The Aquinas Center for Theological Renewal (at Ave Maria University) and the Thomistic Institute (at the Dominican House of Studies) are teaming up once again for a February 2020 academic conference to be held in Ave Maria. This year’s theme is, “Thomas Aquinas and the Crisis of Christology.” The Sacra Doctrina Project’s own Fr. Thomas Joseph White, O.P., will be featured as one of two keynote speakers.
Living Morally and Intelligently in the Light of Christ’s Eternal Glory
Conference and Presentation of Awards
The Aquinas Center realizes the importance of St. Thomas Aquinas’s theology and philosophy for the deepening appropriation of Catholic speculative and moral theology. The Center reaches out to scholars and doctoral students around the world and bestows awards in recognition of their contributions to the study of Aquinas and Catholic intellectual and faith life.
The conference sessions will take place in the ballroom of the Bob Thomas Student Union. All sessions are free and open to the public.
Friday, January 25th, 5p.m.
The Veritas Medal Presentation and Lecture
The Veritas Medal honors an eminent Catholic thinker whose career reflects the Aquinas Center’s goal to foster the search for truth. Since the attainment of truth is a participation in the Wisdom of Christ, the Veritas Medal serves to recognize those who have instantiated, in their lives and work, the integration of faith and reason.
Saturday, January 26th, 10:30-12:30
The Journet Prize honors the scholarly monograph published in any language during the past calendar year that best exemplifies the task of drawing upon the thought of St. Thomas Aquinas to engage constructively in contemporary theology, philosophy, and/or biblical studies.
The St. Thomas Aquinas Dissertation Prize Presentation and Lecture
The Aquinas Dissertation Prize honors the dissertation defended in any language during the past calendar year that best exemplifies the task of drawing upon the thought of St. Thomas Aquinas to engage constructively in contemporary theology, philosophy, and/or biblical studies.
Saturday, January 26th, 2:00-3:30
Graduate Student Panel
“A Thomistic Appraisal of the Phoenix Abortion Case, with Special Consideration Given to the Self-Determinative Structure of Human Acts” by David Tamisiea
“St. Thomas’s Late Teaching on the Procession of the Holy Spirit” by Paul Shields
“True Devotion: Charles De Koninck’s Ego Sapientia and the doctrine of slavery to Mary” by Katherine Gardner
On Friday, October 28th, Fr. John Baptist Ku of the Dominican House of Studies delivered the annual Aquinas Lecture at Ave Maria University to a standing room only crowd. The Aquinas Lecture is delivered each year by the recipient of the Aquinas Center’s Dissertation Prize. Fr Ku’s lecutre, “God the Father in the Theology of St. Thomas Aquinas,” presented the central contribution of his dissertation on Aquinas’ theology of God the Father. Below is a series of texts from Aquinas’ opera provided by Fr. Ku that highlight the unique way that Aquinas uses the terms “author” and “authority” in his theology of the inner Triune life of God.
We are deeply grateful to Fr. Ku for his fine lecture and the generouos amount of time that he spent with our faculty and students during his visit to Ave Maria.
- “Author” and “Authority”
A.1. Among the divine persons, only the Father is the author
But the word “author” adds to the meaning of a principle that it is not from another; and therefore the Father alone is said to be an author, although the Son too is called a principle notionally.
[Eternity] has in its meaning as well the absence of a principle, and in this way it accords with the property of the Father that is fitting to him insofar as he is an author or not from a principle, namely innascibility.
Christ wanted to use prayer to the Father in order to give us an example of praying and to show that the Father is the author from whom he proceeds eternally according to divine nature and from whom according to human nature he possesses every good that he has.
Although the Word is without beginning in time, nevertheless he is not without a principle or author, for he was with God as his author.
The aforesaid Doctors confirm that the Son is the author of the Holy Spirit. For Athanasius says in his Letter to Serapio: “The Apostle attributes what the Spirit works and accomplishes in him, to the Son as his author—as the Son attributes those works he himself does, to God the Father as his author.” But the authority of one divine person with respect to another is only insofar as one is from the other eternally.
When Peter of Tarentaise says that “it does not follow that because the Father is the author both mediately and immediately, therefore he is more truly author—rather it follows that he is the author in another way,” if he takes this absolutely, it is indeed false. If he takes this relatively then in one way it is true and in another way it is false: because the relation by which the Son is a principle of the Holy Spirit is common to the Father and the Son. Hence as far as this relation is concerned, the way of relating is the same, but the relation by which the Son is from the Father is proper to him. In this way, it can be said that the Son is the author of the Holy Spirit in a different way than the Father is, insofar as the Son has this from another, but the Father does not. And similarly it can be said of all things which belong to the Father and the Son, because everything that the Son has is from the Father but the Father has them from no one.
When Hilary says that the Holy Spirit is “from the Father and the Son as authors,” it should be explained that the substantive stands for the adjective.
The Father is the “author of the procession by which the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son.”
Among the Latins, it is not customary to call the Father the cause of the Son or the Holy Spirit, but only the principle or author.
A.2. With respect to the economy, all the divine persons are the “author”
Paul brings in as witnesses God the Father and Our Lord Jesus Christ… . And therefore he brings in the author of life who gives life to all things. But he speaks of God, who is the whole Trinity, who is the author of life.
Moreover, Paul shows who the author of these goods [grace and peace] is, adding “from God the Father, etc.” And these two goods can be distinguished in two ways because when he says “from God the Father,” it can be understood as the whole Trinity. For although the person of the Father is said to be the Father of Christ by nature, nevertheless the whole Trinity is our Father by creation and governance… . Therefore the goods come from God our Father, that is, from the whole Trinity… .
Likewise when he says “from God our Father,” the person of the Father alone can be understood; and although the whole Trinity is our Father, as has been said, nevertheless the person of the Father is our Father by appropriation.
The cause and authority of the goods [grace and peace] is God the Father as author, insofar as he is God.
Christ indeed wanted to suffer what he suffered, for that time, but he nevertheless wanted the glory of the body, which he did not yet have, to follow the passion. This glory he expected from the Father as the author. And therefore it is fitting that he asked him for it.
Therefore adoption, though common to the whole Trinity, is nevertheless appropriated to the Father as the author, to the Son as the exemplar, and to the Holy Spirit as the one imprinting on us the likeness of this exemplar.
The man Christ paid the price of our redemption immediately, but by the command of the Father as the primordial author.
“At that time, Jesus responded: ‘I thank you, Father … .’” In the passage above [11:21-24], the Lord rebukes the infidelity of the crowds. Now he gives thanks for the faith of the disciples and other believers. And first he gives thanks to the Father as the author. Second, he shows that he has the same power when he says: “all things have been given to me by my Father.”
In saying ‘he sent me,’ Christ indicates that the Father is the author of the Incarnation.
It is fitting to the Son to be the “author of this sanctification.”
The sacrifice of the New Law, that is, the Eucharist, contains Christ himself, who is the author of sanctification.
But Christ’s soul is moved by God through grace, not only so that he will come to the glory of eternal life, but also so that he will lead others to it, insofar as he is the head of the Church and the author of human salvation … .
It was fitting that the Father should send the author of salvation, namely the Son … to lead many sons to glory through himself.
And thus “grace” is in the nominative case. Now, Christ is called “grace” because he is the author of grace.
And when he says “who gave himself, etc.,” it is as if he says, therefore Christ is the author of grace and peace … .
Not that peace is a God, as those pagans used to say, but that Christ is called the God of peace because he is the giver and lover of peace. Jn 14:27: “My peace I give to you,” etc. 1 Cor 14:33: “He is not a God of conflict but of peace.” Rom 5:5: “The love of God has been poured in our hearts,” etc. He is also the author of peace… .
The author and giver of spiritual food is Christ.
And who is the author? Certainly, the Holy Spirit. “For it is not you who speak, but the Spirit of your Father who speaks in you.”
So, it was fitting that even the invisible missions of the divine persons be manifested by visible creatures. Nevertheless the Son and the Holy Spirit are manifested differently. For it belongs to the Holy Spirit, insofar as he proceeds as Love, to be the gift of sanctification; but it belongs to the Son, insofar he is the principle of the Holy Spirit, to be the author of this sanctification. And therefore the Son was sent visibly as the author of sanctification but the Holy Spirit as the sign of sanctification.
The Holy Spirit is the author of prophecy (ST II-II, q. 172, a. 6, ad 1, De Veritate, q. 12, a. 10, obj. 7: prophetiae auctor), of Scripture (De Potentia, q. 4, a. 1, corp., Quodlibet VII, q. 6, a. 1, ad 5, Quodlibeta 7, q. 6, a. 3, corp., In Isaiam, lec. 1, In Psalmos, Prologue and part 44, #1: auctor divinae Scripturae), of law (In II ad Cor., ch. 3, lec. 3: auctor legis), of life (In Ioan., ch. 6, lec. 4, In ad Gal., ch. 6, lec. 2: auctor vitae), of gifts (Super I Cor. 12:11: actor donorum), of graces (CT I, ch. 219, Super I ad Cor. xi-xvi, ch. 12, lec. 1, Super I Cor. 12:4: gratiarum auctor), of perfect human action (ST III, q. 41, a. 2, ad 2: perfecti operis auctor), and of Christ’s conception and birth (In Matt. 1 l:4: generationis actorem; actor conceptionis).
B.1. Among the divine persons, the Father and the Son have authority
For the Father is in the Son and the Son in the Father mutually. Nevertheless, the Father does not generate the Son and the Son the Father mutually. And this is what Dionysius adds, that “the Father alone is the supersubstantial source of deity”—as in a source, authority is understood, or a principle not from a principle.
The Father has “first authority.”
Four points … show that the authority of spiration is in the Father. First, because the Holy Spirit is said to proceed principally from the Father. Second, because he is said to proceed properly from him … . Third, because the Holy Spirit is said to be from the Father through the Son … . Fourth, because sometimes only the Father is named in the procession of the Holy Spirit … .
The Holy Spirit is said to be principally from the Father because the authority of spiration is in the Father, from whom even the Son has spirative power.
In every mission, there must be an authority of someone over him who is sent. Now among the divine persons there is only authority according to origin; and therefore it is not fitting to a divine person to be sent unless he is from another, with respect to whom authority over the former can be specified. And therefore the Holy Spirit and the Son are said to be sent but not the Father or the Trinity itself.
And in this way, the Holy Spirit is given only by the Father and the Son insofar as they have authority over him, not indeed of dominion but of origin because he proceeds from both.
But the sender has an authority over the one sent. Therefore it is necessary to say that the Son has an authority with respect to the Holy Spirit… . But the Holy Spirit did not assume a created nature according to which he could be said to be sent by the Son, or according to which the Son could be said to have authority with respect to him. Therefore, it is conceded that the Son has authority over the Holy Spirit with respect to the eternal person.
Therefore, the Holy Spirit must be said to be the Son’s insofar as the Holy Spirit is a divine person. Thus, either he is said to be his absolutely, or he is said to be his as his Spirit. If absolutely, then there must be some authority of the Son with respect to the Holy Spirit… . And the same follows if the Holy Spirit is said to be the Son’s as his Spirit, because “Spirit,” insofar as it is a personal name, implies a relation of origin to the one spirating, as “Son” does to the one generating.
For if all things that are the Father’s are also the Son’s, it is necessary that the Father’s authority, according to which he is the principle of the Holy Spirit, also be the Son’s. Therefore, as the Holy Spirit receives what is the Father’s from the Father, so he receives what is the Son’s from the Son.
Macedonius “denied the Son’s authority of spirating a divine person when he said that the Holy Spirit was a creature.”
B.2. With respect to the economy, all the divine persons have authority
Moreover the cause and authority of the goods [grace and peace] is God the Father as author, insofar as he is God, and the whole Trinity, which is called the God of all things through creation.
The work of the conception is indeed common to the whole Trinity; nevertheless it is attributed in some way to individual persons. For authority is attributed to the Father with respect to the person of the Son, who assumed [human nature] to himself through this kind of conception. And this assumption of the flesh is attributed to the Son, but the formation of the body that was assumed by the Son is attributed to the Holy Spirit.
Therefore the authority of judging is attributed to the Father insofar as he is the principle of the Son, but the essence itself of the judgment is attributed to the Son who is the Art and Wisdom of the Father. That is, as the Father made all things through his Son, insofar as he is his Art, so also he judges all things through his Son, insofar as he is his Wisdom and Truth.
Therefore, the Son alone will appear, who alone has an assumed nature. Therefore, he alone judges, who alone will appear to all, but nevertheless [he judges] by the authority of the Father.
Jesus’ judiciary authority leads them to believe the Christ; and therefore he adds, “I have much to say and judge about you,” as if to say, “I have the authority to judge you.”
“To be seated with” or “he sits with” can be referred to Christ insofar as he is God; and he thus sits with [the Father] because he has the same authority of judging that the Father has but is distinct in person.
The visible mission [of the Holy Spirit] was made to Christ in baptism under the appearance of a dove, which is a fertile animal, to show in Christ the authority of giving of grace … .
Consequently, when he says, “which [food] the Son of man will give you,” he indicates the giver of the spiritual food. First, he indicates the author of this food; second, he manifests whence he has the authority of feeding.
“I desire” [in Jn 17:24: “Father, I desire that they also, whom you have given me, may be with me where I am”] … indicates authority if we refer this to Christ’s divine will, which is the same as the will of the Father; for by his will he justifies and saves men … . If we refer this to Christ’s human will, it indicates merit, for Christ’s human will merits our salvation.
For they were sent by Christ as if bearing his own authority and lot. Jn 20:21: “As the Father has sent me, so also I send you,” that is, with the fullness of authority.
“He who receives him” whom I send, “receives me,” whose authority is in them; and “he who receives me,” receives the Father, whose authority is in me.
Because the Son does these works by his own authority, but he who believes in him does them by asking [the Son].”
Because the Son receives equality from the Father and not conversely, therefore the Son is equaled to the Father and not conversely.
It is not “an insult to the only-begotten God that the Father is the innascible God to him … because he is the only-begotten of the Father, and through generation he receives the whole nature of the Father.” 
 I Sent., d. 29, q. 1, a. 1, corp.: “Sed nomen auctoris addit super rationem principii hoc quod est non esse ab aliquo; et ideo solus Pater auctor dicitur, quamvis etiam Filius principium dicatur notionaliter.”
 I Sent., d. 31, q. 2, a. 1, corp.: “[Aeternitas] Habet etiam in ratione sua privationem principii, et in hoc convenit cum proprietate Patris, quae competit sibi secundum quod est auctor, vel non de principio, scilicet innascibilitate.”
 ST III, q. 21, a. 3, corp.: “Christus ad hoc uti voluit oratione ad Patrem, ut nobis daret exemplum orandi; et ut ostenderet Patrem suum esse auctorem a quo et aeternaliter processit secundum divinam naturam, et secundum humanam naturam ab eo habet quidquid boni habet.”
 In Ioan. 1:1 (lec. 1, no. 48): “Licet Verbum careat initio durationis, non tamen caret principio vel auctore: erat enim apud Deum, ut apud auctorem.”
 CEG II, ch. 23: “‘Quod Filius est auctor Spiritus Sancti.’ Habetur etiam a praedictis doctoribus quod Filius sit auctor Spiritus Sancti. Dicit enim Athanasius in Epistola ad Serapionem ‘Apostolus quae in eo operatur Spiritus et efficit Filio auctori eius attribuit, sicut et Filius quae ipse facit opera suo auctori Deo Patri attribuit.’ Auctoritas autem in divinis personis unius ad alteram non est nisi secundum quod aeternaliter una est ab alia; est ergo Spiritus Sanctus aeternaliter a Filio.”
 Resp. de 108 art., q. 27: “Quod vero XXVII proponitur, ‘Non sequitur quod sit magis auctor sed alio modo auctor, quia et mediate et immediate,’ si modum absolutum intelligit, falsum est. Si autem intelligat modum relatiuum, quantum ad aliquid uerum est, et quantum ad aliquid falsum: quia relatio qua Filius est principium Spiritus Sancti, est communis Patri et Filio, unde quantum ad hanc, idem est modus relatiuus; sed relatio qua Filius est a Patre propria est ei. Secundum hunc modum potest dici, quod Filius alio modo est auctor Spiritus Sancti quam Pater; in quantum Filius hoc habet ab alio, non autem Pater. Et similiter potest dici de omnibus que conueniunt Patri et Filio, quia omnia Filius habet a Patre, et Pater a nullo.”
 ST I, q. 36, a. 4, ad 7: “Quod vero Hilarius dicit, quod Spiritus Sanctus est a Patre et Filio auctoribus, exponendum est quod ponitur substantivum pro adiectivo.”
 I Sent., d. 12, divisio textus: “‘Inde est etiam quod veritas ostendens Patrem esse auctorem processionis qua procedit Spiritus sanctus a Filio.’”
 CEG I, ch. 1: “Apud Latinos autem non est consuetum quod Pater dicatur causa Filii vel Spiritus Sancti, sed solum principium vel auctor.”
 In I ad Tim. 6:14 (lec. 2, no. 261): “Testes inducit Deum Patrem, et Dominum nostrum Iesum Christum… . et ideo inducit auctorem vitae, qui vivificat omnia. Dicit autem Deo, qui est tota Trinitas, qui est auctor vitae.”
 In II ad Cor. 1:2 (lec. 1, nos. 9-10): “Quis autem sit auctor horum bonorum ostendit, subdens a Deo Patre, etc. Et haec duo possunt dupliciter distingui, quia cum dicit a Deo Patre, potest intelligi pro tota Trinitate. Nam, licet persona Patris dicatur pater Christi per naturam, tamen tota Trinitas est pater noster per creationem et gubernationem… . A Deo ergo patre nostro, id est a tota Trinitate proveniunt bona… . Item cum dicit a Deo Patre nostro, potest intelligi persona Patris solum; et, licet tota Trinitas sit pater noster, ut dictum est, tamen persona Patris est pater noster per appropriationem.”
 In ad Gal. 1:3 (lec. 1, no. 13): “Causa autem et auctoritas bonorum est Deus Pater tamquam auctor, inquantum Deus, et tota Trinitas, quae dicitur Deus omnium per creationem.”
 ST III, q. 21, a. 3, ad 2: “Christus volebat quidem pati illa quae patiebatur, pro tempore illo: sed nihilominus volebat ut, post passionem, gloriam corporis consequeretur, quam nondum habebat. Quam quidem gloriam expectabat a Patre sicut ab auctore. Et ideo convenienter ab eo ipsam petebat.”
 ST III, q. 23, a. 2, ad 3: “Et ideo adoptatio, licet sit communis toti Trinitati, appropriatur tamen Patri ut auctori, Filio ut exemplari, Spiritui Sancto ut imprimenti in nobis huius similitudinem exemplaris.”
 ST III, q. 48, a. 5, ad 2: “pretium redemptionis nostrae homo Christus solvit immediate: sed de mandato Patris sicut primordialis auctoris.”
 In Matt. 11:25 (lec. 3, no. 955): “‘In illo tempore respondens Iesus dixit: Confiteor tibi, Pater’ etc.’ Supra Dominus redarguerat infidelitatem turbarum; nunc gratias agit de fide discipulorum et aliorum credentium. Et primo reddit gratias Patri tamquam auctori; secundo ostendit eamdem potestatem se habere, ibi ‘Omnia mihi tradita sunt a Patre meo.’”
 In Ioan. 7:29 (lec. 3, no. 1065): “Per hoc vero quod dicit ‘Ipse me misit,’ insinuat Patrem auctorem incarnationis.”
 ST I, q. 43, a. 7, corp.: “Filio … competit esse sanctificationis huius Auctorem.” The same appellation for the Son appears in ad 4.
 ST I-II, q. 101, a. 4, ad 2: “Ad secundum dicendum quod sacrificium novae legis, idest Eucharistia, continet ipsum Christum, qui est sanctificationis auctor.”
 ST I-II, q. 114, a. 6, corp.: “Sed anima Christi mota est a Deo per gratiam non solum ut ipse perveniret ad gloriam vitae aeternae, sed etiam ut alios in eam adduceret, inquantum est caput Ecclesiae et Auctor salutis humanae.”
 In ad Heb. 2:10 (lec. 3, no. 128): “Decebat ergo quod Pater auctorem salutis mitteret, scilicet Filium, ut expositum est, qui multos filios adduxerat per ipsum in gloriam.”
 In ad Heb. 2:9 (lec. 3, no. 124): “Et sic gratia est nominativi casus. Dicitur autem Christus gratia, quia auctor est gratiae.”
 In ad Gal. 1:4 (lec. 1, no. 14): “Et quantum ad hoc dicit ‘qui dedit semetipsum,’ etc., quasi dicat: Ideo Christus est auctor gratiae et pacis.”
 In II ad Cor. 13:11 (lec. 3, no. 540): “Non quod pax sit unus Deus, sicut illi dicebant, sed ideo Christus dicitur Deus pacis, quia est dator pacis et amator. Io. xiv, 27: ‘Pacem meam do vobis,’ etc. I Cor. xiv, 33: ‘Non est Deus dissensionis, sed pacis.’ Rom. v, 5: ‘Charitas Dei diffusa est in cordibus nostris,’ etc. Ipse etiam est auctor pacis.”
 In Ioan. 6:27 (lec. 3, no. 897): “Auctor autem et dator cibi spiritualis est Christus.”
 In Matt.10:20 (lec. 2, no. 849): “Et quis est auctor? Certe Spiritus sanctus. ‘Non enim vos estis qui loquimini, sed spiritus Patris vestri qui loquitur in vobis.’”
 ST I, q. 43, a. 7, corp.: “ita conveniens fuit ut etiam invisibiles missiones divinarum Personarum secundum aliquas visibiles creaturas manifestarentur. Aliter tamen Filius et Spiritus Sanctus. Nam Spiritui Sancto, inquantum procedit ut Amor, competit esse sanctificationis donum: Filio autem, inquantum est Spiritus Sancti principium, competit esse sanctificationis huius Auctorem. Et ideo Filius visibiliter missus est tanquam sanctificationis Auctor: sed Spiritus Sanctus tanquam sanctificationis indicium.”
 (blank placeholder).
 In Dionysii de Div. Nom., ch. 2, lec. 2 (no. 155): “Mutuo enim Pater est in Filio et Filius in Patre, non tamen mutuo Pater generat Filium et Filius Patrem; et hoc est quod subdit quod solus Pater est fons supersubstantialis Deitatis, ut in fonte, auctoritas intelligatur sive principium non de principio.”
 I Sent., d. 15, q. 2, a. 1, ad 3: “prima auctoritas.”
 I Sent., d. 12, divisio textus: “quatuor … ostendunt auctoritatem spirationis in Patre. Primo per hoc quod dicitur Spiritus sanctus a Patre principaliter procedere. Secundo ex hoc quod dicitur proprie procedere de ipso … . Tertio per hoc quod dicitur Spiritus sanctus esse a Patre per Filium … . Quarto per hoc quod in processione Spiritus sancti aliquando solus Pater nominatur.”
 I Sent., d. 12, q. un., a. 2, ad 3: “Ad tertium dicendum, quod Spiritus sanctus dicitur esse principaliter a Patre, quia in Patre est auctoritas spirationis, a quo etiam habet Filius virtutem spirativam.”
 I Sent., d. 15, q. 2, a. 1, corp.: “Respondeo dicendum, quod, sicut dictum est [d. 1, q. 1, a. 1], in omni missione oportet quod ponatur aliqua auctoritas alicujus ad ipsum missum. In divinis autem personis non est auctoritas nisi secundum originem; et ideo nulli personae divinae convenit mitti, nisi ei quae est ab alio, respectu cujus potest in alio designari auctoritas; et ideo Spiritus sanctus et Filius dicuntur mitti, et non Pater vel Trinitas ipsa.”
 In ad Gal. 3:5 (lec. 2, no. 127): “et hoc modo Spiritus Sanctus datur a solo Patre et Filio secundum quod eius auctoritatem habent, non quidem dominii sed originis, quia ab utroque procedit.”
 SCG IV, ch. 24 (p. 90, col. 2, line 11; no. 3607): “Mittens autem auctoritatem aliquam habet in missum. Oportet igitur dicere quod Filius habeat aliquam auctoritatem respectu Spiritus Sancti… . Spiritus autem Sanctus non assumpsit naturam creatam, ut secundum eam possit dici missus a Filio, vel Filius habere auctoritatem respectu ipsius. Relinquitur igitur quod respectu personae aeternae Filius super Spiritum Sanctum auctoritatem habeat.”
 De Potentia, q. 10, a. 4, corp.: “Oportet ergo quod dicatur esse Spiritus sanctus Filii, in quantum est divina persona. Aut ergo dicitur esse absolute eius, aut dicitur esse eius ut spiritus eius. Si autem absolute, tunc oportet quod sit aliqua auctoritas Filii respectu Spiritus sancti… . Et idem sequitur, si dicatur Spiritus sanctus esse Filii ut spiritus eius; quia Spiritus, secundum quod est nomen personale, importat relationem originis ad spirantem, sicut Filius ad generantem.”
 SCG IV, ch. 24 (p. 91, col. 1, line 8; no. 3608): “si enim omnia quae Patris sunt et Filii sunt, oportet quod auctoritas Patris, secundum quam est principium Spiritus Sancti, sit et Filii. Sicut ergo Spiritus Sanctus accipit de eo quod est Patris a Patre, ita accipit de eo quod est Filii a Filio.” CEG II, ch. 3: “Si enim omnia quae sunt Patris sunt etiam Filii, oportet quod auctoritas Patris secundum quam est principium Spiritus Sancti sit etiam Filii; sicut ergo Spiritus Sanctus accipit de eo quod est Patris a Patre, ita accipit de eo quod est Filii a Filio.”
 CEG II, Prol.: “dum Spiritum Sanctum creaturam esse dixit, Filio subtraxit auctoritatem spirandi divinam personam.”
 In ad Gal. 1:3 (lec. 1, no. 13): “Causa autem et auctoritas bonorum est Deus Pater tamquam auctor, inquantum Deus, et tota Trinitas, quae dicitur Deus omnium per creationem.”
 ST III, q. 32, a. 1, ad 1: “opus conceptionis commune quidem est toti Trinitati, secundum tamen modum aliquem attribuitur singulis Personis. Nam Patri attribuitur auctoritas respectu personae Filii, qui per huiusmodi conceptionem sibi assumpsit; Filio autem attribuitur ipsa carnis assumptio; sed Spiritui Sancto attribuitur formatio corporis quod assumitur a Filio.”
 ST III, q. 59, a. 1, ad 2: “Sic igitur auctoritas iudicandi attribuitur Patri inquantum est principium Filii; sed ipsa ratio iudicii attribuitur Filio, qui est ars et sapientia Patris: ut scilicet, sicut Pater fecit omnia per Filium suum inquantum est ars eius, ita etiam iudicat omnia per Filium suum inquantum est sapientia et veritas eius.”
 In Ioan. 5:22 (lec. 4, no. 763): “Apparebit ergo solus Filius, qui solus habet naturam assumptam. Ipse ergo solus iudicat, qui solus omnibus apparebit; sed tamen auctoritate Patris.”
 In Ioan. 8:26 (lec. 3, no. 1185): “inducit eos ad credendum Christo iudiciaria eius auctoritas; et ideo subdit ‘Multa habeo de vobis loqui et iudicare’; quasi dicat: Habeo auctoritatem vos iudicandi.”
 In ad Heb. 8:1 (lec. 1, no. 381): “Hoc autem quod dicitur consedere, vel consedet, potest referri ad Christum, secundum quod est Deus; et sic consedet quia habet eamdem auctoritatem iudicandi, quam habet Pater, sed distinctus est in persona.”
 ST I, q. 43, a. 7, ad 6: “Facta autem est missio visibilis ad Christum, in baptismo quidem sub specie columbae, quod est animal fecundum, ad ostendendum in Christo auctoritatem donandi gratiam … .”
 In Ioan. 6:27 (lec. 3, no. 897): “Consequenter cum dicit ‘Quem Filius hominis dabit vobis,’ ponit spiritualis cibi datorem: et primo ponit auctorem huius cibi; secundo manifestat unde habeat auctoritatem cibandi.”
 In Ioan. 17:24 (lec. 6, no. 2254): “cum dicit ‘Volo’: quod potest designare auctoritatem, vel meritum. Auctoritatem quidem si intelligamus de voluntate eius inquantum est Deus, quae est eadem cum voluntate Patris: nam sua voluntate homines iustificat et salvat … . Meritum autem designat, si intelligamus de voluntate eius inquantum est homo, quae est meritoria salutis nostrae.”
 In ad Rom. 1:5 (lec. 4, no. 61): “Sunt enim a Christo missi quasi eius auctoritatem et vicem gerentes, Io. xx, 21: ‘Sicut misit me Pater et ego mitto vos,’ id est cum plenitudine auctoritatis.” Cf. also In ad Rom. 1:1 (lec. 1, no. 22): “Apostolus enim idem est quod missus, secundum illud Io. xx, 21: ‘Sicut misit me Pater et ego mitto vos,’ scilicet ex eadem dilectione et cum eadem auctoritate.”
 In Ioan. 13:20 (lec. 3, no. 1794): “‘qui accipit eum’ quem ego mitto, ‘accipit me,’ cuius auctoritas est in eis; et ‘qui me accipit,’ accipit Patrem, cuius auctoritas est in me.”
 In Ioan. 14:13 (lec. 3, no. 1904): “quia Filius facit ipsa opera auctoritate propria, sed qui credit in eum, facit ipsa cum interpellatione.”
 I Sent., d. 31, expositio textus: “et quia Filius accipit aequalitatem a Patre et non e converso, ideo Filius coaequatur Patri et non e converso.” Thomas repeats this in ST I, q. 42, a. 1, ad 3: “Quia igitur Filius accipit a Patre unde est aequalis ei, et non e converso, propter hoc dicimus quod Filius coaequatur Patri, et non e converso.”
 I Sent., d. 5, expositio textus: “‘Numquid unigenito Deo contumelia est Patrem sibi innascibilem Deum esse?’ … Sed non sequitur: quia ipse est unigenitus Patris, et per generationem totam naturam Patris accepit.”