)?
A New Plea for the Authenticity of the Text of the Three Heavenly Witness; Or, Porson's Letters to Travis Eclectically Examined and the External and Internal Evidences for 1 John V, 7 Eclectically Re-surveyed (1867)
In his ninth Letter (8vo ed. p. 220, London 1790), speaking of the non-use of (Grk) in the neuter as applying to persons, he has the following passage: ‘ I pass to your next Greek witness (next in order of time), Euthymius Zigabenus, who, in his “ Panoplia Dogmatica Orthodoxae Fidei,” thus refers to the verse of St. John : “The term one denotes things, the essence and nature of which are the same, and yet the persons are different, as in this instance, And Three are One.” (continues)
Gerbert of Aurillac (c. 946 – 12 May 1003), - Pope Sylvester II
"these three are one, indivisible" (not a real ref)
This all needs checking to give reasonable placement.
Symeon the New Theologian (942 or 949-1022)
has allusion sections like this:
Altmann, Bishop of Passau (1015-1091)
34. Incertus 148, Vita et res gesta S. Altmanni, 148, 0870A
Proinde crede sanctum, praedica probatum, qui iam non se, sed quem Deus commendat (II Cor. X); qui iam non de se ipso testimonium dicit (Ioan. VIII) , sed cui dant testimonium tres, qui sunt in coelo, Pater, et Filius, et Spiritus sanctus (I Ioan. V)
Monk of Göttweig (1150 AD)
Vita et res gesta S. Altmanni. PL 148, col 0870A
IN VITAM S. ALTMANNI EPISCOPI.
Proinde credo sanct probatum, qui jam non se, sed quem mondât (1Cor. x); qui jam non de se ipso testimonium dicit (Joan, vii), sed cui dant testimonium tres,
Robertus Pullus (1080-1150 AD) Robert Pullen
Sententiae. PL 186, col 0676C
- ROBERTI PULLI SENTENTIARUM LIBER PRIMUS.
- CAPUT III. Tres personae sunt.
Sed si unus est Deus testante Moyse, Audi, Israel, Dominus Deus tuus unus est (Deut. VI, 34) ; quomodo est tres, iuxta illud: Tres sunt qui testimonium dant in coelo Pater, et Filius, et Spiritus sanctus, et hi tres unum sunt (Ioan. I, 5, 7) . Ergo unum id est. Deus, est hi tres.
Radulphus Arden(s) Raoul Ardent - High Sheriff of Herefordshire
likely not - Radulphus Brito (c. 1270 – 1320)
Knittel - mostly p. 40-54
Theophylact of Ohrid - (1055-1107) Greek
Nicephorus Bryennius, (c.1064-1137) (Byzantine statesman and historian)
Bruno (bishop of Würzburg) (1005-1045) (no spot identified yet)
[22] Ad hoc. Spiritus Sanctus cum sit a Patre si proptcrca est a Filio. quia Pater ct Filius unum sunt, et Filius cum sit a Patre est a Spiritu Sancto, quia Pater ct Spiritus unum sunt. Nam Pater et Spiritus Sanctus unum sunt, sicut Pater et Filius unum sunt, quia ct Pater et Filius et Spiritus Sanctus unum sunt, sicut Iohanncs in Epistola scribit: ‘Et hi tres unum sunt. Pater, Verbum ct Spiritus Sanctus.'
Hildebrand of Sovana (pope) Gregory VII (1015-1085)
Bishop of Sutri Bonizo, (1073-1085) :
(may not have a referrence, it was on same page as the next one)
Hugh of Flavigny (b. 1064)
Hugonis abbatis Flaviniacensis, Ekkehardi Uraugiensis Chronica
mansuetissima serenitas, primum quidem fidem nostram, quam a prelato exortatore nostro Silvestro universali papa et pontifice edocti sumus, intima cordis confessione ad instruendas omnium mentes proferentes, et ita demum misericordia Dei super nos diffusam annunciantes. (0046A) Nosse enim vos volumus, sicut per anteriorem nostram sacram pragmaticam iussionem significavimus, nos a culturis idolorum, simulacris mutis et manufactis, diabolicis compositionibus atque ab omnibus Satanae pompis recessisse, et ad integram christianorum fidem, quae est lux vera et vita perpetua, pervenisse, credentes iuxta id quod nos idem almificus summus pater et doctor noster Silvester instruxit, credere in Deum patrem omnipotentem, factorem celi et terrae, visibilium omnium et invisibilium, et in Iesum Christum filium eius unicum, Dominum nostrum, creata sunt omnia, et in Spiritum sanctum dominum et vivificatorem universae creaturae. Nos Patrem et Filium et Spiritum sanctum confitemur, ita ut in Trinitate perfecta sit plenitudo divinitatis et unitas potestatis. Pater Deus, Filius Deus, Spiritus sanctus Deus; et tres unum sunt. Tres itaque personae, sed una potestas; nam semper Deus se edidit ex se quod semper erat gignenda ad secula verbum. Et quando eodem solo suae sapientiae verbo universam formavit creaturam, cum eo erat cuncta suo archano componens ministerio. (0046B)
Hildebert of Lavardin (or Hildebert of Tours) (c. 1055 – 1133) Cenomanensis
Peter of Abelard - (1079 –1142) 92 (other refs)
Tractatus de unitate et trinitate divina
he has Augustine and Boetius (Boethius) confirming the words, Boethius is circa 500 AD and needs more study
Anselm of Havelberg (ca. 1100-1158)
dialog with Nicetas of Nicomedia
Anselmus Havelbergensis, Dialogi, 188, 1172C (auctor 1126-1154)
« Verumtamen in illa summa Trinitate non hoc est ibi generare quod esse, nec hoc est ibi gigni quod esse, nec hoc est ibi procedere quod esse; quoniam non eo quo est, eo Pater est; nec eo quo est, eo Filius est; nec eo quo est, eo Spiritus sanctus est; sed eo quo est, substantia est quae ibi una est: et eo quo ille tanquam Pater generat, et eo quo iste tanquam Filius gignitur, et eo quo hic tanquam Spiritus sanctus missus procedit; eo non iam una, sed tres ibi personae sunt: et ita substantia, seu potius essentia qua sunt tres, unum sunt; et personalitate qua distinguuntur tres, tres sunt.
Alanus de Insulis c. 1128-1203 - Alain de Lille
Et Paulus in Epistola ad Hebraeos, ait de Christo: Qui cum sit splendor gloriae, et figura substantiae eius (Hebr. I) . Item Ioannes in Epistola canonica: Tres sunt qui testimonium dant in coelo, Pater, Verbum, et Spiritus Sanctus, et hi tres unum sunt. Et tres sunt qui testimonium dant in terra, spiritus, aqua, et sanguis (Ioan. V) . Hic insinuat Ioannes Christum verum fuisse hominem, et verum Deum et verum Dei Filium.
Alanus de Insulis (1128-1203 AD)
Contra haereticos. PL 210, col 0335A
Peter Lombard - (c 1100-1160) 87 Sententiae I.2.5.3.1, PL 192:528, 590.
"as John Says in the canonical Epistle: There are three who give witness in heaven"
Ioannes quoque in Epistola canonica: "Tres sunt, qui testimonium perhibent in caelo: Pater, Verbum, Spiritus sanctus, et hi tres unum sunt.
Petrus Lombardus (1096-1164 AD)
Sententiae. PL 192, col 0528
Ioannes quoque in Epistola 1 canonica ait: Tres sunt qui testimonium perhibent in coelo, Pater, Verbum et Spiritus sanctus; et hi tres unum sunt.
Gerhoh of Reichersberg (1093-1169 AD)
Gerhohus Reicherspergensis (1093-1169 AD)
Epistolae Gerhohi. PL 193, col 0580C
Nam tres sunt, ait Ioannes, qui testimonium dant in coelo, Pater, Verbum, et Spiritus sanctus (I Ioan. V) . Primo quaeritur, cur non dixerit Pater et Filius, sed Pater, ait, Verbum, et Spiritus sanctus.
Petrus Comestor (d 1178 AD)
Sermones. PL 198, col 1779A
(PL 198 1778C) SERMO XXIV. IN FESTO S. IACOBI APOSTOLI, SANCTI CHRISTOPHORI MARTYRIS, ET GERMANI CONFESSORIS. Ad regulares.
Primum aperit Ioannes in Epistola catholica dicens: Tres sunt, qui testimonium perhibent in coelo: Pater, et Filius, et Spiritus sanctus (Ioan. V) . De ultimo quoque subiunxit: Et tres sunt, qui testimonium perhibent in terra: spiritus, aqua et sanguis (Ibid.) . Medius ordo sunt apostoli, martyres et confessores.
Hildegard of Bingen (1098-1179),88
Scivias Hildegardis sive libri visionum ac revelationum. PL 197, col 0647C
88 Hildegard von Bingen, Scivias III.7.8, CCCM 43:470.
Et tres sunt qui dant testimonium in coelo: Pater, Verbum et Spiritus, et tres unum sunt (I Ioan. V) . Hoc tale est: Spiritus hominis spiritualis est videlicet non procedens de sanguine nec nascens de carne, sed currens de arcano Dei, existens illi invisibilis quod mutabilitati subiectum est.
Roland of Sienna - (pope) Alexander III
Instructio fidei Catholicae, 207, 1072A (auctor c.1103–1181)
Praenominatus Ioannes in Epistola sua canonica dicit:
Tres sunt, qui testimonium dant in coelo: Pater, Verbum, et Spiritus sanctus, et hi tres unum sunt
Alexander III (1103-1181 AD)
Instructio fidei Catholicae. PL 207, col 1072A
Praenominatus Ioannes in Epistola sua canonica dicit: Tres sunt, qui testimonium dant in coelo: Pater, Verbum, et Spiritus sanctus, et hi tres unum sunt .
Rupertus Tuitiensis - Deutz (c. 1075 - c. 1129) , 85
85 Rupertus Tuitiensis, De gloria et honore filii hominis super Matthaeum III, PL 169:731; De sancta trinitate et operibus eius XXXVI (De operibus Spiritus Sancti III), CCCM 24:1907, 1910, 1924:
"Igitur sicut tres sunt qui testimonium dant in terra, ut in communionem Ecclesiæ suscipiamur, sic tres sunt qui testimonium dant in caelo, ut in regnum cœlorum introeamus. Tres isti testes sunt pater et uerbum et spiritus sanctus."
Bernardus Claraevallensis (1090-1153 AD)
In octava Paschae. PL 183, col 0296B
Meditationes de humana conditione. PL 184, col 0500B
Sententiae. PL 183, col 0747D
Gilbert of Poitiers - (1076-1154)
Peter of Poitiers (c. 1130-c.1215)
Aelred of Rievaulx - (1110–1167)
Martinus Legionensis (1130-1203 AD) Martin of Leon
https://books.google.com/books?id=6dMPAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA114 (maybe, have to check)
Expositio in epistolam I Ioannis. PL 209, col 0286B
Sermones. PL 208, col 1274A
Sermones. PL 208, col 1323D
» Et Ioannes evangelista ait: « In principio erat Verbum, et Verbum erat apud Deum, et Deus erat Verbum (Ioan. I, 1); » et iterum ipse ad Parthos: « Tres sunt, inquit, qui testimonium perhibent in terra: aqua, sanguis et caro, tres in nobis sunt; et tres sunt qui testimonium perhibent in coelo: Pater, Verbum, et Spiritus, et hi tres unum sunt.
Martinus Legionensis, Expositio in epistolam I B. Ioannis, 209, 0286B
Iterum subiungit dicens: Quia tres sunt qui testimonium dant in coelo: Pater, Verbum, et Spiritus sanctus.
Martinus Legionensis, Sermones, 208, 1274A
Beatus quoque Ioannes in Epistola canonica ait: Tres sunt, qui testimonium dant in coelo: Pater, Verbum et Spiritus sanctus; et hi tres unum sunt (I Ioan. V) . Ipse etiam in initio sui Evangelii ait: In principio erat Verbum, et Verbum erat apud Deum, et Deus erat Verbum (Ioan. I) . Ubi aperte ostendit Filium semper et aeternaliter fuisse apud Patrem, ut alium apud alium.
Martinus Legionensis, Sermones, 208, 1323D
Multa sunt autem haec testimonia: Quoniam tres sunt qui testimonium dant in coelo: Pater scilicet, et Filius et Spiritus sanctus: et hi tres unum sunt.
Adamus Scotus (1140-1212 AD) Adam of Dryburgh
De tripartito tabernaculo. PL 198, col 0762D
Quia et potentia Patri, et sapientia Filio, et benignitas assignatur Spiritui sancto, quae tamen tria unum sunt in Deo substantialiter, quamvis personaliter distincta sint: haec itaque tria, virga, tabulae, et manna in Sancta sanctorum, quae coelum designant, erant; quia tres sunt qui testimonium dant in coelo: Pater, et Verbum, et Spiritus sanctus (I Ioan. V, 7) . Quae tria illi tres gradus
Alexander of Ashby (c. 1150-c. 1208),93 .
93 Alexander of Ashby, Meditatio IX, CCCM 188:442.
Alexander Neckam (1157-1217) - 99
The welter of interpretations given to the comma was first collected and analysed by Alexander Neckam (or Nequam, 1157-1217) in his Speculum seculationum. 99
99 Neckam, 1988, 73-84.
Petrus Cellensis (1115-1183),89 Tractatus de tabernaculo I.7, PL 202:1079.
Mystica et moralis expositio Mosaici tabernaculi. PL 202, col 1072B
Apostolus testificationem Dei in arca sua posuerat, qui dicebat: Ipse Spiritus Dei testimonium reddit spiritui nostro, quod sumus filii Dei (Rom. VIII, 16) , id est arca Dei. Testificatio Dei est in coelo, id est in arca, quoniam tres sunt qui testimonium dant in coelo, Pater, Verbum, Spiritus sanctus (I Ioan. V, 7) ; et non sunt testificationes, sed testificatio, quia hi tres unum sunt (ibid.) . Si Pater in mente tua, Verbum in intelligentia tua, Spiritus sanctus est in dilectione vel voluntate tua, testificatio Dei est in arca tua, nihilominus Spiritus, aqua et sanguis, una testificatio Dei est, quando conservas impollute sacramentum regenerationis.
Joachim of Fiore - (1135-1202) p. 60-65 Lateran Council, more refs e.g. Erasmus
Henry of Marcy (1136-1189) Henricus de Castro Marsiaco,
(may only use earthly witnesses?)
Praepositinus - (1150-1210) - (Gilbert Prevostin of Cremona, Prevostinus Cremonensis )
William of Auxerre (1160-1229) or 1231
7. In his letter can encourage us in faith: "Everything is born of God overcomes the world, and this is the victory that overcomes the world is our" et cetera. He showed faith in testimony in heaven and on earth, and conscience. At the time when he says, "there are three that bear witness in earth, wind, water and blood." A great place, the Lord with a loud cry, yielded up the spirit, and the fact that he is already dead, that go out of the blood and water came from it him that it was a sign of the Godhead. "And these three are one", for one thing. Three in heaven in the voice of the Father, the Word in the flesh and the spirit of the dove, "and these three are one." There is no doubt about it. The testimony of conscience follows: "Whoever believes in the Son of God, son of God already has in itself", and that her conscience dictates, that "The words in your mouth;
Sicardus Cremonensis (1155-1215 AD) Sicard of Cremona
Mitrale sive Summa de officiis ecclesiasticis. PL 213, col 0050A
Mitrale sive Summa de officiis ecclesiasticis. PL 213, col 0281A
Sicardus Cremonensis, Mitrale sive Summa de officiis ecclesiasticis, 213, 0050A
Nam David, in numero praecedentium, ait: « Verbo Domini coeli firmati sunt, et Spiritu oris eius omnis Virtus eorum; » Ioannes secutus, adiunxit: « Tres sunt qui testimonium dant in coelo: Pater, Verbum et Spiritus sanctus, » vel tam ante incarnationem quam postea, tres fuerunt in Ecclesia gradus: Noe, Daniel, et Iob, id est rectores, virgines vel continentes, et coniugati: hi sunt qui, secundum Evangelium, sunt in agro, in lecto, in mola.
Sicardus Cremonensis, Mitrale sive Summa de officiis ecclesiasticis, 213, 0281A
» et alibi: « Seraphim clamabant: sanctus, sanctus, sanctus, » et Dominus: « Baptizate omnes gentes, in nomine Patris et Filii, et Spiritus sancti; » et Ioannes evangelista: « Tres sunt qui testimonium dant in coelo: Pater, Verbum et Spiritus.
70 Smaragdus S Michaelis, Collectiones in epistolas et evang
Moneta Cremonensis - c.1240
Moneta de Crémone - Venerabilis patris Monetae... Adversus Catharos et Valdenses libri quinque, quos ex manuscriptis codd... (1743)
(269) §III. Testimonia, quod tres Personae sunt unus Deus.
Viso, & ostenso quod tres Personae, scilicet Pater, & Filius, & Spiritus Sanctus sunt consubstantiales, & coaeternae, & coaequales, satis patet, quod tres Personae sunt unus Deus essentialiter. Ut autem hoc magis eluceat, aliqua alia testimonia ad istud inducamus.
Et primo illud, quod dixit Dominus discipulis suis Matth. ultimo v. 19. Euntes docete omnes gentes, baptizantes eos in nomine Patris, & Filii, & Spiritus Sancti. Non dixit: in nominibus, ut ostenderet, quod non est pluralitas substantiarum in tribus Personis, sed unitas. Et Isa. 6.v. 3. Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus, Dominus Deus exercituum. Ter dixit: Sanctus, & subiunxit; Dominus Deus exercituum, ut Trinitatem Personarum innueret in unitate substantiae divinae. Et David Psal. 66.v. 8. Benedicat nos Deus, Deus noster, benedicat nos Deus. Ter dixit: Deus propter Trinitatem personarum; & subiunxit: Et metuant eum omnes fines terrae. Non dixit eos, ut similiter eorum insinuet unitatem.
Praeterea 1.Io:5.v. 7. Tres sunt, qui testimonium dant in caelo: Pater, Verbum, & Spiritus Sanctus; & hi tres unum sunt. Ergo vel unum in substantia, vel unum in accidente. Sed non sunt unum in accidente, quia Deo nihil accidens esse potest: ut enim prius ostensum est: quidquid in Deo est, Deus est. Ergo sunt unum in substantia.
Dante Alighieri - (1265-1321)
The Divine Comedy, Volume 3
144. The schoolmen found the scriptural references to the Trinity chiefly in the O. T., in the plural form of the Hebrew word for “God," in the use of the plural in Gen. i. 26; in the threefold cry in Isaiah vi. 3, etc., etc. The chief passages from the N.T. are the formula of baptism in Matt, xxviii. 19; the text of the three “heavenly witnesses” in 1 John v. 7 (Vulgate and A.V.); and the three-fold formula in Romans xi. 36, after citing which, with some others, Petrus Lombardus adds: “but since almost every syllable of the New Testament agrees in suggesting this truth of the ineffable unity and Trinity, let us dispense with gathering testimonies on this matter.”
Dante may not have a direct reference, but only like this:
"And I believe in three Persons, eternal, and I believe they are One essence, and Threefold, in such a way as to allow are and is to be joined."
Philippus Cancellarius - (1165-1236)
Peter of Blois - (c. 1135 – c. 1211) Petrus Blesensis
Guillaume of Saint-Jacques de Liège, (twelfth century),91
Bandinus Magister [1100-1200] (1218 AD) (auctor fl.1150)
Bandinus, De sacrosancta Trinitate, 192, 0975B
Item alibi: Tres sunt qui testimonium perhibent in coelo, Pater, Verbum et Spiritus sanctus, et hi tres unum sunt (I Ioan.
De sacrosancta Trinitate, 192, 0975B (auctor fl.1150)
Aperte ostendens Filium aeternaliter esse apud Patrem, ut alium apud alium. Item alibi:
Tres sunt qui testimonium perhibent in coelo, Pater, Verbum et Spiritus sanctus, et hi tres unum sunt (I Ioan. V)
http://www.mlat.uzh.ch/MLS/xfromcc.php?tabelle=Bandinus_cps2&rumpfid=Bandinus_cps2, De sacrosancta Trinitate, 2&id=Bandinus_cps2, De sacrosancta Trinitate, 2, 71&level=99&level9798=&satz=71&hilite_id=Bandinus_cps2, De sacrosancta Trinitate, 2, 71&string=tres!unum!sunt&binary=&corpus=&target=&lang=0&home=&von=suchergebnis&hide_apparatus=1&inframe=1&jumpto=71#71
Baldwin of Canterbury (1120-1190 AD) 90
90 Balduinus de Forda (Balduinus Cantuariensis),
Tractatus de sacramento altaris, CCCM 99:413, 416. (so far, only earthly)
Vita haereticorum. PL 204, col 0790C
Bonacursus, Vita haereticorum, 204, 0790C
V: « Spiritus enim est qui testificatur [quia Spiritus est] quoniam Christus est veritas, quia tres sunt qui testimonium dant in coelo, Pater et Verbum et Spiritus sanctus, et hi tres unum sunt.
Gualterus de Castellione (1135-1202 AD)
Liber de Trinitate. PL 209, col 0578A
Liber de Trinitate. PL 209, col 0582D
Gualterus de Castellione, Liber de Trinitate, 209, 0578A
Et Ioannes in Epistola: Tres sunt, qui testimonium dant in coelo, Pater, Verbum et Spiritus, et hi tres unum sunt (Ioan. V).
Gualterus de Castellione, Liber de Trinitate, 209, 0582D
Quod autem pro nominali voce et verbali possint pluraliter designari, manifeste apparet ex supra positis verbis Ioannis apostoli dicentis: Tres sunt, qui testimonium dant in coelo, Pater, Verbum et Spiritus (I Ioan. V).
Bruno Astensis - (1047-1123) Bishop of Segni
Bruno Astensis, Commentaria in Ioannem, 165, 0580A
» Pater enim a nullo, Filius a Patre, Spiritus sanctus a Patre Filioque procedit. (0580A) Non igitur loquitur a semetipso, quia non est a semetipso. Loquitur tamen et a semetipso, quia « Spiritus ubi vult spirat (Ioan. III, 8) . » Sed non tantum a semetipso, quia unum sunt Pater et Filius cum ipso. Tres igitur in uno loquuntur, quia tres unum sunt
Bruno Astensis, Commentaria in Matthaeum, 165, 0172C
Similiter autem et de Spiritu sancto: una est enim virtus et divinitas trium, quia tres unum sunt.
Bruno Astensis, Sententiae, 165, 0988C
« Quoniam tres sunt, qui testimonium dant in terra, Spiritus, aqua et sanguis; et hi tres unum sunt.
Et tres sunt, qui testimonium dant in coelo: Pater, Verbum et Spiritus sanctus; et hi tres unum sunt (ibid., 7-8) . » Et coelum nobis testatur et terra quod Filius hominis venit in hunc mundum ut nos redimeret atque salvaret.
Bruno Astensis, Sententiae, 165, 0988D
Et de baptismo quidem scriptum est: « Qui crediderit, et baptizatus fuerit, salvus erit (Marc. XVI, 16) . » De sanguine vero: « Qui dilexit nos, et lavit nos a peccatis nostris in sanguine suo (Apoc. I, 5) . » Itemque: « Qui manducaverit meam carnem, et biberit meum sanguinem, habet vitam aeternam (Ioan. VI, 52) . » Et hi tres unum sunt.
Lotario Segni == Innocent III (1160 or 1161 – 16 July 1216)-
Fourth Lateran Council 1215 - Grantley p. 60-61
Nicolaus de Tornaco - (fl. 1226/39)
Robert Grosseteste - (1175-1253) - (no ref yet)
Thomas Cisterciensis Ioannes Algrinus (1190-1237 AD) ? Thomas_of_Perseigne
Commentaria in Cantica canticorum. PL 206, col 0638C
Thomas Cisterciensis Ioannes Algrinus, Commentaria in Cantica canticorum, 206, 0638C (auctor -1237)
De primo: « Qui adhaeret Deo, unus efficitur spiritus, » de secundo: « Sicut anima rationalis et caro unus est homo, ita Deus et homo unus est Christus; » De tertio: « Tres sunt qui testimonium dant in coelo: Pater et Filius, et Spiritus sanctus, et hi tres unum sunt.
Roger of Wendover up to 1235 (historian)
(maybe Matthew Paris adds something of interest)
Nicholas of Gorran - (1232 -1295)
Durandus of Saint-Pourçain - (c. 1275–1332/1334)
Petrus Aureolus - Pierre D'Auriol - (1280-1322)
John of Ruysbroeck - (1293-1381)
Nicholas Aymerich (Eymerich) - (1316-1399)
Hugh of Saint-Cher - (1200--1263) St. Caro - Hugo Charensis
8. In the same century flourifhed Hugo Charensis. He died in A. D. 1262, a Cardinal, and high in reputation. He has not only quoted, but commented upon, both the verses 1 John v: 7 and 8. But his commentary will not be easily abbreviated: and it is too long and diffuse to be stated here at large. A short extract from it shall, however, be subjoined. (continues)
Giovanni (di) Fidanza Bonaventure - (* 1221- 1274)
Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) ** (quotes Origen)
Albertus Magnus - (1206-1280)
Sed cum fides Catholica tres esse profileretur, sicut Joannes in epistola canonica ait : Tres sunt qui testimonium dant in coelo, quaerebatur quid illi tres essent, id est, an essent tres res, et quae tres res, et quo nomine illae tres res significarentur.
theser next are more the editors
Jacobus de Voragine - (c.1230–1298)
Giovanni (di) Fidanza Bonaventure (1217/1218-1274),94
Ilor ipsum testantnr et verba, inter quae, cum multa sint, illud unicnm est expressum, quod scripsil amicus sjwnsi primae loannis qninto8: Tres sunt, qui testimonium dant in caeto, Pater, Verbum et Spiritus sanctus, et hi tres unum sunt.
Et Sanctus Ioannes Apostolus & Euangelista in sua Epistola ait: Tres sunt,qui testimonium dant in caelo, Pater, Verbum & Spiritus samctis: & hi tres unum sunt. Et tres sunt qui testimonium dant in terra, spiritus, & aqua, & sanguis: & hi tres unum sunt. Hoc est sicuri in caelo Pater,Filius, & Spiritus sanctus dant testimonium, quod Iesus Cnrsftus verus sit Deus, sic etiam in terra, Spiritus quem Christus in cruce pendens emisit, & aqua & sanguis ab eius latere exeuntes, quando Longinus lancea latus eius aperuit, testimonium dant, quod Christus sit verus homo, Ex quibus verbis probatur Christum verum suisse Deum, et verum suisse hominem.
Duns Scotus - (1265–1308)
"Ioannes quoque in Epistola canonica ait, Tres sunt qui testimonium perhibetn in coelo, Pater, Verybum, & Spiritus sanctus, & hi tres unum sunt
Synod of Sis - Armenian Council 1303 (perhaps writers like Gregorius Sisensis)
Meister Eckhart (1260-1327) Eckhart von Hochheim
Die lateinischen Werke, Volume 3 (1994)
by Eckhart (maestro.) - Kohlhammer
Expositio s. evangelii sec. Iohannem
"fateri patrem, filium et spiritum sanctum, et quod, 'hi tres unum sunt', non unus"
Meister Eckhart: The Essential Sermons, Commentaries, Treatises, and Defense (1981)
Edmund Colledge, O.S.A. and Bernard McGinn - Preface by Huston Smith
“I am in the Father, and the Father is in me” (Jn. 14:11); “The Father and I are one” (Jn. 10:30). In the Godhead the Son and the Holy Spirit are not from nothing, but are “God from God, light from light, one light, one God” with the Father.90 “These three are one” (1 Jn. 5:7). This is why it says here, “God created heaven and earth.”
13. The second point that follows from this is that the Son is in the Father and the Father in the Son (“I am in the Father and the Father is in me,” Jn. 14:11), and that the Son is one with the Father (“The Father and I are one,” Jn. 10:30). The same is true of the Holy Spirit, who is in the Son and the Son in him. He is in the Father and the Father is in him; he is “with the Son and with the Father.”99 This is why “These three are one” (1 Jn. 5:7), both because the Son and Holy Spirit proceed from and remain in the One, “in whom there is no number,” as Boethius says,100 and also because they are prior to everything that is on the outside and to the fall into what is exterior.
Franciscus of Marchia (1285/1290-after 1343),96
Bridget of Sweden (1303-1373)
As John says in today's epistle, or, rather, as I say through John: 'There are three witnesses on earth, the Spirit, the water, and the blood, and three in heaven, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and these three are your witnesses. The Spirit, who protected you in the womb of your mother, bears witness concerning your soul that you belong to God through the baptismal faith that your parents professed in your stead. - Grantley: Bridget mentions the comma in immediate proximity to a reference to baptism. You know my thoughts about this. It's long been established that liturgy and credal formulations guided the interpretation of Scripture in the early church and the middle ages. As you know, the Great Commission was one of the classic texts used in the articulation of the doctrine of the Trinity. I therefore find it interesting that some early articulations of the comma are found in such close proximity to discussions of baptism.
Conrad of Megenberg (1309-1374)
Conradus Megenbergensis, Yconomica III, 1, p2; 1696 (auctor 1309-1374)
Unde Ysaye 6 per Seraphin ter sanctus clamantes et I Ioh. 5: Tres sunt qui testimonium dant in celo: Pater, verbum et spiritus sanctus et hii tres unum sunt.
John Wycliffe - (c.1320 -1384)
Thomas of Cobham († c. 1333/1336),97
William Ockham 1288-1348 ,98
98 Guillelmus de Ockham, Scriptum in librum primum Sententiarum, in William of Ockham, 1967-1979, 2:359; 4:228.
Et est mirabilis novitas vide re tres personas ab invicem non distinctas. Nam Filius non distinguitur a Patre, neque Spiritus sanctus a Patre et Filio, qui procedit ab eis; et tamen tres personae sunt, et hii tres unum sunt. Haec verba eius hacretica fidei catholicae inimica.
Nicholas de Lyra- (c. 1270 - 1349)
... 1 John v. 7 (a.v). is brought in as an authority for the Doctrine of the Trinity thus:
‘The Blessed Trinity reveals Itself to the saints in a distinction of Persons, an emanation of the Word from the Father, and of the Holy Spirit from Both.’ The Father is unbegotten, the Word is begotten by Him, and the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Word. ‘ And these Three are One,’ that is ‘ in Essence, and so are one God, above all, full of glory.’
Grantley McDonald, p. 64 110 Nicolaus de Lyra, in Glossa ordinaria, 1603, VI: 1414: “Et hi tres vnum sunt, in essentia, & vnus Deus super omnia glorisosus."
The Holy Spirit in the mediaeval church : a study of Christian teaching concerning the Holy Spirit and His place in the Trinity, from the post-patristic age to the counter-Reformation
by Howard Watkin-Jones 1888-1953
Robert Holcot - (1290c.-1349)
Assumptum probo quia haec est forma syllogismi expositorii: iste Pater generat, // iste Pater est essentia, ergo essentia generat. Similiter haec, ista essentia est Pater, ista essentia est Filius. ergo Filius est Pater. Et tamen in istis formis praemissae sunt verae. et conclusiones sunt falsae, ergo etc.
Ad oppositum, 1 Iohannis 5.(7]: “Tres sunt qui testimonium dant in caelo: Pater. Verbum et Spiritus Sanctus, et hi tres unum sunt," e Magister, 1 Sententiarum, d. 2, per totum.1
Langland, William - (1332-1386)
Waymarks in the Mind: Finding the Kingdom in Langland’s Vulgate Quotations and Bible Contexts (2010)
(check that the text is Langland, not Blick)
Ambrose Traversari - (1386-1439 )
In 1424 he wrote to Niccoli of the powerful impression which his reading of the Greek text of Athanasius’ Contra gentiles, De incarnatione, and Disputatio contra Arium had made on him.
(All accepted as Athansius)
Heymeric de Campo - (1395-1460)
Heymeric de Campo[1] (1395–1460) was a Dutch theologian and scholastic philosopher. He was a prominent Albertist,[2][3] and forerunner of Nicholas of Cusa. He studied at the University of Paris, and taught at Cologne (where Nicholas studied under him[4]), and Leuven.[5] Preterea quicquid est in altero, est in illo per modum illius, in quo est. Sed vcritas, bonitas, vita, intelligencia, Pater, Filius, Spiritus sanctus et omnia, que conveniunt deo, habent indivisionem in sua   esse. Ergo sunt essencialiter unum, prout de tribus personis clarc testatur Iohannes in sua prima canonica1, cum dicit: Tres sunt qui, testimonium pcrhibent in celo et hii tres unum sunt.
Opera selecta, Volume 1
Collatio facta in die S. Trinitatis in illud 'Tres unum sunt.'
Henricus Kalteisen OP Collatio in die s. trinitatis in illud 'Tres unum sunt'
Wien, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek (ÖNB), Cod. 4975, Nr. 24
Emanuel (Manuel) Calecas (d. 1410)
Manuelis Calecae Principiis Fidei Catholicae
de Principiis Fidei Catholicae
Ἀλλὰ uὴv tὰ ῥntὰ tῆς Γpaφῆς tῷ Πatpὶ kaὶ tῷ Yἱῷ tpίtov tῇ tάEeι σuvapιθuoῦaι tὸ Πveῦua; Φnσὶ Yὰp ὁ Xpισtὸς, "Πopeuθέvteς eἰς tὸv kόσuov ἂπavta, uaθnteύσate πάvta tὰ ἔθvn, BaπtίZovte; aὐtoὺς eἰς tὸ ὄvoua toῦ Πatpὸς kaὶ Yἱoῦ kaὶ toῦ ἅYίou Πveύuatoς". (Matt 28:19) Kaὶ ὁ EὐaYYeλισtὴς Ἰwάvvnς, "Tpeῖς eἰσιv oἱ uaptupoῦvteς, ὁ Πatὴp, ὁ AόYoς kaὶ tὸ Πveῦua tὸ ἅYιov". (1 John 5:7) Kaὶ πάλιv, "Ὅtav δὲ ἔλθῃ ὁ πapάkλntoς, ὃv ἐYὼ πέuψw ὑuῖv, tὸ πveῦua tῆς ἀλnθeίaς, ὃ πapὰ toῦ πatpὸς ἐkπopeύetaι, ἐkeῖvoς uaptupήσeι πepὶ ἐuoῦ". (John 15:26)
Migne Graeca PG 152, 515-516 [516B]
Manuēl patriarchu Kōnstantinupoleōs tu Kaleka, ta heuriskomena panta (1866)
Dissertationes duae critico theologicae: Ia de his Joannis Evangelistae verbis (1713)
Thirteen Sermons Concerning the Doctrine of the Trinity: Preach'd at the Merchant's-lecture, at Salter's Hall (1722)
Referenced by John Mill, may be first in heavenly witnesses debate. Prudent Maran has a good section, as does Thomas Burgess, and he is frequently mentioned because he is a writer in Greek with the verse before the Reformation era of Erasmus.
Assistance on English and Greek from Mike Ferrando.
Joseph Bryennius (c. 1350-1430) (Bryennios)
Bryennius by contrast, (to Manuel Calecas) a strident opponent of union with Rome, translated the comma as he found in the Latin Vulgate, including two of its divergances from the Greek text: the reading “for Christ is the truth” in 1 Jn 5:6, and the omission of the concluding clause of 1 Jn 5:8.115 - Grantley p. 65-66, references Porson, Seller and Riggenbach, he omits the English which you can see here from John Kitto Cyclopedia by W. W.:
SA Note: this Bryennius reference was published by Eugenius Bulgaris in 1768, discussed on another PBF, and in some depth by Grantley in Ghost of Arius and here:
All of these I think most show the heavenly witnesses, except most of the Greeks. And it would be interesting to know how many of these were multi-lingual like Aquinas (at least to a degree)
Last edited: Aug 28, 2022
Grantley Robert McDonald medieval Latin list
The book list I had might be a bit different and can be compared.
Raising the ghost of Arius : Erasmus, the Johannine comma and religious difference in early modern Europe
Faculty of the Humanities, Leiden University 2011-02-15
Peter Damian (c. 1007-1072),84
Rupert of Deutz (c. 1070-1129/1130),85
Bernard of Clairvaux (c. 1090-1153),86
Peter Lombard (c. 1095-1160),87
Hildegard of Bingen (1098-1179),88
Baldwin of Canterbury († 1190),90
Guillaume of Saint-Jacques de Liege (twelfth century),91
Alexander of Ashby (c. 1150-c. 1208),93
Franciscus of Marchia (1285/1290-after 1343),96
Thomas of Cobham († c. 1333/1336),97
William of Ockham (c. 1290/1300-c. 1349/1350),98
84 Petrus Damiani, Epist. X, in Damiani, 1983-1993, 4.1:132.
85 Rupertus Tuitiensis, De gloria et honore filii hominis super Matthaeum III, PL 169:731; De sancta trinitate et operibus eius XXXVI (De operibus Spiritus Sancti III), CCCM 24:1907, 1910, 1924: "Igitur sicut tres sunt qui testimonium dant in terra ut in communionem ecclesiæ recipiamur sic tres sunt qui testimonium dant in caelo ut in regnum caelorum introeamus. Tres isti testes sunt pater et uerbum et spiritus sanctus."
86 Bernard of Clairvaux, Sententiae I.1, in Bernard, 1957-1977, 6,2:7. The Glossa ordinaria, 1603, VI:1414, cites Bernard as suggesting that the three infernal worms of Is 66 likewise bear witness: "His qui in coelo sunt datur testimonium beatitudinis, his qui in terra, iustificationis, his qui in inferno sunt, damnationis. Primum testimonium est gloriae, secundum gratiae, tertium irae."
87 Petrus Lombardus, Sententiae I.2.5.3.1, PL 192:528, 590.
88 Hildegard von Bingen, Scivias III.7.8, CCCM 43:470.
89 Petrus Cellensis, Tractatus de tabernaculo I.7, PL 202:1079.
90 Balduinus de Forda (Balduinus Cantuariensis), De commendatione fidei 66, CCCM 99:402; Tractatus de sacramento altaris, CCCM 99:413, 416.
91 Guillaume de Saint-Jacques de Liège, De benedictione Dei 26, in Haring, 1972, 168.
92 Petrus Abaelardus, Theologia christiana, CCCM 12:271 (possibly drawing on Facundus, Pro defensione trium capitulorum I.3); Theologia "Summi boni", CCCM 13:160.
93 Alexander of Ashby, Meditatio IX, CCCM 188:442.
94 Bonaventure, Collationes in Hexaemeron II.1, in Bonaventure, 1934, 113-114: "Intellectus enim noster per fidem illuminatus clamat ter Sanctus in confessione trium et tantum semel dicit: Dominus deus. Notitia enim dei est in cognitione trium personarum cum essentiae unitate unde Ioan.: Tres sunt, qui testimonium dant in caelo. Intellectus ergo noster seraphico lumine et incendio per fidem clamat ter Sanctus et alter respondet: Sanctus Sanctus Sanctus. […] Non enim cognoscitur incaarnatio nisi præcognita discretione personarum. Sabellius enim, personas non distinguens, habet necesse sentire patrem incarnatum et passum. Nec trinitas cognoscitur sine [114] incarnatione quia etiam tres sunt qui testimonium dant in terra, scilicet spiritus, hoc est deitas, aqua, hoc est caro, sanguis, hoc est anima; si autem Trinitatem vis cognoscere sine incarnatione, tunc non vis habere testimonium in terra sed tantum in caelo. Nunc autem utrobique est testimonium." See also Collationes II.2, 1934, 118; and Sermo de Trinitate (sermo 27), in Bonaventure, 1993, 360-364.
95 Guillelmus Duranti, Rationale diuinorum officiorum IV.25.17, CCCM 140:368: “Dicens uero: ‘Patrem,’ incipit personas distinguere, de quibus Ysaias: Quis appendit tribus digitis molem terre? [Is 40:12], et alibi: Seraphim clamat Sanctus, sanctus, sanctus [Is 6:3]; et Dominus: Baptizate omnes gentes in nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritus sancti [Mt 28:19]; et Iohannes: Tres sunt qui testimonium dant in celo, Pater, Verbum et Spiritus [1 Jn 5:7]. Pater est prima, non tempore sed auctoritate, in Trinitate persona.â€
96 Franciscus de Marchia, Commentarius in IV libros Sententiarum, in Franciscus de Marchia, 2003, 559.
97 Thomas of Cobham, Sermones, CCCM 82A:14.
98 Guillelmus de Ockham, Scriptum in librum primum Sententiarum, in William of Ockham, 1967-1979, 2:359; 4:228.
100 pope Innocent III (Lottario dei Conti di Segni, 1160/1161
Guillaume of Saint-Thierry (c. 1085-1148) had also shown a remarkably historical view of the textual
Guillelmus abbas (1085-1148 AD)
Aenigma fidei. PL 180, col 0409B
Thomas Aquinas - p. 63 Augustine or Peter Lombard? check this out
attack on KJVToday p. 65
Last edited: Aug 28, 2022
Novi ex codicibus vaticanis sermones item speculum et alya quaedam cum diversorum patrum scriptis et tabulis XVI., Volume 1 (1852)
FRAGMENTUM DIALOGI HOMINIS CATHOLICI CUM HAERETICO
The book is Augustine sermons and related fragments and Speculum?
Hilary on p. 489 has interesting John Quote
p. 496 is the key one - it has a Priscillian sense.
Unde et Iohannes in epistola sua ait : tres sunt qui testimonium dicunt in caelo, pater, Verbum et spiritus sanctus
2). In Christo lesu unum sunt; non tamcn unus est. quia non est corum una persona. Numquid aliut c) scntiendum est, quam pater vcrus unus qui gcnuit, idem non sit qui et genilus ab ipso est? et filius unus qui non genuit, pater non sit? et spiritus sanctus, qui nec pater nec filius, alter sit in persona ? Praeterea qui nec genuit nec nalus refcrtur ?
Interesting new today, Ulm ms. something about a Gerbert, and more
Cipolla on Priscillian - ever checked ?
many more on searches
190 - "tres unum sunt"
76 "in coelo Pater"
19 "in caelo Pater"
Middle Ages Theology Refs
Last edited: Apr 5, 2021
books and resources that focus on medieval and pre-Reformation commentators
Studies in Medieval Thought and Learning From Abelard to Wyclif (1981)
Beryl Smalley FBA -
An Introduction to the 'Glossa Ordinaria' as Medieval Hypertext - p. 040 -
David A. Solomon -
Erasmus idols - Reform and Conflict: From the Medieval World to the Wars of Religion,
- Rudoph W. Heinze, Tim Dowley
Isaiah: interpreted by early interpreted by early Christian and medieval commentators (2007)
Wilken - Christman, Hollerich,
Biblical Humanism and Scholasticism in the Age of Erasmus
Rupert of Deutz, Tuiteiensis,
has an interesting section noted by Westcott, where he interprets.
Mentioned also by Kettner, Martin, Turner, Travis
Maybe it is this, or something else in his book?
Deep was the respect for the Regius Professor among University authorities, but to the average Undergraduate he remained a personage
of mystery. In more than one course of lectures Westcott quoted freely from those mediaeval luminaries Tauler and Rupert of Deutz ; and the Undergraduate audience knowing nothing of Rupert of Deutz, took to applauding when the name was mentioned. Westcott, unaware that the cheering was the mere display of boyish humour, was delighted at the reception given to his hero, and told the story of the growing popularity of Rupert among Undergraduates to his friends.
Grantley gives two other references, but this one is better.
Also note that Bandinus / Bandini is connected to, but different than Peter Lombard.
RGA - p. 57
quoted by mediaeval writers such as ... Rupert of Deutz (c. 1070-1129/1130),85
De gloria et honore filii hominis super Matthæum III, PL 169:731;
De sancta trinitate et operibus eius XXXVI (De operibus Spiritus Sancti III), CCCM 24:1907, 1910, 1924:
“Igitur sicut tres sunt qui testimonium dant in terra ut in communionem ecclesiæ recipiamur sic tres sunt qui testimonium dant in cælo ut in regnum cælorum introeamus. Tres isti testes sunt pater et uerbum et spiritus sanctus.”
The Witness of God is Greater
Rupert of Deutz (1075-1129 AD)
Rupert of Deutz (Latin: Rupertus Tuitiensis; c. 1075/1080 – c. 1129) was an influential Benedictine theologian, exegete
and writer on liturgical and musical topics. Rupert was from Liège, and late in life became abbot of the Abbey of Deutz, in
what is now a suburb of Cologne. His was a prolific writer, and his works take up four volumes in Patrologia Latina (vols.
167–170); He died in Deutz. (Rupert of Deutz. Wikipedia.  )
● The three who bear witness in heaven. Why did Saint John not say “the Father and the Son”, but “the Father and the Word”? How the Word bears witness to the man he assumes.
● We have spoken according to our strength of the three witnesses who bear witness on earth; a few words also remain to be said of the three who bear witness in heaven. For "there are three, he says, who bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word and the Holy Spirit". We first ask ourselves why he did not say “Father and Son, more commonly used form, but “Father and Word and Holy Spirit”.
● Let us answer that the three witnesses, on both sides, do not only testify in our favor that we were born of God, as the thesis put it: "All that is born of God triumphs over the world", and according to the thesis. these words at the end of the chapter: "He who believes in the Son of God has the testimony of God in himself"; but they still bear, or rather they bear chief witness to Jesus himself. They attest that he is indeed Christ, and that “Christ is Truth”. It was necessary to avoid giving hold to the heretics, who were disposed to say that there are two sons, one Son of God, the other son of man. Also the Scriptures, relating the testimonies given on this man who was hung on the cross and died, did not mean that the Father and the Son bear witness to him, whereas he himself in the double divine and human nature is the only Son of God. The Scriptures preferred to say "the Father and the Word and the Holy Spirit". And really, it is not indeed. the Son who bears witness to the Son; but it is the Word who bears
witness to the assumed man. He testifies that the very one who has been denied and reproved is Christ in person, is Truth itself. I mean it doesn't. not think of two persons in Christ, one bearing witness to the other, but that one of the two natures of Christ bears witness to the other. How does the Word bear witness? To say nothing of so many things that are beyond our beginnings, he testifies in this: that everything that this man said is true, is the only true Word. And that is a legitimate testimony.
● For the Law gives the sign by which we recognize the prophet and the one who is not a prophet: "What if you say to yourself: How can I know that this word the Lord has not spoken? This is the sign that you will have: what this prophet foretold in the name of the Lord and which did not happen, that the Lord did not say, but the prophet invented it by the swelling of his mind; and therefore you will not respect it. ” This rule was given in view of our prophet, the Lord of the prophets. For here is the theme that had just been posed: "The Lord your God will raise up out of your race and of your brothers a prophet like me", etc. The Law having therefore set the major, the person concerned provides us with the minor by saying: "Heaven and earth will pass, but as for my words, they will not pass." Against the Jews, his enemies, let us give as only argument that he said of them: "They will fall with the edge of the sword, and they will be taken captive in all the nations"; and so was done. So, according to the
testimony of the Word, “Jesus is the Christ”: yes, this Jesus who was thought to be the son of Joseph - and there is no other Christ.
● But how does the Father bear witness to him? First by saying: “This is my beloved Son in whom I am delighted. »Then by always answering him, for the realization of great works that no one else has done, and above all by raising him from the dead. For if he were to lie in saying that he is the Christ, the testimony of divine works would not accompany him, the resurrection of his flesh which is the great testimony would not follow. In turn, the Holy Spirit bears this witness to him that he is Christ and that he is the Son of God. For he said: "When the Paraclete comes, whom I send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth which proceeds from the Father, he will bear witness of me, and you also will bear witness." And this word has been realized, and is being realized, and will be realized until the end of time. "These three bear witness in heaven", that is to say invisibly, while the previous witnesses, the Spirit, the water and the blood, bore witness on the earth, that is to say visibly. The Spirit indeed appeared on him visibly, taking the bodily form of a dove, and confirmed what he had ordered to recognize in this sign, namely that "it is he who baptizes." The blood and water, Jesus visibly poured out on his side, having already died, which he would not have done if he was not the Christ
Son of God. Let us now return to our subject.
● Rupert of Deutz, The Operations of the Holy Spirit, Book 3.16; Translated by Élisabeth de Solms, vol 2, 1967.
● De tribus qui testimonium dant in coelo, et cur non dixerit: Pater et Filius, sed « Pater et Verbum, » et quomodo Verbum homini assumpto testimonium perhibuerit.
● De tribus testibus testimonium in terra dantibus (1657B) pro posse diximus, superest ut de tribus
testimonium in coelo dantibus breviter dicamus: Nam et tres sunt, inquit, qui testimonium dant in
coelo, Pater, Verbum et Spiritus sanctus (I. Ioan. V). Primo quaeritur cur non dixerit, quod magis
usitatum est, Pater et Filius, sed Pater, et Verbum et Spiritus sanctus.
● Ad quod dicendum, quia non solum tres illi vel tres isti testes testimonium dant, quod sumus nati ex Deo,
sicut proposuerat, dicendo: Omne quod natum est ex Deo, vincit mundum, et sicut in fine capituli: qui
credit, inquit, in Filium Dei, habet testimonium Dei in se (ibid.). Verum et ipsi, imo principaliter ipsi Iesu
testimonium dant quia ipse est Christus, vel quia Christus est veritas (ibid.). Ne ergo (1657C) occasio
porrigeretur haereticis, dicturis duos esse filios, alterum Filium Dei, et alterum filium hominis, de illo
homine, qui pependit in cruce et mortuus est, testificationes conferens, noluit dicere, quia testimonium
dant ei Pater, et Filius, cum ipse in utraque substantia Dei et hominis, unus sit Dei Filius, sed Pater et
Verbum, inquit, et Spiritus sanctus. Nam revera non Filius filio, sed Verbum assumpto homini testimonium
dat quod ipse qui negatus et reprobatus est, ipse, inquam, sit Christus, ipse sit veritas, id est non altera
Christi persona, alteri Christi personae; sed altera Christi substantia alteri Christi substantiae hoc
testimonium dat. Quomodo testimonium dat hoc Verbum? Ut multa praeteream, quae nostram excedunt
infantiam, in eo nimirum (1657D) testimonium dat quod quaecunque locutus est hic homo, vera sunt, et
omnia unum verum Verbum. Et hoc est legitimum testimonium.
● Dicit enim lex cognoscendi prophetae, et non prophetae signum: Quod si tacita cogitatione responderis:
Quomodo possum intelligere verbum quod non est locutus Dominus, hoc habebis signum: Quod in
nomine Domini propheta ille praedixerit, et non evenerit, hoc Dominus non locutus est, sed per tumorem
animi sui propheta confixit, et idcirco non timebis eum (Deut. XVIII). Hoc nimirum propter istum
prophetam, imo prophetarum Dominum dictum est. Promiserat enim, dicens: Prophetam de gente tua, et
de fratribus tuis, sicut me suscitabit Dominus tuus (ibid.), etc. Hac ergo praecunte legis propositione
(1658A) assumptionem ipse de quo propositum fuerat, nobis porrigit, dicens: Coelum et terra transibunt,
verba autem mea non transibunt (Matth. XXIV). Porro adversus inimicos eius Iudaeos vel istud sufficiat,
quia dixit de illis: Et cadent in ore gladii, et captivi ducentur in omnes gentes (Ier. XLIV), ut quae ita
factum est. Igitur secundum Verbi testimonium Iesus est Christus, Iesus utique, ut putabatur filius Ioseph
(Luc. III), et non alius Christus est.
● Quomodo autem Pater dat huic testimonium? Primum dicendo: Hic est Filius meus dilectus, in quo mihi
complacui (Matth. XIII). Deinde semper illum audiendo in faciendis operibus magnis, quae nemo alius
fecit (Ioan. XV), maxime vero ipsum resuscitando a mortuis. Si enim dicendo se esse Christum,
mentiretur, (1658B) divinorum operum testimonium non illum comitaretur, resurrectio carnis eius, quod
magnum est testimonium, non consequeretur. Nihilominus Spiritus sanctus testimonium dat huic quod sit
Christus, vel quod sit Filius Dei, quia videlicet quemadmodum dixit: Cum venerit Paracletus quem ego
mittam vobis a Patre Spiritum veritatis, qui a Patre procedit, ille testimonium perhibebit de me, et vos
testimonium perhibebitis (Ioan. XV), sic factum est, et fit, et fiet usque in finem saeculi. Hi tres
testimonium dant in coelo, id est invisibiliter. Nam antedicti testes, scilicet Spiritus, aqua et
sanguis, dederunt testimonium in terra, id est, visibiliter. Spiritus enim visibiliter, id est sumpta
columbae corporea specie, super illum apparuit, affirmans quod hoc (1658C) signo cognosci
iusserat, scilicet qui baptizat, sanguinem et aquam visibiliter de latere suo iam mortuus fudit;
quod non fecisset, si non esset Christus Filius Dei. Nunc ad nostra redeamus.
● Rupertus Tuitiensis, De Operibus Spiritus Sancti liber tertiu, S. De sapientia liber tertius; Migne Latina, PL 167.1657-1658.
Last edited: Jun 29, 2021
Speculum .. 8th-9th century or origin with Augustine?
my 2008 note .. compare with Grantley
Scrivener actually gives more salient information p. 258, helpful albeit still rudimentary.
m. This letter indicates the readings extracted by Mai (Spicilegium Romanum, 1843, Tom. ix. pp. 61—86) from a " Speculum" [vi or vu] which, has been ascribed to Augustine, and is unique for containing extracts from the whole 1ST. T. except St Mark, 3 John, Hebrews, and Philemon. It is in the Monastery of Santa Croce, or Bibliotheca Sessoriana (No. 58) at Rome. "Wiseman drew attention to it in his celebrated " Two Letters," 1835 (see p. 255), because it contains 1 John v. 7 in two different places. Both he and Mai furnish facsimiles. This "Speculum" (published in full by Mai, Patrum Nova Collectio, Yol. i. pt. 2, 1852) consists of extracts from both Testaments, arranged in chapters under various heads or topics. What Scrivener discusses on p. 255 is a section where Wiseman demonstrates, among other things, that the Sessoriana Speculum quotes the African Bible text as used by Augustine. Augustine also used an Italian text and was generally adverse to the Vulgate of Jerome. The Aland comment "reasons unknown" is humorous in its ignorance and/or deception. The type of hokum you expect from Aland or Metzger or Wallace.
To start you can simply read the Nicholas Wiseman section. And you can note the comment by Possidius, the biographer of Augustine, that he was working on such a work at the time of his death, as mentioned by Sanday, who also mentions that the Preface is quoted in the 6th century by Eugippius.
Since Aland did not do any homework, or decided to hide the history, you can also look at the placement of the Speculum de Scriptura in Augustine's writings by scholars who specialize on Augustine, like Mary T. Clark's work in 2005 .
Secondly, it has often been claimed that Augustine cited the comma in a work called Speculum, but this claim is based on a confusion between two treatises called Speculum, sometimes found together in the same manuscripts, only one of which—Speculum “Quis ignorat”, the one that does not contain the comma—was written by the great African Father.35
35 The presence of the comma in the Speculum, first publicised in two letters published by Nicholas (later cardinal) Wiseman in 1832 and 1833 (repr. in Wiseman, 1853, 1:5-70), has caused some confusion, since there are two treatises of this name attributed to Augustine, both of which are included in Weihrich’s edition in CSEL 12: the Speculum “Quis ignorat” and the Speculum “Audi Israhel”. Only the first of these—preserved in Munich, BSB clm 14513 (ninth century); Chartres ms 33 (ninth century); Sankt Gallen, Stiftsbibliothek ms 137 (tenth century); Vatican, BAV cod. Pal. 198 (tenth or eleventh century); Paris, BnF ms. lat. 2473 (thirteenth century)—is actually by Augustine. (When Erasmus came to include the Speculum “Quis ignorat” in his edition of Augustine’s works, printed by Froben in 1528, he even called the authenticity of that work into question.) The Speculum “Audi Israhel”—preserved in Rome, Biblioteca della Basilica di Santa Croce in Gerusalemme, ms 58 (codex Sessorianus, eighth or ninth century); Paris, BnF ms lat. 6400G (codex Floriacensis, fourth to seventh century, also known as ms h, Beuron 55, fragmentary); Avranches ms 87 (ninth century); Paris BnF ms lat. 15082 (twelfth century); Paris, BnF ms. lat. 2977A (eleventh or twelfth century); Paris, BnF ms nouv. acq. 256 (twelfth century); and in abridged versions in Paris, BnF ms lat. 4/42 (codex Aniciensis), formerly in Le Puy-en-Velay; and Paris, BnF ms lat. 9380 (ninth century), 338-346—contains a selection of scriptural passages organised under a number of doctrinal heads. There are a number of reasons to doubt that this work was compiled by Augustine: it uses a different biblical text from that found in Augustine’s other works; it quotes from the ps.-Pauline Epistle to the Laodiceans, which Augustine rejected; and it employs the Western order of the Gospels (Matthew, John, Luke, Mark), which Augustine likewise avoided. Further, see Weihrich, 1881; Weihrich’s introduction to CSEL 12; and Sanday, 1890, who question some of Wiseman’s claims. In any case, the text of the comma cited in the Speculum “Audi Israhel”, CSEL 12:325-326, reads: “Spiritus est qui testimonium reddit, quia spiritus est ueritas. Item illic: Tres sunt qui testimonium dicunt in cælo, pater, uerbum et spiritus, et hii tres unum sunt.” The transmission is not consistent in the mss; Avranches 87, Paris 15082 and Paris 2977A read: “Spiritus est qui dicit in cælo pater uerbum et spiritus et hii tres unum sunt.”
3 Speculum-related Errors acknowledged by Grantley (one is minor date)
Paris, BnF ms lat. 6400G (codex Floriacensis, fourth to seventh century, also known as ms h, Beuron 55, fragmentary);
(incorrect, does not have Speculum)
Weihrich cites this manuscript under the siglum F, which he calls "Codicis Floriacensis fragmenta Ashburnhamensia". I had originally assumed that this was the Codex Floriacensis (Beuron 55), but in fact it is a different manuscript.
this claim is based on a confusion between two treatises called Speculum, sometimes found together in the same manuscripts, only one of which—Speculum “Quis ignorat”, the one that does not contain the comma—was written by the great African Father.35
(not found in same ms.)
My statement that the two Specula are sometimes found in the same manuscript is also incorrect, and has already been corrected in the revised book.
Last edited: Jul 4, 2022
Joachim Fiore and Thomas Aquinas ---> Complutensian Polyglot
(mangled by Peter Gurry on Twitter)
The Three Witnesses. The Disputed Text in St. John: Considerations New and Old (1883)
SIR ISAAC NEWTON seems to understand that the famous Note was inserted in the margin of the Complutensian Polyglott by the editors, as some sort of explanation of the irregularity which they were conscious of introducing into the Greek text, when they introduced the disputed verse. * It may, however, be questioned whether the Note was intended to have anything to do either with this Greek text or with the claims of the disputed verse. It seems rather intended as a justification of their version of the Latin text. The ordinary Latin text had not only a clause—“ These Three are One” (hi tres unum sunt)—with the heavenly witnesses, but also a second clause—“These Three agree in One” (hi tres unum sunt)—with the earthly witnesses. This second clause the Complutensian editors thought not genuine, and accordingly omitted it. The Note is their defence of this step and is not, as Sir Isaac Newton, and Dr. Davidson after him, seem to have thought, any indication that they felt their Greek text in this part of the Epistle to need apology. The Note may be translated as follows :
“St. Thomas, in his exposition of the second decretal upon the Supreme Trinity and the Catholic Faith, in treating the following passage against Abbot Joachim—viz., “There are Three who bear witness in heaven, Father, Word, and Holy Ghost,” says as follows : “And in order to teach the Unity of the Three Persons, there is subjoined, “And these Three are One'”—which indeed is said on account of their unity of essence. But Joachim, minded to take this perversely, tried to fasten its authority upon a unity of love and consent. For there is added in the same passage : “And there are three that bear witness on earth—Spirit, Water, and Blood.” And in some books there is added : “ And these Three are One.” This, however, is not contained in the true copies ; but it is said to have been added by the Arian heretics, in order to pervert the true understanding of the foregoing authority about the unity in essence of the Three Persons. Thus far St. Thomas in the place cited above."
Let's document the claimed Newton and Davidson blunders.
Compare to the Peter Gurry blunders.
And see if Grantley was clear and accurate.
Here are the two blunders mentioned by Armfield.
... and so here, where the testimony of “the Three in Heaven” is generally wanting in the Greek copies, they make a third marginal note, to secure themselves from being blamed for printing it. p. 45
XXX. So then, to sum up the argument, the Complutensian divines did sometimes correct the Greek by the Latin, without the authority of any Greek manuscript, as appears by their practice in Matthew vi. 13; and therefore their printing the testimony of “the Three in Heaven” is no evidence that they did it by a manuscript, but, on the contrary, for want of one, they contented themselves with the authority of Thomas Aquinas; and Stunica confessed that they had none. Nor has all the zeal for this text been able since to discover one either in Spain, or any where else. p. 50-51
The editors have also affixed a marginal note to the Greek text—a circumstance very unusual with them, as only three instances of it occur in the whole edition. In this note, the object of which was to secure themselves from blame for printing the verse, we should expect their best defence of it. Yet they do not mention any Greek MS. that contains it, nor any various readings in Greek MSS. They simply appeal to Thomas Aquinas. When we add to this, the agreement of their Greek of the passage with the verse as it stands in their text of the Vulgate, it is certain that they had no Greek MSS. containing it. We believe therefore, that the editors took the passage not from Greek MSS. but from the modem copies of the Vulgate, Pseudo-Jerome, and Thomas Aquinas.
Now to Grantley in Raising the Ghost of Arius:
However, the delayed publication of the Complutensian Polyglot had the unexpected benefit of allowing corrections to be made to respond to some of the more controversial aspects of Erasmus’ text. In this way some of the reputational value of the Complutensian bible could be recovered. Stunica’s published attacks on Erasmus’ text thus had the function not merely of defending the true text of the New Testament, but also of undermining the reputational value of Erasmus’ edition by casting his orthodoxy and scholarly integrity into doubt—and since the beginnings of the Lutheran debate in 1517, a reputation for orthodoxy had been at a premium.
Michael Screech’s examination of the typography of the Complutensian New Testament has provided fascinating insights into the final stages of its production. It seems that several bifolia are cancels (reprints), including the bifolium KK2r-v and KK5r-v, the sheet on which the comma is found. Significantly, it seems that the comma was actually already part of the text before the reprinting of the cancels. In order to make the Greek text more manageable for those with little knowledge of the language, the Complutensian edition uses small superscript letters to cross-reference each Greek word against the corresponding word in the parallel Latin text; the continuity of these letters on to KK3r (which is not a cancel) shows that the comma was part of the text in the first impression. But after Erasmus’ edition had omitted the comma, the editors at Alcalá apparently felt compelled to justify its appearance in their edition. Bifolium KK2/5 was therefore reprinted with a long note on the comma—the only strictly theological note in the entire edition—shoehorned into the margins of KK2v. (Screech’s finding is consistent with the absence of any note on the comma in a set of manuscript annotations collated while the text of the Complutensian bible was being established for print, notes which Jerry Bentley tentatively ascribed to Demetrius Ducas and Elio Antonio de Nebrija.)34 The new marginal note consists of a condensed extract from Thomas Aquinas’ commentary on the decision taken at the Fourth Lateran Council to condemn Joachim of Fiore’s position on the Trinity.35 This new note has two functions: firstly, it gives an authoritative theological justification for the omission of the phrase kaὶ oἱ tpeῖς eἰς tὸ ἕv eἰσιv at the end of verse 8 in the Complutensian edition; more importantly, it was supposed to show on the authority of Aquinas that Erasmus’ omission of the comma from his edition and his inclusion of the last phrase of verse 8 betrayed a hint of Arianism. Yet the insertion of this new note required the typesetter to put some of the Greek text on fol. KK2r into line 54, the lowest line available in the forme, usually only used for the signature; this typographical aberration is unique in the entire edition. The different degrees of wear and damage to the frame and the forehead of the saint in the ornamental capital I on fols. KK4r and KK5v supports the contention that bifolium KK2/5 was printed after those that surround it. Parts of gathering U were also reprinted, apparently to cast doubt upon Erasmus’ controversial reading at 1 Cor 15:51. Screech attributed these alterations to sinister motives: “behind the austere text of the Complutensian Polyglot lay tensions between scholarly integrity and the arrogance of power. And somebody was prepared to betray the reader’s trust, quietly giving at times readings in the Greek which never had […] any valid manuscript authority behind them.”36 Yet this revision may equally be interpreted as an expedient designed to recapture some of the value invested in the Complutensian bible by Ximénez, the editors and the University of Alcalá, value that had been compromised by the appearance of Erasmus’ edition.
34 Bentley, 1980, 148; the notes are in Madrid, Universidad Complutense, Archivo Historico Universitario, ms 117-Z-1.
35 Reeve and Screech, 1990, XXI, reproduce KK2r-v of the Complutensian New Testament; the marginal note reads as follows (original punctuation): “Sanctus Thomas in expositione secunde decretalis de summa trinitate & fide catholica tractans istum passum contra abbatem Ioachim videlicet Tres sunt qui testimonium dant in celo. pater: verbum: & spiritus sanctus: dicit ad litteram verba sequentia. Et ad insinuandam vnitatem trium personarum subditur & hii tres vnum sunt. Quodquidem dicitur propter essentie vnitatem. Sed hoc Ioachim perverse trahere volens ad vnitatem charitatis et consensus inducebat consequentem auctoritatem. Nam subditur ibidem: & tres sunt qui testimonium dant in terra, s. spiritus: aqua: & sanguis. Et in quibusdam libris additur: & hii tres unum sunt. Sed hoc in veris exemplaribus non habetur: sed dicitur esse appossitum ab hereticis arrianis ad peruertendum intellectum sanum auctoritatis premisse de vnitate essentie trium personarum. Hec beatus Thomas ubi supra.” My
examination of the watermarks in the copy in the Bibliothèque nationale de France did not reveal any conclusive evidence.
36 Reeve and Screech, 1990, XXII-XXIII.
Reeve, Anne, and Michael A. Screech. Erasmus’ Annotations on the New Testament: Acts, Romans, I and II Corinthians. Leiden: Brill, 1990.
Already in the 1820s T. J. Pettigrew was able to publish the results of comparison of two variant copies of the Complutensian Polyglot and to conclude that some leaves had been reprinted in 1520 or so, well after the first run.12 Further bibliographical evidence is marshalled by F. J. Norton in his fine description and study.13 It seems to me that we should suspect that the marginal notes to 1 Corinthians were added in the 1520s since (almost unbelievably otherwise) virtually all the textual cruces just happened to occur in that single in-6 gathering, the one signed U. By the time the Complutensian Bible was on sale 1 Corinthians 15:51 had become a bone of great contention. The temptation to defend the reading of 1 Corinthians 15:51 with a marginal note inserted about 1520 must have been very real. And once that gathering U had been retrieved from the pile, why not add two more on texts where Erasmus’ scholarship could be shown to be shaky? I can see no sign however that the gathering itself was reprinted in its entirety. The evidence points the other way.
10 The printing of the whole set of gatherings was done before July 1517, but with at least some additional printing in 1521 (cf. F. J. Norton, Printing in Spain, 1501-1520, Cambridge University Press, 1966: pp. 36; 38-41; 129 etc.). The introduction to the Interpretations specifically says that the relevant gathering, a, was printed afterwards. The worn state of the ornamental capitals show that this was considerably later.
12 O. T. J. Pettigrew: Bibliotheca Sussexiana, London, 1827, I (part 2) citing Dr Adam Clark.
13 See both the work cited in note 10 and the satisfyingly detailed bibliographical des-cription in A Descriptive Catalogue of Printing in Spain and Portugal, Cambridge University Press, 1978, pp. 11-15.
Then we have the long heavenly witnesses cancel-sheet section - of which Grantley gives some information.
Last edited: Aug 28, 2022
Here are the problems with the idea that the Complutensian cancel-sheet was reactive to Erasmus.
1) Was there a cancel-sheet? And if so, when?
(e.g. See Grantley's watermark note.)
2) If so, we have little or no idea of changes from the original. Conjectures are strained.
3) There is nothing in the "cancel-sheet" text that really is a counter to Erasmus. All the Arian concern goes back to the Joachim-Aquinas dispute in the 1100s through to the Lateran Council. It is anachronistic to try to make this an oblique attack on Erasmus.
Plus, you can see that Screech is not an honest broker, with his wild attack on the Complutensian integrity.
See the A J MacDonald post here.
Pinella on the cancel-sheet hypothesis
Screech’s more recent proposal stands in a completely different category. He turned his attention to one of the few marginal notes (five) that exist in the New Testament volume of the Polyglot, namely that of 1 John 5,7–8, the comma Iohanneum. 20 He suggests that the gathering of the Polyglot which contains these verses (fols. KK2 and KK5) are cancels reprinted following the controversy over its omission in Erasmus’ Novum Instrumentum. This would mean that the leaves were printed again, not before 1517. In order to defend this hypothesis, Screech relies on some typographical features in which he thinks this intervention can be detected.21 These arguments are however weak and inconclusive. Furthermore, Screech declares that, as long as it is indisputable that the comma Iohanneum was present in the original printing, the decision to add a posteriori a marginal note would imply the re-composition of the whole gathering. This is not accurate, as it would have been enough to pass the existing copies through the press (as happened with the first quire of volume I). In fact, Screech proposes the existence of two issues, but without having identified a single copy of this supposed first issue. Regarding other typographical features, it is evident that, if the authors had decided to add a marginal gloss even in the first issue, the typesetter would have needed to organize the material differently, so the presence of some unusual features is not telling.22 .. (Jan Krans on Matthew 6:13b) ... As long as there are no witnesses to the first issue, these suggestions will remain too hypothetical to prove the influence of Erasmus’ Novum Testamentum on the Complutensian Polyglot Bible.
20 See M. A. Screech, ‘Introduction’, Reeve (1990), xi-xxv, here xxi-xxiii.
21 His arguments are: The Greek text on KK2r over-runs into the lower margin and has the maximum of lines (54, most have 53) (Fig. 2); one can see that the capital letters are worn, especially one capital “I” on KK5v (Fig. 3).
22 I am indebted to Julian Martin Abad and to Inmaculada Garcia-Cervigon for the discussion of Screech’s hypothesis. Some scholars accept it unreservedly, see Botley, Latin Translation (op. cit. n. 4), 122.
TW) THAT LIKELY ARE NOT HITS - Hincmar of Rheims brought to own page
Florus of Lyon (Lugdunensis) (d. c. 860) - no commentary, only a quote from Cyprian
Mysterium vestis Christi, id est corporis eius, scindi non oportere; ex libro S. Cypriani de Ecclesiae Unitate. (0090C)
15. Dominus dicit: Ego et Pater unum sumus (Ioan. X, 30) . Et iterum de Patre et Filio et Spiritu sancto scriptum est: Tres unum sunt (Ioan. V, 7) ; et quisquis credit hanc veritatem de divina firmitate venientem, sacramentis coelestibus haerentem, scindi in Ecclesia non posse hoc unitatis sacramentum, hoc vinculum concordiae inseparabiliter cohaerentis, ostenditur, quando in Evangelio tunica Domini nostri Iesu Christi non dividitur omnino nec scinditur, sed sortientibus de veste Christi, quis Christum potius indueret, integra vestis accipitur, et incorrupta atque indivisa tunica possidetur. Loquitur ac dicit Scriptura
The Verse was possibly from Migne, not the Smaragdus ms.
Smaragdus of Saint-Mihiel - (c. 760 – c. 840)
5 Smaragdus S Michaelis, Collectiones in epistolas et evangelia, 102, 0277A (auctor c.760-c.840)
Omne quod natum est ex Deo, vincit mundum. Et haec est victoria quae vincit mundum fides nostra. Quis est autem qui vincit mundum, nisi qui credit, quoniam Iesus est Filius Dei. Hic est qui venit per aquam et sanguinem Christus Iesus. Non in aqua solum, sed in aqua et sanguine. (0277A) Et spiritus est qui testificatur, quoniam Christus est veritas. Quoniam tres sunt qui testimonium dant in coelo, Pater, Verbum et Spiritus sanctus, et hi tres unum sunt, qui testimonium dant in terra, spiritus, aqua et sanguis, hi et tres unum sunt. Si testimonium hominum accipimus, testimonium Dei maius est. Quoniam hoc est testimonium Dei quod maius est, quoniam testificatus est de Filio suo. Qui credit in Filium Dei, habet testimonium Dei in se.
(commentary is unclear, only includes earthly?)
(commentary only includes earthly)
The Scripture passage is quoted with the witnesses, but then when you read further, verse 8 omits "in earth" and he does not comment on it.
the Scripture passage of verse 7 is not quoted at all or commented on.try to find a manuscript with this passage and see if the Scripture is really there.
Last edited: Sep 10, 2021
Gennadius Scholarios - (1400-1473)
From the Orthodox Wiki page, shown here on PBF
He may have been written about by Simonides in 1819
And this is on Academia.edu
The Theology of the Divine Essence and Energies in George-Gennadio Scholarios (Ἔkδoσις Ἱepᾶς ΘeoλoYιkῆς Exoλῆς Xάλknς [forthcoming]
Dear Dr. Christiaan Kappes,
I am trying to track down a reference in the Orthodox Wiki about the usage of the heavenly witnesses verse, 1 John 5:7
1 John 5:7 (AV)
For there are three that bear record in heaven,
the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost:
and these three are one.
kaι eπιφaveίς θeoλόYoι όπwς o Πatpιάpxnς Kwvσtavtιvouπόλewς Γevvάδιoς Exoλάpιoς (15oς aιώvaς)
and eminent theologians such as the Patriarch of Constantinople Gennadios Scholarios (15th century)
Said to be in this book:
Eπιtouή tou katά Eθvιkώv, σto eδάφιo 4,15.
This would be an important textual find, by an additional top Greek Orthodox scholar many years before Erasmus.
Can you help confirm if Scholarios used the verse?
Last edited: Apr 29, 2021
Guibert of Nogent (c. 1055–1124)
The Autobiography Of Guibert (1925)
George Gordon Coulton (1858-1947)
Guibert de Nogent (d.1124):
Recueil des historiens des croisades - Volume 8 - (1879)
Guiberti Abbatis S. Mariæ de Novigento
(PL 156 0686D) CAPUT II.
Cum ab institutis paternorum canonum, et ab Occidentalis Ecclesiae pio ritu, sensu ac multimoda actione discordent, hunc damnationis suae abjecerunt cumulum, ut claudicare perhibeant, inflicta ei propriae naturae inaequalitate, Deum. Si enim, ex Filii Dei praecepto, in Patris et Filii et Spiritus sancti nomine baptizandum est , et hoc idcirco quia haec tria unus Deus est: quidquid in his tribus asseritur minus alterutro, Deus profecto non est.
Guibert of Nogent: Portrait of a Medieval Mind (2013)
RGA - p. 42
Guibert of Nogent (c. 1055-1124), Historia quæ dicitur gesta dei per francos I.2, PL 121, 688 (Græcorum erronea doctrina): “Si enim, ex Filii Dei præcepto, in Patris et Filii et Spiritus sancti nomine baptizandum est [Mt 28:19], et hoc idcirco quia hæc tria unus Deus est: quidquid in his tribus asseritur minus alterutro, Deus profecto non est.”
The Witness of God is Greater
As the designation of Bogomils does not seem to have been used even in Macedonia and Thrace before the time of Euthymius of the Periblepton in l045 AD, it is difficult to see how either Adhemar or Roger could have described what they believed to be dualist heresy other than as Manichaean. Three reports (by Paul, a monk of St Pere de Chartres, writing in c. l072 about the Orleans heretics of 1022, Landulf, a cleric of Milan describing the heretics of Montforte in c. 1028, and Guibert of Nogent) emphasise the docetic views of the heretics, that is their belief that the human life of Christ was an illusion. Two reports (from the Synod of Cambrai in 1025 which looked at the allegations against the heretics of Arras, and Guibert of Nogent) say that the heretics only believed in the Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles.67 Roger of Chalons describes the ritual of the laying-on of hands.68 Guibert says that they rejected food produced by coition.59 All the cases exhibit strong anti-sacramental opinions, including the denial of the validity of baptism, the Eucharist, penance, and marriage. Chastity and fasting were central to their lifestyle. All these beliefs are consistent with Bogomil teaching, and in three cases there is some hint of outside influence in which Italy is the common factor ...
(Barber, The Cathars: Dualist Heretics in Languedoc in the High Middle Ages, 2014, p. 29-30)
3.9 KB · Views: 70
Last edited: Jun 25, 2021
Geoffrey of Clairvaux, or Geoffrey of Auxerre, was the secretary and biographer of Bernard of Clairvaux and later abbot of a number of monasteries in the Cistercian tradition.
A disciple of Bernard, was b. between the years 1115 and 1120, at Auxerre; d. some time after the year 1188, probably at the abbey of Haute Combe, Savoy. At an early age he entered the ranks of the clergy, and followed for some time the course of lectures given by Abelard. In 1140 St. Bernard of Clairvaux came to Paris, and before the assembled scholars preached a sermon "De conversione ad clericos" (P.L., CLXXXII, 832 sqq.), in which he dwelt on the vanities of a life in the world, on the necessity of a sincere conversion, and on the peace to be found in the monastic profession. Geoffrey was so struck by this forcible discourse that, with several others, he followed St. Bernard and joined the monastic community of Clairvaux.
Vita prima Sancti Bernardi Claraevallis Abbatis: liber primu (2011)
Guillelmus a Sancto Theodorico, Arnaud de Bonneval, Gaufridus Claraevallensis
Geoffrey (of Auxerre), ...
The Writings against Gilbert of Poitiers by Geoffrey of Auxerre (1966)
Nicholas M. Haring (Häring)
RGA - p. 42
Gaufridus Clarævallensis (c. 1114/20-1188),
Contra capitula Gilberti Pictaviensis episcopi. De capitulo secundo, PL 185, 608: “Ibi enim unitas vere est Trinitas, et Trinitas vere est unitas. Tunc perfecte cognoscemus, quod modo salubriter credimus. Neque enim aliter animadvertere merebimur, nisi nunc, quæ vera sunt, fateamur, hoc est, veram, coæternam, incommutabilem, distinctam personis et inseparabilem Trinitatem, replentem omnia simul substantiali virtute sua. Unum simplex, trinumque: hæc tria unum, et hoc unum tres: sed non tres Patres, nec tres Filii nec tres Spiritus sancti
There is a good hit above and in Witness of God for William (Guillaume) of Auxerre.
Last edited: Jun 25, 2021
[Alcuin, De fide sanctæ et individuæ trinitatis I.11]. Tres unum, et unum
tres confiteor. Hæc tria unus Deus, et unus Deus hæc tria [Alcuin, De fide III].”
Peter Cellensis - (b. in Troyes c. 1115;[1] d. at Chartres, 20 February 1183) Peter of Celle, Peter of Celles, Pierre de Celle and Peter de la Celle,
RGA - p. 57
89 Petrus Cellensis, Tractatus de tabernaculo I.7, PL 202:1079.
Petri Abbatis Cellensis primum, deinde S. Remigii apud Remos, ac demum episcopi Carnotensis opera omnia (1671)
Petri Cellensis ... Opera omnia: ex libris tum editis, tum mss. in unum collecta cura et studio D. Ambr. Janvier ... (1855)
Alexander of Ashby (c. 1220)
Alexander of Ashby (Latin: Alexander Essebiensis) was a celebrated English theologian and poet, who flourished about the year 1220.
https://archive.org/details/MediaevalStudies/Mediaeval Studies - Volume 52 - 1990/page/n83/mode/2up
RGA - p. 57
Alexander of Ashby (c. 1150-c. 1208),93 .
93 Alexander of Ashby, Meditatio IX, CCCM 188:442.
Perturbations of the Soul: Alexander of Ashby and Aegidius of Paris on Understanding Biblical Obscuritas
The Wiley-Blackwell Encyclopedia of Literature in Britain: Entries on Alexander of Ashby, Lawrence of Durham, and William de Montibus
Last edited: Jun 26, 2021
Hildegard of Bingen (1098-1179),88 Hildegardis Bingensis
RGA - p. 57
Hildegard of Bingen (1098-1179),88
88 Hildegard von Bingen, Scivias III.7.8, CCCM 43:470.
Hildegardis Bingensis, Scivias Hildegardis sive libri visionum ac revelationum, 197, 0647B (auctor 1098–1179)
Scivias Hildegardis sive libri visionum ac revelationum. PL 197, col 0647C (check this)
Hildegardis Abbatissa, Visiones, 3, 7
22 Sicque Filius Dei a multis et admirandis signis in toto terrarum orbe manifestatus est ex Patre secundum divinitatem ante tempora ineffabiliter genitus fuisse, et post in tempore secundum humanitatem mirabiliter incarnatus esse ex Virgine, ita quod corda omnium haec audientium horrore et tremore nimio sint concussa, et quod vana ac fallacia opera quae secundum voluptates suas fecerunt, ad nihilum in eis per contemptum mortis sint redacta vero verbo Dei testimonium sanctae Trinitati atque vivificae salvationi quae fit per aquam regenerationis ad vitam reddente, ut dilectus Ioannes in verbis exhortationis suae ostendit dicens: Et Spiritus est qui testificatur quoniam Christus est veritas, quia tres sunt qui testimonium dant in terra: spiritus, aqua et sanguis, et tres unum sunt.
23 Et tres sunt qui dant testimonium in coelo: Pater, Verbum et Spiritus, et tres unum sunt [I Ioan. V]. Hoc tale est: Spiritus hominis spiritualis est videlicet non procedens de sanguine nec nascens de carne, sed currens de arcano Dei, existens illi invisibilis quod mutabilitati subiectum est. Ideoque est illius testificatio ad Filium Dei cuius gloria mirabilis est in mystico spiramine, quam nullus hominum perfecte intelligere valet, scilicet quomodo idem Unigenitus Dei de Spiritu sancto receptus sit et in hunc mundum venerit, sicut etiam nullus hominum plene scire poterit: quomodo anima pertranseat corpus et sanguinem hominis, ita quod eis una vita sit.
Last edited: Jun 27, 2021
Using MLS tres unum sunt search
On the other hand, it now seems practically demonstrated that Alain de Lille was the author of the Ars catholicae fidei and the treatise Contra haereticos.[6] Alphandéry, Paul Daniel (1911). "Alain de Lille". In Chisholm, Hugh (ed.). Encyclopædia Britannica. 1 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. pp. 467–468.
(PL 210 0334C) CAPUT XXXII. Quibus auctoritatibus et rationibus probatur quod Christus vere fuerit Filius Dei.
Patet ex praemissis Christum veram carnem assumpsisse, et verum hominem fuisse, vere passum resurrexisse a mortuis, veram futuram mortuorum resurrectionem, et in propria carne. Propter praedictas rationes dicunt quidam haeretici Christum veram quidem carnem habuisse, sed Filium Dei non fuisse: absurdum enim iudicant asserere Filium Dei assumpsisse carnem. Sed, quod Christus vere Filius Dei fuerit, et auctoritas clamat, et ratio. (0334D) Ait enim Christus: Ego et Pater unum sumus (Ioan. X) . Sed absit Christum mentitum fuisse! Ergo vel Pater non erat Deus, vel Christus erat Deus. Sed Deum vocat Patrem suum, ergo ipse erat Filius Dei. (0335A) Erubescant ergo haeretici hoc diffiteri quod daemones etiam coacti sunt confiteri dicentes: Iesu Fili Dei vivi, utquid venisti ante tempus torquere nos? (Matth. VIII.) Et Ioannes evangelista clamat eum esse Deum dicens: Et Deus erat Verbum (Ioan. I) . Et Paulus in Epistola ad Hebraeos, ait de Christo: Qui cum sit splendor gloriae, et figura substantiae eius (Hebr. I) . Item Ioannes in Epistola canonica: Tres sunt qui testimonium dant in coelo, Pater, Verbum, et Spiritus Sanctus, et hi tres unum sunt. Et tres sunt qui testimonium dant in terra, spiritus, aqua, et sanguis (Ioan. V) . Hic insinuat Ioannes Christum verum fuisse hominem, et verum Deum et verum Dei Filium. Item per opera miraculosa quae ipse fecit, quae nemo alius facere potuit, probari potest, ipsum necessario fuisse Deum. Unde et ipse ad Iudaeos ait: Si verbis non creditis, operibus credite (Ioan. X) . Item ipse ait: Satanam se vidisse de coelo cadentem tanquam fulgur (Luc. X) . Sed hoc factum est in mundi initio. Ergo Christus fuit in initio mundi: sed tunc non fuit homo, vel alia creatura, ergo Creator. (0335B) Item ipse ait: Antequam Abraham fieret, ego sum (Ioan. VIII) . Item Ioannes ait per ipsum esse factam omnem creaturam, ergo non est pura creatura, per quem facta est omnis creatura.
Pope Alexander III - Instructio fidei Catholicae - AD 1169
This has to be checked as to how it is listed, both Witness and RGA
Alexander_III_cps2, Epistola de perseverantia ordinis <<<
Est enim Deus Pater, Deus Filius, et Deus Spiritus sanctus; sed Pater, et Filius, et Spiritus sanctus unum sunt. Est autem ea discretio in personis, ut
ALEXANDER episcopus, servus servorum Dei, soldano Iconii, veritatem agnoscere, et agnitam custodire. (1069D)
Codex Dogmaticus seu Collectio veritatum Catholicarum atque nonnullarum de iis explationum ac de dogmatibus tractationum (1868)
A. D. 1067 to A. D. 1216, Volume 2 By Matthaeus (Parisiensis.)
AD. 1169. Letter of pope Alexander III. to the sultan of Iconium. giving him instruction in the Christian faith.
Alexander III referenced in context of heavenly witnesses by defenders.
Same Latin text, check context
Appendix of Roger of Wendover
Last edited: Jun 26, 2021
You must log in or register to reply here.
Facebook Twitter Reddit Pinterest Tumblr WhatsApp Email Share Link
Medieval and Ante-Reformation church writers
Community platform by XenForo® © 2010-2021 XenForo Ltd.