De Trinitate or On the Trinity 8

sant'Ilario di Poitiers (315–367 d.C.) · De Trinitate · PL 10, 25–472

8.1 Book VIII PL 10, 236

1. The Blessed Apostle Paul in laying down the form for appointing a bishop and creating by his instructions an entirely new type of member of the Church, has taught us in the following words the sum total of all the virtues perfected in him:—Holding fast the word according to the doctrine of faith that he may be able to exhort to sound doctrine and to convict gainsayers. For there are many unruly men, vain talkers and deceivers. For in this way he points out that the essentials of orderliness and morals are only profitable for good service in the priesthood if at the same time the qualities needful for knowing how to teach and preserve the faith are not lacking, for a man is not straightway made a good and useful priest by a merely innocent life or by a mere knowledge of preaching. For an innocent minister is profitable to himself alone unless he be instructed also; while he that is instructed has nothing to support his teaching unless he be innocent. For the words of the Apostle do not merely fit a man for his life in this world by precepts of honesty and uprightness, nor on the other hand do they educate in expertness of teaching a mere Scribe of the Synagogue for the expounding of the Law: but the Apostle is training a leader of the Church, perfected by the perfect accomplishment of the greatest virtues, so that his life may be adorned by his teaching, and his teaching by his life. Accordingly he has provided Titus, the person to whom his words were addressed, with an injunction as to the perfect practice of religion to this effect:—In all things shewing thyself an ensample of good works, teaching with gravity sound words that cannot be condemned, that the adversary may be ashamed, having nothing disgraceful or evil to say of us. This teacher of the Gentiles and elect doctor of the Church, from his consciousness of Christ who spoke and dwelt within him, knew well that the infection of tainted speech would spread abroad, and that the corruption of pestilent doctrine would furiously rage against the sound form of faithful words, and infusing the poison of its own evil tenets into the inmost soul, would creep on with deep-seated mischief. For it is of these that he says, Whose word spreadeth like a cancer, tainting the health of the mind, invaded by it with a secret and stealthy contagion. For this reason, he wished that there should be in the bishop the teaching of sound words, a good conscience in the faith and expertness in exhortation to withstand wicked and false and wild gainsayings. For there are many who pretend to the faith, but are not subject to the faith, and rather set up a faith for themselves than receive that which is given, being puffed up with the thoughts of human vanity, knowing the things they wish to know and unwilling to know the things that are true; since it is a mark of true wisdom sometimes to know what we do not like. However, this will-wisdom is followed by foolish preaching, for what is foolishly learnt must needs be foolishly preached. Yet how great an evil to those who hear is foolish preaching, when they are misled into foolish opinions by conceit of wisdom! And for this cause the Apostle described them thus: There are many unruly, vain talkers and deceivers. Hence we must utter our voice against arrogant wickedness and boastful arrogance and seductive boastfulness,—yes, we must speak against such things through the soundness of our doctrine, the truth of our faith, the sincerity of our preaching, so that we may have the purity of truth and the truth of sound doctrine.

Episcopus et pius debet esse et doctus. Cur Episcopus et bonus et doctus esse debeat. Praevidit Paulus fore, quibus teneretur Episcopus contradicere. --Beatus apostolus Paulus formam constituendi Episcopi fingens , et plane novum Ecclesiae hominem praeceptis suis condens, hanc veluti summam consummatarum in eo virtutum esse docuit dicens: Obtinentem secundum doctrinam fidei verbum, ut potens sit exhortari ad doctrinam sanam, et contradicentes revincere. Sunt enim multi et non subditi, vaniloqui et seductores . Ita enim quae propria disciplinae ac morum sunt, ad sacerdotii meritum utilia esse significat, si etiam haec quae ad docendae ac tuendae fidei scientiam necessaria sunt, inter reliqua non deerunt, quia non statim boni atque utilis sacerdotis est, aut tantummodo innocenter agere, aut tantummodo scienter praedicare: cum et innocens sibi tantum proficiat, nisi doctus sit; et doctus sine doctrinae sit auctoritate, nisi innocens sit. Non enim apostolicus sermo probitatis honestatisque praeceptis hominem tantum saeculo conformat ad vitam, neque rursum per doctrinae scientiam scribam Synagogae instituit ad legem: sed perfectum Ecclesiae principem perfectis maximarum virtutum bonis instituit, ut et vita ejus ornetur docendo, et doctrina vivendo. Denique ipsum illum, ad quem ei sermo erat, Titum istiusmodi decreto consummandae religionis instruxit: In omnibus te ipsum bonorum factorum praebens exemplum docentem cum veneratione verbum sanum, irreprehensibile; ut adversarius revereatur, nihil habens turpe aut malum de nobis dicere Non ignoravit doctor hic gentium, et, ex conscientia loquentis atque habitantis in se Christi, Ecclesiae electus magister, morbidi eloquii grassatura esse contagia, et adversum sanitatem verborum fidelium desaevituram doctrinae pestiferae corruptionem, quae impiae intelligentiae suae luem usque ad ipsam sedem animae demergens, profundo serperet malo. Ex his enim ait: Quorum sermo ut cancer serpit , latenti semper subrepentique contagio sanitatem pervasae mentis inficiens. Ob quod sani sermonis in Episcopo voluit esse doctrinam, fidei conscientiam, 214 et exhortationum scientiam, adversum impias et mendaces et vesanas contradictiones obtinentem. Multi enim sunt, qui simulantes fidem non subditi sunt fidei, sibique fidem ipsi potius constituunt, quam accipiunt, sensu humanae inanitatis inflati, dum quae volunt sapiunt, et nolunt sapere quae vera sunt: cum sapientiae haec veritas sit, ea interdum sapere quae nolis. Sequitur vero hanc voluntatis sapientiam sermo stultitiae: quia necesse est quod stulte sapitur, stulte et praedicetur. Jam vero stulta praedicatio quantum malum est audientium, cum seducuntur in sententiam stultitiae sub opinione sapientiae? Et idcirco Apostolus hunc de his ordinem tenuit dicens: Sunt enim multi et non subditi, vaniloqui et seductores. Contradicendum itaque est, et impietati insolenti, et insolentiae vaniloquae, et vaniloquio seducenti: et contradicendum per doctrinae sanitatem, per fidei veritatem, per verborum sinceritatem; ut et sinceritas veritatis sit, et veritas sanitatis.

8.2 PL 10, 237

2. The reason why I have just mentioned this utterance of the Apostle is this; men of crooked minds and false professions, void of hope and venomous of speech, lay upon me the necessity of inveighing against them, because under the guise of religion they instil deadly doctrines, infectious thoughts and corrupt desires into the simple minds of their hearers. And this they do with an utter disregard of the true sense of the apostolic teaching, so that the Father is not a Father, nor the Son, Son, nor the Faith, the Faith. In resisting their wild falsehoods, we have extended the course of our reply so far, that after proving from the Law that God and God were distinct and that very God was in very God, we then shewed from the teaching of evangelists and apostles the perfect and true birth of the Only-begotten God; and lastly, we pointed out in the due course of our argument that the Son of God is very God, and of a nature identical with the Father’s, so that the faith of the Church should neither confess that God is single nor that there are two Gods. For neither would the birth of God allow God to be solitary, nor would a perfect birth allow different natures to be ascribed to two Gods. Now in refuting their vain speaking we have a twofold object, first that we may teach what is holy and perfect and sound, and, that our discourse should not by straying through any by-paths and crooked ways, and struggling out of devious and winding tunnels, seem rather to search for the truth than declare it. Our second object is that we should reveal to the conviction of all men the folly and absurdity of those crafty arguments of their vain and deceitful opinions which are adapted to a plausible show of seductive truth. For it is not enough for us to have pointed out what things are good, unless they are understood to be absolutely good by our refutation of their opposites.

Hoc tempus sibi obvenisse sentit Hilarius. Quid jam ea in re perfecerit. Quam viam contra haereticos teneat. --Ac mihi quidem ea nunc commemorandae hujus sententiae apostolicae fuit causa, quia homines mente perversi, et professione fallaces, et spe inanes, et sermone viperei, contradicendi nobis necessitatem imponunt: dum lethales doctrinas, et morbidas intelligentias, et corruptas voluntates, simplicitati audientium per speciem religionis insinuant: id apud eos praetermissa apostolicae praedicationibus sinceritate agentes, ne Pater pater sit, ne Filius filius sit, ne Deus deus sit, ne fides fides sit. Quorum vesanis mendaciis renitentes usque eo jam sermonem responsionis nostrae tetendimus, ut cum Deum et Deum, et verum Deum in vero Deo demonstrassemus ex lege; tum deinde perfectam ac veram unigeniti Dei nativitatem ex evangelicis atque apostolicis doctrinis ostenderemus; postremo ut verum Deum Dei filium et indifferentis a Patre naturae, eodem praedicationis nostrae cursu doceremus: ita ut nec singularem Deum fides Ecclesiae, nec duos deos profiteretur; cum 215 nec nativitas Dei solitarium Deum sineret, nec nativitas perfecta diversarum naturarum nomina in diis duobus admitteret. Duplex autem nobis in refellendis eorum vaniloquiis cura est, ut primum quae sunt sancta et perfecta et sana doceamus, neque sermo noster per deflexus quosdam atque anfractus oberrans, et ex deviis atque erraticis cuniculis emergens, veritatem quaerat potius quam ostendat: tum deinde ut quae ab illis inanium ac fallacium sententiarum argutiis ad speciem veri blandientis aptantur, ea ipsa conscientiae omnium ridicula esse et inepta pandamus. Non enim sufficit nobis docuisse quae pia sunt, nisi piissima ea esse per id intelligantur, dum quae impia sunt refelluntur.

8.3 PL 10, 238

3. But as it is the nature and endeavour of the good and wise to prepare themselves wholly for securing either the reality or the opportunity of some precious hope lest their preparedness should in some respects fall short of that which they look for,—so in like manner those who are filled with the madness of heretical frenzy make it their chiefest anxiety to labour with all the ingenuity of their impiety against the truth of pious faith, in order that against those who are religious they may establish their own irreligion; that they may surpass the hope of our life in the hopelessness of their own, and that they may spend more thought over false than we spend over true teaching. For against the pious assertions of our faith they have carefully devised such objections of their impious misbelief, as first to ask whether we believe in one God, next, whether Christ also be God, lastly, whether the Father is greater than the Son, in order that when they hear us confess that God is one they may use our reply to shew that Christ cannot be God. For they do not enquire concerning the Son whether He be God; all they wish for in asking questions about Christ is to prove that He is not a Son, that by entrapping men of simple faith they may through the belief in one God divert them from the belief in Christ as God, on the ground that God is no longer one if Christ also must be acknowledged as God. Again with what subtlety of worldly wisdom do they contend when they say, If God is one, whosoever that other shall be shewn to be, he will not be God. For if there be another God He can no longer be one, since nature does not permit that where there is another there should be one only, or that where there is only one there should be another. Afterwards, when by the crafty cunning of this insidious argument they have misled those who are ready to believe and listen, they then apply this proposition (as if they could now establish it by an easier method), that Christ is God rather in name than in nature, because this generic name in Him can destroy in none that only true belief in one God: and they contend that through this the Father is greater than the Son, because, the natures being different, as there is but one God, the Father is greater from the essential character of His nature; and that the Other is only called Son while He is really a creature subsisting by the will of the Father, because He is less than the Father; and also that He is not God, because God being one does not admit of another God, since he who is less must necessarily be of a nature alien from that of the person who is greater. Again, how foolish they are in their attempts to lay down a law for God when they maintain that no birth can take place from one single being, because throughout the universe birth arises from the union of two; moreover, that the unchangeable God cannot accord from Himself birth to one who is born, because that which is changeless is incapable of addition, nor can the nature of a solitary and single being contain within itself the property of generation.

Haeretici plus impendunt curae ad falsa insinuanda quam Catholici ad vera. Interrogationes quibus simplicium fidei insidiantur. --Ut vero bonis et prudentibus viris naturae ac studii est, totos se ad beatae spei alicujus obtinendam vel rem vel tempus praeparare, ne in aliquo minor sit exspectatione procinctus; ita istis haeretico furore amentibus sollicitudinis maximae est, toto adversus piae fidei veritatem impietatis suae ingenio laborare: ut adversus eos, qui religiosi sunt vincant esse irreligiosi; et ultra spem vitae nostrae vitae suae desperatione potiores sint; et plus impendant cogitationis ad falsa, quam nos doctrinae aptamus ad vera. Piis enim fidei nostrae professionibus has impiae perfidiae suae contradictiones elaboraverunt, ut primum requirant, utrumne nobis in fide Deus unus sit; deinde subjiciant, an etiam Christus Deus sit; postremo, an Pater major sit Filio: ut cum audierint in professione Deum unum, utantur ea ad id, ne Christus Deus sit. Non enim de Filio quaerunt, an Deus sit: sed id tantum volunt, de Christo interrogando, ne filius sit; ut simplicis fidei hominem captantes, per unius eum Dei fidem a Christi Dei confessione depellant, dum jam non unus Deus sit, si sit Deus confitendus et Christus. Jam vero hic quanta saecularis ingenii subtilitate contendunt, cum dicunt, Si unus est, quisquis ille alius videbitur esse, jam non erit. Quod si alius est, jam unus hic non erit: cum natura non sinat, ut ubi alius est, ibi unus sit: aut 216 ubi sit unus, ubi alius sit. Dehinc cum facilitatem credentis atque audientis, arte subdolae hujus assertionis eluserint, tum id aptant, quod tamquam jam faciliore via obtineant, ut Deus Christus ex nomine potius quam ex natura sit; quia generale hoc in eo nomen in nullo eam, quae vera sola est, unius Dei fidem destruat: et per hoc Pater filio major sit, quia differente natura, cum non nisi Deus unus est, major Pater sit proprietate naturae; sit que hic nuncupatus filius, et creatio ex Dei voluntate subsistens, quia et minor Patre sit; et Deus non sit, quia Deus unus Deum alium esse non patitur, et qui minor est, necesse est ut naturae ab eo, qui se est major, alienae sit. Et hi quidem quam ridiculi in eo sunt, praescribentes Deo, cum asserunt, ex uno nasci nihil posse, quia universarum rerum ex duorum conjunctione nativitas est: Deum autem indemutabilem nullam ex se nativitatem tribuere posse nascenti; quia nec accessioni id quod non demutatur obnoxium sit, nec solitarii atque unius natura id in se habeat conditionis, ut generet.

8.4 PL 10, 239

4. We, on the contrary, having by spiritual teaching arrived at the faith of the evangelists and apostles, and following after the hope of eternal blessedness by our confession of the Father and the Son, and having proved out of the Law the mystery of God and God, without overstepping the limits of our faith in one God, or failing to proclaim that Christ is God, have adopted this method of reply from the Gospels, that we declare the true nativity of Only-begotten God from God the Father, because that through this He was both very God and not alien from the nature of the One very God, and thus neither could His Godhead be denied nor Himself be described as another God, because while the birth made Him God, the nature within him of one God of God did not separate Him off as another God. And although our human reason led us to this conclusion, that the names of distinct natures could not meet together in the same nature, and not be one, where the essence of each did not differ in kind; nevertheless, it seemed good that we should prove this from the express sayings of our Lord, Who after frequently making known that the God of our faith and hope was One, in order to affirm the mystery of the One God, while declaring and proving His own Godhead, said, I and the Father are one; and, If ye had known Me, ye would have known My Father also; and, He that hath seen Me hath seen the Father also; and, Believe Me, that the Father is in Me, and I in the Father: or else believe for the very works’ sake. He has signified His own birth in the name Father, and declares that in the knowledge of Himself the Father is known. He avows the unity of nature, when those who see Him see the Father. He bears witness that He is indivisible from the Father, when He dwells in the Father Who dwells in Him. He possesses the confidence of self-knowledge when He demands credit for His words from the operations of His power. And thus in this most blessed faith of the perfect birth, every error, as well that of two Gods as of a single God, is abolished, since They Who are one in essence are not one person, and He Who is not one person with Him Who is, is yet so free from difference from Him that They Two are One God.

Fides catholica hactenus asserta et sensu communi et Domini dictis confirmatur. --Nos autem evangelicam atque apostolicam fidem doctrinis spiritalibus assecuti, et beatae aeternitatis spem in Patris et Filii confessione sectantes, demonstrato Dei et Dei ex lege sacramento, neque unius Dei fidem excedentes, neque non et Deum Christum praedicantes, hunc ex Evangeliis responsionis ordinem sumpsimus, ut veram ex Deo patre nativitatem unigeniti Dei doceremus; quia per eam et Deus verus esset, neque a natura unius Dei veri esset alienus; ac sic neque Deus negari posset, neque ipse alius Deus dici; quia et Deum ( supple, esse) nativitas praestaret, et natura in eo unius Dei ex Deo, eum in Deum alterum non separaret. Et quamquam ad id nos communis intelligentiae sensus impelleret; ne in natura eadem naturarum nomina convenirent, et non unum essent, quibus id quod sunt non differret in genere: tamen ipsis hoc Domini nostri professionibus placuit ostendi, qui cum frequenter fidei ac spei nostrae Deum unum intimasset, ut sacramentum unius Dei se 217 quoque Deo professo probatoque firmaret dixit: Ego et Pater unum sumus: et, Si scitis me, scitis et Patrem meum: et, Qui me vidit, vidit et Patrem: et, Pater, qui in me manet, ipse facit opera sua: et, Credite mihi, quia Pater in me, et ego in Patre: sin autem vel propter opera ipsa credite . Nativitatem suam in nomine patris expressit, cognosci Patrem in se cognito docet. Unitatem naturae fatetur, cum Pater in se viso videtur. Inseparabilem se a Patre testatur, cum in manente in se manet Patre. Fiduciam conscientiae tenet, cum his dictis suis credi postulat ex operatione virtutis. Atque ita in hac perfectae nativitatis beatissima fide, vitium omne, et duum deorum, et Dei singularis exstinguitur: cum qui unum sunt, non sit unus; et qui non unus est, non tamen ab eo qui est, ita ex aliquo differat, ut uterque non unum sint.

8.5 PL 10, 240

5. Now seeing that heretics cannot deny these things because they are so clearly stated and understood, they nevertheless pervert them by the most foolish and wicked lies so as afterwards to deny them. For the words of Christ, I and the Father are one, they endeavour to refer to a mere concord of unanimity, so that there may be in them a unity of will not of nature, that is, that they may be one not by essence of being, but by identity of will. And they apply to the support of their case the passage in the Acts of the Apostles, Now of the multitude of them that believed the heart and soul were one, in order to prove that a diversity of souls and hearts may be united into one heart and soul through a mere conformity of will. Or else they cite those words to the Corinthians, Now he that planteth and he that watereth are one, to shew that, since They are one in Their work for our salvation, and in the revelation of one mystery, Their unity is an unity of wills. Or again, they quote the prayer of our Lord for the salvation of the nations who should believe in Him: Neither for these only do I pray, but for them also that shall believe on Me through their Word; that they all may be one; even as Thou, Father, art in Me, and I in Thee, that they also may be in Us, to shew that since men cannot, so to speak, be fused back into God or themselves coalesce into one undistinguished mass, this oneness must arise from unity of will, while all perform actions pleasing to God, and unite one with another in the harmonious accord of their thoughts, and that thus it is not nature which makes them one, but will.

EGO ET PATER UNUM SUMUS, exponunt de unitate consensus; quibus argumentis. --Haec igitur quia haeretici negare non possunt, quippe cum sint tam absolute dicta atque intellecta, tamen stultissimo impietatis suae mendacio neganda corrumpunt. Id enim quod ait: Ego et Pater unum sumus , tentant ad unanimitatis referre consensum; ut voluntatis in his unitas sit, non naturae, id est, ut non per id quod sunt, sed per id quod idem volunt, unum sint. Et illud, quod est in Actibus Apostolorum, huic defensioni suae aptant: Multitudinis autem credentium erat anima et cor unum ; ut animarum et cordium diversitas, in cor unum atque animam per convenientiam ejusdem voluntatis unitas sit. Vel illud, quod ad Corinthios scribitur: Qui plantat autem, et qui rigat, unum sunt : ut non differente ministerio ad salutem et in ejusdem sacramenti profectum, voluntatis sit unitas in duobus. Vel id, quod Dominus salutem crediturarum in se gentium a Patre postulans, ait: Non pro his autem rogo tantum, sed et pro his qui credituri sunt per verbum eorum in me, ut omnes unum sint sicut, tu, Pater, in me, et ego in te, ut et ipsi sint in nobis : ut quia homines refundi in Deum non possunt, vel ipsi invicem in unum atque indiscretum acervum coire, id quod unum sunt, ex unitate sit voluntatis, cum et omnes Deo placita agant, et ipsi non dissidentibus inter se animorum motibus coeant; 218 atque ita unum eos esse non natura efficiat, sed voluntas.

8.6 PL 10, 241

6. He clearly knows not wisdom who knows not God. And since Christ is Wisdom he must needs be beyond the pale of wisdom who knows not Christ or hates Him. As, for instance, they do who will have it that the Lord of Glory, and King of the Universe, and Only-begotten God is a creature of God and not His Son, and in addition to such foolish lies shew a still more foolish cleverness in the defence of their falsehood. For even putting aside for a little that essential character of unity which exists in God the Father and God the Son, they can be refuted out of the very passages which they adduce.

Arianorum stultitia. --Nescit plane sapere, qui Deum nescit. Et cum sapientia Christus sit, necesse est ut extra sapientiam sit, qui Christum aut ignorat, aut audit: ut isti, qui majestatis Dominum, et Regem saeculorum, et unigenitum Deum creaturam Dei volunt potius esse quam filium: et cum stulte mentiantur, stultius tamen in defensione mendacii sui sapiunt. Dilata enim paululum etiam nunc ea, quae in Deo patre et in Deo filio est, unitatis proprietate, ex his ipsis quibus utuntur refellendi sunt.

8.7 PL 10, 241

7. For as to those whose soul and heart were one, I ask whether they were one through faith in God? Yes, assuredly, through faith, for through this the soul and heart of all were one. Again I ask, is the faith one or is there a second faith? One undoubtedly, and that on the authority of the Apostle himself, who proclaims one faith even as one Lord, and one baptism, and one hope, and one God. If then it is through faith, that is, through the nature of one faith, that all are one, how is it that thou dost not understand a natural unity in the case of those who through the nature of one faith are one? For all were born again to innocence, to immortality, to the knowledge of God, to the faith of hope. And if these things cannot differ within themselves because there is both one hope and one God, as also there is one Lord and one baptism of regeneration; if these things are one rather by agreement than by nature, ascribe a unity of will to those also who have been born again into them. If, however, they have been begotten again into the nature of one life and eternity, then, inasmuch as their soul and heart are one, the unity of will fails to account for their case who are one by regeneration into the same nature.

Naturalis est fidelium per unius fidei naturam unitas. Fideles ex unitate sacramentorum sunt unum. --Namque quorum anima et cor unum erat, quaero utrum per fidem Dei unum erat. Utique per fidem: per eam enim anima et cor unum omnium erat. Et interrogo, utrum fides una, anne altera sit? Una certe, etiam ipso Apostolo auctore , unam fidem, sicuti unum Dominum, et unum baptisma, et unam spem, et unum Deum praedicante. Si ergo per fidem, id est, per unius fidei naturam unum omnes erant; quomodo non naturalem in his intelligis unitatem, qui per naturam unius fidei unum sunt? Omnes enim renati erant ad innocentiam, ad immortalitatem, ad cognitionem Dei,ad spei fidem. Et si haec non possunt sibi esse diversa, quia et spes una est, et Deus unus, sicuti et Dominus unus est, et baptisma regenerationis unum est: si haec assensu potius unum sunt, quam natura; his quoque, qui in haec renati sunt, unitatem voluntatis adscribe. Si vero regenerati in unius vitae atque aeternitatis naturam sunt, per quod anima eorum et cor unum est; cessat in his assensus unitas, qui unum sunt in ejusdem regeneratione naturae.

8.8 PL 10, 241

8. These are not our own conjectures which we offer, nor do we falsely put together any of these things in order to deceive the ears of our hearers by perverting the meaning of words; but holding fast the form of sound teaching we know and preach the things which are true. For the Apostle shews that this unity of the faithful arises from the nature of the sacraments when he writes to the Galatians, For as many of you as were baptized into Christ did put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female; for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. That these are one amid so great diversities of race, condition, sex,—is it from an agreement of will or from the unity of the sacrament, since these have one baptism and have all put on one Christ? What, therefore, will a concord of minds avail here when they are one in that they have put on one Christ through the nature of one baptism?

Pauli in eam rem sententia. --Non nostra loquimur, neque ad illudendas audientium aures corrupto dictorum sensu aliqua ex his ementita compingimus: sed sanae doctrinae formam tenentes, quae sincera sunt sapimus, et praedicamus. Docet enim Apostolus ex natura sacramentorum esse hanc fidelium unitatem, ad Galatas scribens: Quotquot enim in Christo baptizati estis, Christum induistis. Non inest Judaeus neque Graecus, non inest servus neque liber, non inest masculus neque femina; omnes 219 enim vos unum estis in Christo Jesu . Quod unum sunt in tanta gentium, conditionum, sexuum diversitate; numquid ex assensu voluntatis est, aut ex sacramenti unitate, quia his et baptisma sit unum, et unum Christum induti omnes sunt? Quid ergo hic animorum concordia faciet, cum per id unum sint, quod uno Christo per naturam unius baptismi induantur?

8.9 PL 10, 242

9. Or, again, since he who plants and he who waters are one, are they not one because, being themselves born again in one baptism they form a ministry of one regenerating baptism? Do not they do the same thing? Are they not one in One? So they who are one through the same thing are one also by nature, not only by will, inasmuch as they themselves have been made the same thing and are ministers of the same thing and the same power.

Qui plantat et qui rigat natura unum sunt. --Aut cum qui plantat, et qui rigat, unum sint; numquid non per hoc unum sunt, quia ipsi in uno baptismo renati una unius regenerantis baptismi dispensatio sint? numquid non idem agunt? numquid non in uno unum sunt? Itaque qui per rem eamdem unum sunt, natura etiam unum sunt, non tantum voluntate: quia et ipsi res eadem effecti sunt, et ejusdem rei atque efficientiae sint ministri.

8.10 PL 10, 242

10. Now the contradiction of fools always serves to prove their folly, because with regard to the faults which they contrive by the devices of an unwise or crooked understanding against the truth, while the latter remains unshaken and immovable the things which are opposed to it must needs be regarded as false and foolish. For heretics in their attempt to deceive others by the words, I and the Father are one, that there might not be acknowledged in them the unity and like essence of deity, but only a oneness arising from mutual love and an agreement of wills—these heretics, I say, have brought forward an instance of that unity, as we have shewn above, even from the words of our Lord, That they all may be one, as Thou Father art in Me, and I in Thee, that they also may be in Us. Every man is outside the promises of the Gospel who is outside the faith in them, and by the guilt of an evil understanding has lost all simple hope. For to know not what thou believest demands not so much excuse as a reward, for the greatest service of faith is to hope for that which thou knowest not. But it is the madness of most consummate wickedness either not to believe things which are understood or to have corrupted the sense in which one believes.

Stultitia se ipsa prodit, dum adversatur veritati. Fidei perversae spes nulla. Simplicis meritum. --Proficit autem semper contradictio stultorum ad stultitiae demonstrationem: quia quae ingenio insipientis aut perversae intelligentiae adversus veritatem coaptantur, dum et inconcussa et immobilis est, necesse est ut quae e diverso sunt, et falsa intelligantur et stulta. Laborantes enim haeretici fallere per id quod dictum est: Ego et pater uuum sumus , ne naturae in his unitas et indifferens divinitatis substantia crederetur, sed ex dilectione mutua et ex voluntatum concordia unum essent, exemplum unitatis istius, ut superius demonstravimus, etiam ex dictis dominicis protulerunt: Ut omnes unum sint, sicut tu Pater in me, et ego in te, ut et ipsi sint in nobis . Extra evangelica promissa est, quisquis extra fidem eorum est: et impiae intelligentiae crimen spem simplicem perdidit. Habet enim non tam veniam, quam praemium, ignorare quod credas: quia maximum stipendium fidei est, sperare quae nescias. At vero ultimae impietatis 220 furor est, aut intellecta non credere, aut intelligentiam corrupisse credendi.

8.11 PL 10, 243

11. But although the wickedness of man can pervert his intellectual powers, nevertheless the words retain their meaning. Our Lord prays to His Father that those who shall believe in Him may be one, and as He is in the Father and the Father in Him, so all may be one in Them. Why dost thou bring in here an identity of mind, why a unity of soul and heart through agreement of will? For there would have been no lack of suitable words for our Lord, if it were will that made them one, to have prayed in this fashion,—Father, as We are one in will, so may they also be one in will, that we may all be one through agreement. Or could it be that He Who is the Word was unacquainted with the meaning of words? and that He Who is Truth knew not how to speak the truth? and He Who is Wisdom went astray in foolish talk? and He Who is Power was compassed about with such weakness that He could not speak what He wished to be understood? He has clearly spoken the true and sincere mysteries of the faith of the Gospel. And He has not only spoken that we may comprehend, He has also taught that we may believe, saying, That they all may be one, as Thou Father art in Me, and I in Thee, that they also may be in Us. For those first of all is the prayer of whom it is said, That they all may be one. Then the promotion of unity is set forth by a pattern of unity, when He says, as Thou, Father, art in Me, and I in Thee, that they also may be in Us, so that as the Father is in the Son and the Son in the Father, so through the pattern of this unity all might be one in the Father and the Son.

Improprie UT UNUM SINT de unanimitate dixisset Christus. --Sed licet ipsum intelligentiae suae sensum impietas demutet, non tamen potest intelligentia non exstare dictorum. Dominus Patrem orat, ut qui in se credituri sint, unum sint, et sicut ipse in Patre, et Pater in eo est, ita omnes in his unum sint. Quid hic aequanimitatem, quid per voluntatis assensum animae et cordis unitatem introducis? Fuerat namque in verborum copia et proprietate, ut si voluntas unum esse eos faceret, Dominus ita precaretur: Pater, sicut nos unum volumus, ita et illi unum velint, ut unum per concordiam simus omnes. Aut forte qui verbum est, significationem verbi ignoravit? et qui veritas est, loqui vera nescivit? et qui sapientia est, in stultiloquio erravit? et qui virtus est, in ea fuit infirmitate, ne posset eloqui quae vellet intelligi? Locutus plane ille est vera et sincera fidei evangelicae sacramenta. Neque solum locutus est ad significationem, sed etiam ad fidem docuit, ita dicens: Ut omnes unum sint, sicut tu Pater in me, et ego in te, ut et ipsi sint in nobis. Pro his primum precatio est, de quibus dicitur, Ut omnes unum sint: tum deinde unitatis profectus exemplo unitatis ostenditur, cum ait: Sicut tu, Pater, in me, et ego in te, ut et ipsi sint in nobis: ut sicut Pater in Filio et Filius in Patre est, ita per hujus unitatis formam, in Patre et Filio unum omnes essent.

8.12 PL 10, 244

12. But because it is proper to the Father alone and the Son that They should be one by nature because God is from God, and the Only-begotten from the Unbegotten can subsist in no other nature than that of His origin; so that He Who was begotten should exist in the substance of His birth, and the birth should possess no other and different truth of deity than that from which it issued; for our Lord has left us in no doubt as to our belief by asserting throughout the whole of the discourse which follows the nature of this complete unity. For the next words are these, That the world may believe that Thou didst send Me. Thus the world is to believe that the Son has been sent by the Father because all who shall believe in Him will be one in the Father and the Son. And how they will be so we are soon told,—And the glory which Thou hast given Me I have given unto them. Now I ask whether glory is identical with will, since will is an emotion of the mind while glory is an ornament or embellishment of nature. So then it is the glory received from the Father that the Son hath given to all who shall believe in Him, and certainly not will. Had this been given, faith would carry with it no reward, for a necessity of will attached to us would also impose faith upon us. However He has shewn what is effected by the bestowal of the glory received, That they may be one, even as We are one. It is then with this object that the received glory was bestowed, that all might be one. So now all are one in glory, because the glory given is none other than that which was received: nor has it been given for any other cause than that all should be one. And since all are one through the glory given to the Son and by the Son bestowed upon believers, I ask how can the Son be of a different glory from the Father’s, since the glory of the Son brings all that believe into the unity of the Father’s glory. Now it may be that the utterance of human hope in this case may be somewhat immoderate, yet it will not be contrary to faith; for though to hope for this were presumptuous, yet not to have believed it is sinful, for we have one and the same Author both of our hope and of our faith. We will treat of this matter more clearly and at greater length in its own place, as is fitting. Yet in the meantime it is easily seen from our present argument that this hope of ours is neither vain nor presumptuous. So then through the glory received and given all are one. I hold the faith and recognise the cause of the unity, but I do not yet understand how it is that the glory given makes all one.

Honor a Patre acceptus, et a Filio datus credentibus, praestat ut unum sint. --Sed quia soli Patri et Filio ex natura proprium est ut unum sint, quia Deus ex Deo, et unigenitus ex innascibili non potest nisi in originis suae esse natura; ita ut et in substantia nativitatis suae qui genitus est exsistat, neque aliam ac diversam divinitatis nativitas habeat, quam ex qua profecta 221 est, veritatem: nihil nobis ambiguum Dominus ad fidem relinquens, absolutae unitatis hujus toto consequenti sermone docuit naturam. Id enim sequitur: Ut et mundus credat, quoniam tu me misisti . Per id ergo mundus crediturus est Filium a Patre missum esse, quod omnes, qui credituri in eum sunt, unum in Patre et Filio erunt. Et quomodo erunt, mox docemur: Et ego honorem, quem dedisti mihi, dedi eis . Et nunc interrogo, utrum id ipsum sit honor, quod voluntas; cum voluntas motus mentis sit, at vero honor naturae aut species aut dignitas. Honorem ergo acceptum a Patre Filius omnibus qui in se credituri sunt dedit, non utique voluntatem: quae si data esset, non haberet fides praemium, cum fidem nobis necessitas affixae voluntatis inferret. Accepti autem honoris datio quid proficeret, ostendit: Ut sint unum, sicut nos unum sumus . Ob eam ergo causam acceptus honor datus est, ut omnes unum sint. Jam igitur unum sunt omnes in honore; quia non alius, quam qui acceptus est, honor datus est; neque ob aliud datus est, quam ut omnes unum essent. Et cum per honorem datum Filio, et a Filio praestitum credentibus, omnes unum sint; quaero quomodo Filius diversi honoris a Patre sit, cum credentes omnes honor Filii ad unitatem paterni honoris assumat? Et insolens 222 quidem hic forte humanae spei erit sermo, sed non erit infidelis: quia quamvis hoc sperare temerarium sit, tamen non credidisse irreligiosum est cum idem atque unus nobis et spei auctor sit et fidei. Et de hoc quidem planius et copiosius suo, ut congruit, loco tractabimus. Interim tamen etiam ex praesenti sermone neque inanis, neque temeraria esse haec spes nostra intelligitur. Per acceptum igitur et datum honorem unum omnes sunt. Fidem teneo, atque causam unitatis accipio: sed nondum apprehendo rationem, quomodo datus honor unum omnes esse perficiat.

8.13 PL 10, 245

13. Now our Lord has not left the minds of His faithful followers in doubt, but has explained the manner in which His nature operates, saying, That they may be one, as We are one: I in them and Thou in Me, that they may be perfected in one. Now I ask those who bring forward a unity of will between Father and Son, whether Christ is in us to-day through verity of nature or through agreement of will. For if in truth the Word has been made flesh and we in very truth receive the Word made flesh as food from the Lord, are we not bound to believe that He abides in us naturally, Who, born as a man, has assumed the nature of our flesh now inseparable from Himself, and has conjoined the nature of His own flesh to the nature of the eternal Godhead in the sacrament by which His flesh is communicated to us? For so are we all one, because the Father is in Christ and Christ in us. Whosoever then shall deny that the Father is in Christ naturally must first deny that either he is himself in Christ naturally, or Christ in him, because the Father in Christ and Christ in us make us one in Them. Hence, if indeed Christ has taken to Himself the flesh of our body, and that Man Who was born from Mary was indeed Christ, and we indeed receive in a mystery the flesh of His body—(and for this cause we shall be one, because the Father is in Him and He in us),—how can a unity of will be maintained, seeing that the special property of nature received through the sacrament is the sacrament of a perfect unity?

Unitas naturalis fidelium in Deo praestatur Verbi incarnatione, et Eucharistiae sacramento. --Sed Dominus nihil fidelium conscientiae incertum relinquens, ipsum illum naturalis efficientiae docuit effectum, dicens, Ut sint unum, sicut nos unum sumus, ego in his, et tu in me; ut sint perfecti in unum (Joan. XVII, 22 et 23). Eos nunc, qui inter Patrem et Filium voluntatis ingerunt unitatem, interrogo utrumne per naturae veritatem hodie Christus in nobis sit, an per concordiam voluntatis? Si enim vere Verbum caro factum est, et vere nos Verbum carnem cibo dominico sumimus; quomodo non naturaliter manere in nobis existimandus est, qui et naturam carnis nostrae jam inseparabilem sibi homo natus assumpsit, et naturam carnis suae ad naturam aeternitatis sub sacramento 223 nobis communicandae carnis admiscuit? Ita enim omnes unum sumus, quia et in Christo Pater est, et Christus in nobis est. Quisquis ergo naturaliter Patrem in Christo negabit, neget prius non naturaliter vel se in Christo, vel Christum sibi inesse; quia in Christo Pater, et Christus in nobis, unum in his esse nos faciunt. Si vere igitur carnem corporis nostri Christus assumpsit, et vere homo ille, qui ex Maria natus fuit, Christus est, nosque vere sub mysterio carnem corporis sui sumimus (et per hoc unum erimus, quia Pater in eo est, et ille in nobis); quomodo voluntatis unitas asseritur, cum naturalis per sacramentum proprietas, perfectae sacramentum sit unitatis.

8.14 PL 10, 246

14. The words in which we speak of the things of God must be used in no mere human and worldly sense, nor must the perverseness of an alien and impious interpretation be extorted from the soundness of heavenly words by any violent and headstrong preaching. Let us read what is written, let us understand what we read, and then fulfil the demands of a perfect faith. For as to what we say concerning the reality of Christ’s nature within us, unless we have been taught by Him, our words are foolish and impious. For He says Himself, My flesh is meat indeed, and My blood is drink indeed. He that eateth My flesh and drinketh My blood abideth in Me, and I in him. As to the verity of the flesh and blood there is no room left for doubt. For now both from the declaration of the Lord Himself and our own faith, it is verily flesh and verily blood. And these when eaten and drunk, bring it to pass that both we are in Christ and Christ in us. Is not this true? Yet they who affirm that Christ Jesus is not truly God are welcome to find it false. He therefore Himself is in us through the flesh and we in Him, whilst together with Him our own selves are in God.

Verum Christi corpus in hoc Sacramento percipimus. -- Non est humano aut saeculi sensu in Dei rebus loquendum : neque per violentam atque imprudentem praedicationem; coelestium dictorum sanitati, alienae atque impiae intelligentiae extorquenda perversitas est. Quae scripta sunt legamus, et quae legerimus intelligamus: et tum perfectae fidei officio fungemur. De naturali enim in nobis Christi veritate quae dicimus, nisi ab eo didicimus, stulte atque impie dicimus. Ipse enim ait, Caro mea vere est esca, et sanguis meus vere est potus. Qui edit carnem meam, et bibit sanguinem meum, in me manet, et ego in eo . De veritate carnis et sanguinis non relictus est ambigendi locus. Nunc enim et ipsius Domini professione, et fide nostra vere caro est, et vere sanguis est. Et haec accepta atque hausta id efficiunt, 224 ut et nos in Christo, et Christus in nobis sit. Anne hoc veritas non est? Contingat plane his verum non esse, qui Christum Jesum verum esse Deum denegant. Est ergo in nobis ipse per carnem, et sumus in eo: dum secum hoc, quod nos sumus, in Deo est.

8.15 PL 10, 247

15. Now how it is that we are in Him through the sacrament of the flesh and blood bestowed upon us, He Himself testifies, saying, And the world will no longer see Me, but ye shall see Me; because I live ye shall live also; because I am in My Father, and ye in Me, and I in you. If He wished to indicate a mere unity of will, why did He set forth a kind of gradation and sequence in the completion of the unity, unless it were that, since He was in the Father through the nature of Deity, and we on the contrary in Him through His birth in the body, He would have us believe that He is in us through the mystery of the sacraments? and thus there might be taught a perfect unity through a Mediator, whilst, we abiding in Him, He abode in the Father, and as abiding in the Father abode also in us; and so we might arrive at unity with the Father, since in Him Who dwells naturally in the Father by birth, we also dwell naturally, while He Himself abides naturally in us also.

Perfecta nobis, Christo mediante, cum Deo unitas. --Quam autem in eo per sacramentum communicatae carnis et sanguinis simus, ipse testatur dicens, Et hic mundus me jam non videt; vos autem me videbitis, quoniam ego vivo, et vos vivetis; quoniam ego in Patre meo, et vos in me, et ego in vobis (Joan. XIV, 19, etc.). Si voluntatis tantum unitatem intelligi vellet: cur gradum quemdam atque ordinem consummandae unitatis exposuit: nisi ut cum ille in Patre per naturam divinitatis esset; nos contra in eo per corporalem ejus nativitatem, et ille rursum in nobis per sacramentorum inesse mysterium crederetur: ac sic perfecta per Mediatorem unitas doceretur, cum nobis in se manentibus ipse maneret in Patre, et in Patre manens maneret in nobis; et ita ad unitatem Patris proficeremus, cum qui in eo naturaliter secundum nativitatem inest, nos quoque in eo naturaliter inessemus, ipso in nobis naturaliter permanente?

8.16 PL 10, 248

16. Again, how natural this unity is in us He has Himself testified on this wise,—He who eateth My flesh and drinketh My blood abideth in Me, and I in him. For no man shall dwell in Him, save him in whom He dwells Himself, for the only flesh which He has taken to Himself is the flesh of those who have taken His. Now He had already taught before the sacrament of this perfect unity, saying, As the living Father sent Me, and I live through the Father, so he that eateth My flesh shall himself also live through Me. So then He lives through the Father, and as He lives through the Father in like manner we live through His flesh. For all comparison is chosen to shape our understanding, so that we may grasp the subject of which we treat by help of the analogy set before us. This is the cause of our life that we have Christ dwelling within our carnal selves through the flesh, and we shall live through Him in the same manner as He lives through the Father. If, then, we live naturally through Him according to the flesh, that is, have partaken of the nature of His flesh, must He not naturally have the Father within Himself according to the Spirit since He Himself lives through the Father? And He lives through the Father because His birth has not implanted in Him an alien and different nature inasmuch as His very being is from Him yet is not divided from Him by any barrier of an unlikeness of nature, for within Himself He has the Father through the birth in the power of the nature.

Unitas haec quam naturalis. Unitas Filii cum Patre. --Quam autem naturalis in nobis haec unitas sit, ipse ita testatus est: Qui edit carnem meam, et bibit sanguinem meum, in me manet, et ego in eo . Non enim quis in eo erit, nisi in quo ipse fuerit: ejus tantum in se assumptam habens carnem, qui suam sumpserit. Perfectae autem hujus unitatis 225 sacramentum superius jam docuerat, dicens: Sicut misit me vivens Pater, et ego vivo per Patrem: et qui manducaverit meam carnem, et ipse vivet per me . Vivit ergo per Patrem: et quo modo per Patrem vivit, eodem modo nos per carnem ejus vivimus. Omnis enim comparatio ad intelligentiae formam praesumitur: ut id, de quo agitur, secundum propositum exemplum assequamur. Haec ergo vitae nostrae causa est, quod in nobis carnalibus manentem per carnem Christum habemus: victuris nobis per eum ea conditione, qua vivit ille per Patrem. Si ergo nos naturaliter secundum carnem per eum vivimus, id est, naturam carnis suae adepti: quomodo non naturaliter secundum Spiritum in se Patrem habeat, cum vivat ipse per Patrem? Per Patrem autem vivit, dum nativitas non alienam ei intulit diversamque naturam, dum quod est, et ab eo est, nec tamen ab eo per aliquam incidentem naturae dissimilitudinem separatur; dum in se per nativitatem habet Patrem in virtute naturae.

8.17 PL 10, 249

17. I have dwelt upon these facts because the heretics falsely maintain that the union between Father and Son is one of will only, and make use of the example of our own union with God, as though we were united to the Son and through the Son to the Father by mere obedience and a devout will, and none of the natural verity of communion were vouchsafed us through the sacrament of the Body and Blood; although the glory of the Son bestowed upon us through the Son abiding in us after the flesh, while we are united in Him corporeally and inseparably, bids us preach the mystery of the true and natural unity.

Epilogus. Haec autem idcirco a nobis commemorata sunt, quia voluntatis tantum inter Patrem et Filium unitatem haeretici mentientes, unitatis nostrae ad Deum utebantur exemplo, tamquam nobis ad Filium, et per Filium ad Patrem, obsequio tantum ac voluntate religionis unitis, nulla per sacramentum carnis et sanguinis naturalis communionis proprietas indulgeretur: cum et per honorem nobis datum Filii, et per manentem in nobis carnaliter Filium, et in eo nobis corporaliter et inseparabiliter unitis, mysterium verae ac naturalis unitatis sit praedicandum.

8.18 PL 10, 249

18. So we have made our reply to the folly of our violent opponents, merely to prove the emptiness of their falsehoods and so prevent them from misleading the unwary by the error of their vain and foolish statements. But the faith of the Gospel did not of necessity require our answer. The Lord prayed on our behalf for our union with God, but God keeps His own unity and abides in it. It is not through any mysterious appointment of God that they are one, but through a birth of nature, for God loses nothing in begetting Him from Himself. They are one, for the things which are not plucked out of His hand are not plucked out of the hand of the Father, for, when He is known, the Father is known, for, when He is seen, the Father is seen, for what He speaks the Father speaks as abiding in Him, for in His works the Father works, for He is in the Father and the Father in Him. This proceeds from no creation but from birth; it is not brought about by will but by power; it is no agreement of mind that speaks, it is nature; because to be created and to be born are not one and the same, any more than to will and to be able; neither is it the same thing to agree and to abide.

Unitas Filii et Patris diserte in Scripturis asserta. --Responsum igitur a nobis est stultitiae furentium, ad demonstrationem tantum inanis mendacii: ne imperitos fallerent vanae ac ridiculae assertionis errore. Caeterum fides evangelica responsionis nostrae necessitate non eguit. Unitatem nostram ad Deum Dominus pro nobis precatus est: suam vero 226 obtinet ille, et in ea manet. Nec per sacramentum dispensationis unum sunt, sed per naturae nativitatem, dum nihil in eo ex se Deus eum gignendo degenerat. Unum sunt, dum quae de manu ejus non rapiuntur, non rapiuntur de manu Patris ; dum eo cognito Pater cognitus est; dum eo viso Pater visus est; dum quae loquitur, manens in se Pater loquitur; dum in operante se operatur Pater; dum ipse in Patre est, et in eo Pater est (Joan. XIV, 7, 9, 10, 12). Hoc non praestat creatura, sed nativitas; non efficit voluntas, sed potestas; non loquitur unanimitas, sed natura: quia non unum est creari, et nasci; neque velle id ipsum est, quod et posse; neque concordare idem est, quod manere.

8.19 PL 10, 250

19. Thus we do not deny a unanimity between the Father and the Son,—for heretics are accustomed to utter this falsehood, that since we do not accept concord by itself as the bond of unity we declare Them to be at variance. But let them listen how it is that we do not deny such a unanimity. The Father and the Son are one in nature, honour, power, and the same nature cannot will things that are contrary. Moreover, let them listen to the testimony of the Son as touching the unity of nature between Himself and the Father, for He says, When that advocate is come, Whom I shall send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth Who proceedeth from the Father, He shall testify of Me. The Advocate shall come and the Son shall send Him from the Father, and He is the Spirit of truth Who proceedeth from the Father. Let the whole following of heretics arouse the keenest powers of their wit; let them now seek for what lies they can tell to the unlearned, and declare what that is which the Son sends from the Father. He Who sends manifests His power in that which He sends. But as to that which He sends from the Father, how shall we regard it, as received or sent forth or begotten? For His words that He will send from the Father must imply one or other of these modes of sending. And He will send from the Father that Spirit of truth which proceedeth from the Father; He therefore cannot be the Recipient, since He is revealed as the Sender. It only remains to make sure of our conviction on the point, whether we are to believe an egress of a co-existent Being, or a procession of a Being begotten.

Unanimitas non negatur, dum asseritur unitas. De Patris et Filii unitate apertum testimonium. --Non negamus igitur unanimitatem inter Patrem et Filium: nam hoc solent haeretici mentiri, ut cum solam concordiam ad unitatem non recipimus, discordes eos a nobis affirmari loquantur. Sed audiant quam a nobis unanimitas non negetur. Unum sunt Pater et Filius natura, honore, virtute: nec natura eadem potest velle diversa. Et audiant adhuc naturae sibi cum Patre unitatem Filium testantem; ait enim: Cum venerit advocatus ille, quem ego mittam vobis a Patre, Spiritum veritatis, qui a Patre meo procedit, ipse testificabitur de me . Advocatus veniet, et hunc mittet Filius a Patre, et Spiritus veritatis est, qui a Patre procedit. Excutiat ingenii sui aculeos omnis haereticorum schola: et quaerat nunc, quod vel mentiri ignorantibus possit, et doceat quid sit hoc quod Filius mittit a Patre. Qui mittit, potestatem suam in eo quod mittit ostendit. Sed quod a Patre mittit, quid intelligemus, utrum acceptum, aut dimissum, aut genitum? nam horum necesse est unum aliquid significet, quod a Patre missurus est. Et missurus a Patre est eum Spiritum veritatis, qui a Patre procedit: jam ergo non est acceptio, ubi demonstrata processio est. Superest ut confirmemus in eo sententiam nostram, 227 utrum in hoc consistentis egressionem, an geniti processionem existimemus.

8.20 PL 10, 250

20. For the present I forbear to expose their licence of speculation, some of them holding that the Paraclete Spirit comes from the Father or from the Son. For our Lord has not left this in uncertainty, for after these same words He spoke thus,—I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. When He, the Spirit of truth, is come, He shall guide you into all truth: for He shall not speak from Himself: but what things soever He shall hear, these shall He speak; and He shall declare unto you the things that are to come. He shall glorify Me: for He shall receive of Mine and shall declare it unto you. All things whatsoever the Father hath are Mine: therefore said I, He shall receive of Mine and shall declare it unto you. Accordingly He receives from the Son, Who is both sent by Him, and proceeds from the Father. Now I ask whether to receive from the Son is the same thing as to proceed from the Father. But if one believes that there is a difference between receiving from the Son and proceeding from the Father, surely to receive from the Son and to receive from the Father will be regarded as one and the same thing. For our Lord Himself says, Because He shall receive of Mine and shall declare it unto you. All things whatsoever the Father hath are Mine: therefore said I, He shall receive of Mine and shall declare it unto you. That which He will receive,—whether it will be power, or excellence, or teaching,—the Son has said must be received from Him, and again He indicates that this same thing must be received from the Father. For when He says that all things whatsoever the Father hath are His, and that for this cause He declared that it must be received from His own, He teaches also that what is received from the Father is yet received from Himself, because all things that the Father hath are His. Such a unity admits no difference, nor does it make any difference from whom that is received, which given by the Father is described as given by the Son. Is a mere unity of will brought forward here also? All things which the Father hath are the Son’s, and all things which the Son hath are the Father’s. For He Himself saith, And all Mine are Thine, and Thine are Mine. It is not yet the place to shew why He spoke thus, For He shall receive of Mine: for this points to some subsequent time, when it is revealed that He shall receive. Now at any rate He says that He will receive of Himself, because all things that the Father had were His. Dissever if thou canst the unity of the nature, and introduce some necessary unlikeness through which the Son may not exist in unity of nature. For the Spirit of truth proceedeth from the Father and is sent from the Father by the Son. All things that the Father hath are the Son’s; and for this cause whatever He Who is to be sent shall receive, He shall receive from the Son, because all things that the Father hath are the Son’s. The nature in all respects maintains its law, and because Both are One that same Godhead is signified as existing in Both through generation and nativity; since the Son affirms that that which the Spirit of truth shall receive from the Father is to be given by Himself. So the frowardness of heretics must not be allowed an unchecked licence of impious beliefs, in refusing to acknowledge that this saying of the Lord,—that because all things which the Father hath are His, therefore the Spirit of truth shall receive of Him,—is to be referred to unity of nature.

Spiritus sanctus a quo sit non incertum. Quod a Filio accipit, accipit et a Patre. Hinc unum natura sunt Pater et Filius. --Neque in hoc nunc calumnior libertati intelligentiae, utrum ex Patre, an ex Filio Spiritum paracletum putent esse. Non enim in incerto Dominus reliquit: nam sub iisdem dictis haec ita locutus est: Adhuc multa habeo vobis dicere, sed non potestis portare illa modo. Cum venerit ille Spiritus veritatis, diriget vos in omnem veritatem. Non enim loquetur a semetipso, sed quaecumque audierit loquetur, et futura annuntiabit vobis. Ille me honorificabit; quoniam de meo accipiet, et annuntiabit vobis. Omnia quaecumque habet Pater, mea sunt: propterea dixi, De meo accipiet, et annuntiabit vobis . A Filio igitur accipit, qui et ab eo mittitur, et a Patre procedit. Et interrogo, utrum id ipsum sit a Filio accipere, quod a Patre procedere. Quod si differre credetur inter accipere a Filio, et a Patre procedere; certe id ipsum atque unum esse existimabitur, a Filio accipere, quod sit accipere a Patre. Ipse enim Dominus ait: Quoniam de meo accipiet, et annuntiabit vobis. Omnia quae cumque habet Pater, mea sunt: propterea dixi, De meo accipiet, et annuntiabit vobis . Hoc quod accipiet (sive potestas est, sive virtus, sive doctrina est), Filius a se accipiendum esse dixit: et rursum hoc ipsum significat accipiendum esse de Patre. Cum enim ait, omnia quaecumque habet Pater, sua esse, et idcirco dixisse se de suo accipiendum esse: docet etiam a Patre accipienda, a se tamen accipi; quia omnia quae Patris sunt, sua sint. Non habet haec unitas diversitatem: nec differt a quo acceptum sit, quod datum a Patre, datum referatur a Filio. Numquid et hic voluntatis unitas afferetur? Omnia quae habet Pater, Filii sunt: et omnia quae Filii 228 sunt, Patris sunt. Ipse enim ait: Et mea omnia tua sunt, et tua mea . Nondum loci est, ut demonstrem, cur ita dixerit: Quoniam de meo accipiet: futuri enim temporis significatio est, ubi accepturus ostenditur. Nunc certe ideo a se accepturum ait, quia omnia Patris sua essent. Disseca naturae hujus, si potes, unitatem: et aliquam dissimilitudinis infer necessitatem, per quam Filius non sit in unitate naturae. A Patre enim procedit Spiritus veritatis: sed a Filio a Patre mittitur. Omnia quae Patris sunt, Filii sunt: et idcirco quidquid accipiet, a Filio accipiet ille mittendus, quia Filii sunt universa quae Patris sunt. Natura itaque in omnibus tenet suam legem, et quod unum ambo sunt, ejusdem in utroque per generationem nativitatemque divinitatis significatio est: cum id quod accipiet a Patre Spiritus veritatis, id Filius dandum a se esse fateatur. Non permittenda itaque ad impiae intelligentiae libertatem haeretica perversitas est: ut dictum hoc Domini, quod quia omnia quae Patris sunt, sua sunt, idcirco a se accipiet Spiritus veritatis, non ad unitatem confiteatur referendum esse naturae

8.21 PL 10, 252

21. Let us listen to that chosen vessel and teacher of the Gentiles, when he had already commended the faith of the people of Rome because of their understanding of the truth. For wishing to teach the unity of nature in the case of the Father and the Son, he speaks thus, But ye are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God is in you. But if any have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His. But if Christ is in you, the body indeed is dead through sin, but the Spirit is life through righteousness. But if the Spirit of Him Who raised up Christ from the dead dwelleth in you; He Who raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies, because of His Spirit Who dwelleth in you. We are all spiritual if the Spirit of God dwells in us. But this Spirit of God is also the Spirit of Christ, and though the Spirit of Christ is in us, yet His Spirit is also in us Who raised Christ from the dead, and He Who raised Christ from the dead shall quicken our mortal bodies also on account of His Spirit that dwelleth in us. We are quickened therefore on account of the Spirit of Christ that dwelleth in us, through Him Who raised Christ from the dead. And since the Spirit of Him Who raised Christ from the dead dwells in us, and yet the Spirit of Christ is in us, nevertheless the Spirit Which is in us cannot but be the Spirit of God. Separate, then, O heretic, the Spirit of Christ from the Spirit of God, and the Spirit of Christ raised from the dead from the Spirit of God Which raises Christ from the dead; when the Spirit of Christ that dwelleth in us is the Spirit of God, and when the Spirit of Christ Who was raised from the dead is yet the Spirit of God Who raises Christ from the dead.

Dei et Christi unus est Spiritus. --Loquatur enim ille, qui electionis est vas et gentium doctor, secundum veritatis intelligentiam fide Romanae plebis ante laudata. Volens enim naturae unitatem in Patre et Filio docere, ita ait : Vos autem non estis in carne, sed in Spiritu si quidem Spiritus Dei in vobis est. Si quis autem Spiritum Christi non habet, hic non est ejus. Si autem Christus in vobis est, corpus quidem mortuum est per peccatum, spiritus autem vita est per justitiam. Si autem Spiritus ejus, qui suscitavit Jesum a mortuis, habitat in vobis; qui suscitavit Christum a mortuis, vivificabit et mortalia corpora vestra propter 229 Spiritum suum, qui habitat in vobis. Spiritales omnes sumus, si in nobis est Spiritus Dei. Sed hic Spiritus Dei, et Spiritus Christi est. Et cum Christi Spiritus in nobis sit, ejus tamen Spiritus in nobis est, qui Christum suscitavit a mortuis: et qui suscitavit Christum a mortuis, corpora quoque nostra mortalia vivificabit propter habitantem Spiritum ejus in nobis. Vivificamur ergo, propter habitantem in nobis Spiritum Christi, per eum qui Christum suscitavit a mortuis. Et cum ejus, qui suscitavit Christum a mortuis, in nobis est Spiritus; et Spiritus tamen in nobis est Christi, nec tamen non Dei est Spiritus, qui in nobis est. Discerne igitur, o haeretice, Spiritum Christi a Spiritu Dei, et excitati a mortuis Spiritum Christi ab Spiritu Dei Christum a mortuis excitantis; cum inhabitans in nobis Spiritus Christi, Spiritus Dei sit; et cum Spiritus Christi a mortuis excitati. Spiritus tamen Dei sit Christum a mortuis excitantis.

8.22 PL 10, 252

22. And now I ask whether thou thinkest that in the Spirit of God is signified a nature or a property belonging to a nature. For a nature is not identical with a thing belonging to it, just as neither is a man identical with what belongs to a man, nor fire with what belongs to fire itself, and in like manner God is not the same as that which belongs to God.

Spiritus Dei an natura, an res naturae. --Et quaero nunc in Spiritu Dei utrum naturam, an rem naturae significatam existimes. Non idem est enim natura, quod naturae res: sicuti non idem est homo, et quod hominis est, nec idem est ignis, et quod ignis ipsius est: et secundum hoc non idem est Deus, et quod Dei est.

8.23 PL 10, 253

23. For I am aware that the Son of God is revealed under the title Spirit of God in order that we may understand the presence of the Father in Him, and that the term Spirit of God may be employed to indicate Either, and that this is shewn not only on the authority of prophets but of evangelists also, when it is said, The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me; therefore He hath anointed Me. And again, Behold My Servant Whom I have chosen, My beloved in Whom My soul is well pleased, I will put My Spirit upon Him. And when the Lord Himself bears witness of Himself, But if I in the Spirit of God cast out devils, then has the kingdom of God come upon you. For the passages seem without any doubt to denote either Father or Son, while they yet manifest the excellence of nature.

Modo Patrem, modo filium significat. --Memini enim in Spiritu Dei ita filium Dei significari, ut in eo Deus pater demonstratus esse intelligatur, et ad cujusvis demonstrationem posse significatum Dei Spiritum pertinere: neque tantum hoc ex prophetica, sed ex evangelica auctoritate monstrari, cum dicitur: Spiritus Domini super me, propterea unxit me ; et rursum : Ecce puer meus quem elegi, dilectus meus in quo complacuit animae meae, ponam super eum Spiritum 230 meum; et ipso de se Domino testante: Si autem in Spiritu Dei ego ejicio daemonia, utique appropiavit in vobis regnum Dei (Ib., 28): haec enim videntur non ambigue vel Patrem significare, vel filium, virtutem tamen naturae manifestantia .

8.24 PL 10, 253

24. For I think that the expression ‘Spirit of God’ was used with respect to Each, lest we should believe that the Son was present in the Father or the Father in the Son in a merely corporeal manner, that is, lest God might be thought to abide in one position and exist nowhere else apart from Himself. For a man or any other thing like him, when he is in one place, cannot be in another, because what is in one place is confined to the place where it is: his nature cannot allow him to be everywhere when he exists in some one position. But God is a living Force, of infinite power, present everywhere and nowhere absent, and manifests His whole self through His own, and signifies that His own are naught else than Himself, so that where they are He may be understood to be Himself. Yet we must not think that, after a corporeal fashion, when He is in one place He ceases to be everywhere, for through His own things He is still present in all places, while the things which are His are none other than His own self. Now these things have been said to make us understand what is meant by ‘nature.’

Cur uterque dictus sit Spiritus. --Namque idcirco dictum existimo in utroque Spiritus Dei, ne secundum corporales modos ita inesse Filium in Patre vel Patrem in Filio crederemus: scilicet ne loco Deus manens, nusquam alibi exstare videretur a sese. Homo enim, aut aliquid aliud ei simile, cum alicubi erit, tamen alibi non erit: quia id, quod est illic, continetur ubi fuerit: infirma ad id natura ejus, ut ubique sit, qui insistens alicubi sit. Deus autem immensae virtutis vivens potestas, quae nusquam non adsit, nec desit usquam, se omnem per sua edocet, et sua non aliud quam se esse significat: ut ubi sua insint, ipse esse intelligatur. Non autem corporali modo, cum alicubi insit, non et ubique esse credatur: cum per sua in omnibus esse non desinat; non aliud autem sint, quam quod est ipse, quae sua sunt. Et haec quidem ad naturae intelligentiam dicta sunt.

8.25 PL 10, 254

25. Now I think that it ought to be clearly understood that God the Father is denoted by the Spirit of God, because our Lord Jesus Christ declared that the Spirit of the Lord was upon Him since He anoints Him and sends Him to preach the Gospel. For in Him is made manifest the excellence of the Father’s nature, disclosing that the Son partakes of His nature even when born in the flesh through the mystery of this spiritual unction, since after the birth ratified in His baptism this intimation of His inherent Sonship was heard as a voice bore witness from Heaven:—Thou art My Son; this day have I begotten Thee. For not even He Himself can be understood as resting upon Himself or coming to Himself from Heaven, or as bestowing on Himself the title of Son: but all this demonstration was for our faith, in order that under the mystery of a complete and true birth we should recognise that the unity of the nature dwells in the Son Who had begun to be also man. We have thus found that in the Spirit of God the Father is designated; but we understand that the Son is indicated in the same way, when He says: But if I in the Spirit of God cast out devils, then has the kingdom of God come upon you. That is, He shews clearly that He, by the power of His nature, casts out devils, which cannot be cast out save by the Spirit of God. The phrase ‘Spirit of God’ denotes also the Paraclete Spirit, and that not only on the testimony of prophets but also of apostles, when it is said:—This is that which was spoken through the Prophet, It shall come to pass on the last day, saith the Lord, I will pour out of My Spirit upon all flesh, and their sons and their daughters shall prophesy. And we learn that all this prophecy was fulfilled in the case of the Apostles, when, after the sending of the Holy Spirit, they all spoke with the tongues of the Gentiles.

In Spiritu Dei significatur Pater. Significatur Filius. Significatur et Spiritus sanctus. --In Spiritu autem Dei patrem Deum significari, ita existimo intelligi oportere, quod Spiritum Domini super se esse Dominus Jesus Christus professus sit, propter quod eum ungat, et mittat ad evangelizandum. Paternae enim naturae virtus in eo manifestatur; naturae suae communionem in Filio etiam in carne nato per sacramentum spiritalis hujus unctionis ostendens , cum post consummati baptismi nativitatem tum haec quoque proprietatis significatio audita est, voce testante de coelo: Filius meus es tu, ego hodie genui te . Non enim vel ipse super se esse, vel sibi de coelis adesse, vel ipsum se 231 cognominasse sibi filium intelligendus est: sed omnis haec fidei nostrae fuit demonstratio, ut sub perfectae ac verae nativitatis sacramento, unitatem naturae manentis in Filio, qui etiam homo esse coeperat, nosceremus. Et Patrem quidem in Dei Spiritu ita significari repertum est. Filium vero hoc modo demonstratum intelligimus, cum dicit: Quod si in Spiritu Dei ego ejicio daemones, utique appropiavit in vobis regnum Dei: se scilicet, id est, naturae suae potestate daemones ejicere demonstrans, qui non nisi Dei Spiritu ejici possint. Est autem et in Spiritu Dei Spiritus paracleti significatio; neque solum prophetica, sed apostolica auctoritate, cum dicitur: Sed hoc est, quod dictum est per prophetam, Erit in novissimis diebus, dicit Dominus, effundam de Spiritu meo in omnem carnem, et prophetabunt filii eorum et filiae eorum Et consummatum hoc totum fuisse in Apostolis docetur, cum misso Spiritu sancto omnes linguis gentium sunt locuti.

8.26 PL 10, 255

26. Now we have of necessity set these things forth with this object, that in whatever direction the deception of heretics betakes itself, it might yet be kept in check by the boundaries and limits of the gospel truth. For Christ dwells in us, and where Christ dwells God dwells. And when the Spirit of Christ dwells in us, this indwelling means not that any other Spirit dwells in us than the Spirit of God. But if it is understood that Christ dwells in us through the Holy Spirit, we must yet recognise this Spirit of God as also the Spirit of Christ. And since the nature dwells in us as the nature of one substantive Being, we must regard the nature of the Son as identical with that of the Father, since the Holy Spirit Who is both the Spirit of Christ and the Spirit of God is proved to be a Being of one nature. I ask now, therefore, how can They fail to be one by nature? The Spirit of Truth proceeds from the Father, He is sent by the Son and receives from the Son. But all things that the Father hath are the Son’s, and for this cause He Who receives from Him is the Spirit of God but at the same time the Spirit of Christ. The Spirit is a Being of the nature of the Son but the same Being is of the nature of the Father. He is the Spirit of Him Who raised Christ from the dead; but this is no other than the Spirit of Christ Who was so raised. The nature of Christ and of God must differ in some respect so as not to be the same, if it can be shewn that the Spirit which is of God is not the Spirit of Christ also.

In nobis est Deus, cum Christus; cum Spiritus Christi, Spiritus Dei. Filii et Patris natura una. --Haec autem idcirco sunt demonstrata necessario, ut in quamcumque se licet partem haeretica falsitas contulisset, finibus tamen atque praescripto veritatis evangelicae concluderetur. Habitat enim in nobis Christus: et habitante Christo, habitat Deus. Et cum habitat in nobis Spiritus Christi; habitante tamen in nobis Spiritu Christi, non alius tamen spiritus habitat, quam Spiritus Dei. Quod si per Spiritum sanctum Christus in nobis esse intelligitur, hunc tamen ita Spiritum Dei, ut Spiritum Christi esse noscendum est. Et cum, per naturam rei natura ipsa habitet in nobis; indifferens natura Filii esse credetur a Patre, cum Spiritus sanctus, qui et Spiritus Christi et Spiritus Dei est, res naturae esse demonstretur unius. Quaero nunc igitur, quomodo non ex natura unum sunt? A patre procedit Spiritus veritatis: a Filio mittitur, et a Filio accipit. Sed omnia, quae habet Pater, Filii sunt: et idcirco qui ab eo accipit, Dei Spiritus 232 est, sed idem et Spiritus Christi est. Res naturae Filii est ( supple, Spiritus), sed eadem res et naturae Patris est. Excitantis Christum a mortuis Spiritus est; sed idem Spiritus Christi est a mortuis excitati. In aliquo differat Christi et Dei natura, ne eadem sit; si praestari potest ut Spiritus, qui Dei est, non sit et Christi.

8.27 PL 10, 255

27. But you, heretic, as you wildly rave and are driven about by the Spirit of your deadly doctrine the Apostle seizes and constrains, establishing Christ for us as the foundation of our faith, being well aware also of that saying of our Lord, If a man love Me, he will also keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come unto him, and make Our abode with him. For by this He testified that while the Spirit of Christ abides in us the Spirit of God abides in us, and that the Spirit of Him that was raised from the dead differs not from the Spirit of Him that raised Him from the dead. For they come and dwell in us: and I ask whether they will come as aliens associated together and make Their abode, or in unity of nature? Nay, the teacher of the Gentiles contends that it is not two Spirits—the Spirits of God and of Christ—that are present in those who believe, but the Spirit of Christ which is also the Spirit of God. This is no joint indwelling, it is one indwelling: yet an indwelling under the mysterious semblance of a joint indwelling, for it is not the case that two Spirits indwell, nor is one that indwells different from the other. For there is in us the Spirit of God and there is also in us the Spirit of Christ, and when the Spirit of Christ is in us there is also in us the Spirit of God. And so since what is of God is also of Christ, and what is of Christ is also of God, Christ cannot be anything different from what God is. Christ, therefore, is God, one Spirit with God.

Filii et Patris una apud nos habitatio. --Sed te, haeretice, furentem, et spiritu doctrinae mortiferae circumactum tenet et coarctat Apostolus, Christum nobis fundamentum ponens fidei , dicti hujus quoque dominici non nescius: Si quis diligit me, et verbum meum servabit: et pater meus diliget eum, et ad eum veniemus, et mansionem apud eum faciemus . Per id enim, Spiritu Christi in nobis manente, Dei Spiritum in nobis manere testatus est, nec diversum a se esse Spiritum a mortuis excitati et Spiritum a mortuis excitantis. Veniunt enim, atque habitant in nobis: et rogo utrum comitatu diversitatum venient, mansionemque facient, an unitate naturae? Sed obnititur doctor gentium, non duos spiritus. Dei scilicet et Christi, sed Spiritum Christi, qui et Spiritus Dei est, inesse credentibus. Non est cohabitatio, sed habitatio est: sub sacramento tamen cohabitationis habitatio, dum neque duo habitant, neque ab alio diversus habitator est. Est enim in nobis Spiritus Dei, sed est in nobis Spiritus Christi: et cum Spiritus Christi inest, inest Spiritus Dei. Ita cum quod Dei est, et Christi est; et cum quod Christi est, Dei est: non potest aliud quid diversum Christus esse, quam Deus est. Deus igitur Christus est unus cum Deo Spiritus.

8.28 PL 10, 256

28. Now the Apostle asserts that those words in the Gospel, I and the Father are one, imply unity of nature and not a solitary single Being, as he writes to the Corinthians, Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man in the Spirit of God calleth Jesus anathema. Perceivest thou now, O heretic, in what spirit thou callest Christ a creature? For since they are under a curse who have served the creature more than the Creator—in affirming Christ to be a creature, learn what thou art, since thou knowest full well that the worship of the creature is accursed. And observe what follows, And no one can call Jesus Lord, but in the Holy Spirit. Dost thou perceive what is lacking to thee, when thou deniest Christ what is His own? If thou holdest that Christ is Lord through His Divine nature, thou hast the Holy Spirit. But if He be Lord merely by a name of adoption thou lackest the Holy Spirit, and art animated by a spirit of error: because no one can call Jesus Lord, but in the Holy Spirit. But when thou sayest that He is a creature rather than God, although thou stylest Him Lord, still thou dost not say that He is the Lord. For to thee He is Lord as one of a common class and by a familiar name, rather than by nature. Yet learn from Paul His nature.

Ariani a Spiritu sancto alieni Christum Deum negant, et tamen colunt. --Et illud evangelicum: Ego et Pater unum sumus , docet Apostolus unitatem esse naturae, non solitudinem unionis, scribens Corinthiis: Propter quod notum facio vobis, quia nemo in Spiritu Dei dicit anathema Jesum. Scisne nunc, haeretice, in quo spiritu dicas Christum creaturam ? Cum enim in anathemate sint, qui servierunt creaturae 233 potius quam Creatori ; Christum creaturam confitens, quid sis intellige, qui non ignores quin in maledicto sit religio creaturae. Et quid sequatur adverte: Et nemo potest dicere Dominum Jesum, nisi in Spiritu sancto . Sentisne quid tibi desit, Christo negando quod suum est? Si per naturam Dei Christus tibi Dominus est, habes Spiritum sanctum: si vero per adoptivum nomen hic dominus est, Spiritu sancto carens, spiritu erroris animaris: quia nemo nisi in Spiritu sancto Dominum Jesum potest dicere. Et tu creaturam eum potius quam Deum dicens, dominum licet nuncupans, Dominum tamen esse non dicis; quia tibi ex communi genere potius et familiari nomine, quam ex natura sit Dominus. Sed a Paulo disce naturam.

8.29 PL 10, 257

29. For the Apostle goes on to say, Now there are diversities of gifts, but there is the same Spirit; and there are diversities of ministrations but one and the same Lord; and there are diversities of workings but the same God, Who worketh all things in all. But to each one is given the manifestation of the Spirit for that which profiteth. In this passage before us we perceive a fourfold statement: in the diversity of gifts it is the same Spirit, in the diversity of ministrations it is the very same Lord, in the diversity of workings it is the same God, and in the bestowal of that which is profitable there is a manifestation of the Spirit. And in order that the bestowal of what is profitable might be recognised in the manifestation of the Spirit, he continues: To one indeed is given through the Spirit the word of wisdom; and to another the word of knowledge according to the same Spirit; to another faith in the same Spirit; to another the gift of healing in the same Spirit; to another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues.

Gratiarum divisiones. --Sequitur enim: Divisiones autem donorum sunt, idem autem Spiritus est; et divisiones ministeriorum sunt, et idem ipse Dominus; et divisiones operationum sunt, idem autem Deus, qui operatur omnia in omnibus. Unicuique autem datur manifestatio Spiritus, ad id quod utile est . In praesenti sermone quadrimoda significatio intelligitur, cum in divisione donorum idem Spiritus est, et in divisione ministeriorum idem ipse Dominus est, et in divisione operationum idem Deus est, et in utilitatis datione manifestatio Spiritus. Atque ut datio utilitatis in manifestatione Spiritus nosceretur; continuo subjectum est: Huic quidem per Spiritum datur sermo sapientiae, alii autem sermo scientiae secundum eumdem Spiritum, alteri autem fides in eodem Spiritu, alii donum curationum in eodem Spiritu, alii operatio virtutum, alii prophetia, alii discretio Spirituum, alii genera linguarum, alii interpretatio linguarum .

8.30 PL 10, 257

30. And indeed that which we called the fourth statement, that is the manifestation of the Spirit in the bestowal of what is profitable, has a clear meaning. For the Apostle has enumerated the profitable gifts through which this manifestation of the Spirit took place. Now in these diverse activities that Gift is set forth in no uncertain light of which our Lord had spoken to the apostles when He taught them not to depart from Jerusalem; but wait, said He, for the promise of the Father which ye heard from My lips: for John indeed baptized with water, but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost, which ye shall also receive not many days hence. And again: But ye shall receive power when the Holy Ghost cometh upon you; and ye shall be My witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judæa, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth. He bids them wait for the promise of the Father of which they had heard from His lips. We may be sure that here we have a reference to the Father’s same promise. Hence it is by these miraculous workings that the manifestation of the Spirit takes place. For the gift of the Spirit is manifest, where wisdom makes utterance and the words of life are heard, and where there is the knowledge that comes of God-given insight, lest after the fashion of beasts through ignorance of God we should fail to know the Author of our life; or by faith in God, lest by not believing the Gospel of God, we should be outside His Gospel; or by the gift of healings, that by the cure of diseases we should bear witness to His grace Who bestoweth these things; or by the working of miracles, that what we do may be understood to be the power of God, or by prophesy, that through our understanding of doctrine we might be known to be taught of God; or by discerning of spirits, that we should not be unable to tell whether any one speaks with a holy or a perverted spirit; or by kinds of tongues, that the speaking in tongues may be bestowed as a sign of the gift of the Holy Spirit; or by the interpretation of tongues, that the faith of those that hear may not be imperilled through ignorance, since the interpreter of a tongue explains the tongue to those who are ignorant of it. Thus in all these things distributed to each one to profit withal there is the manifestation of the Spirit, the gift of the Spirit being apparent through these marvellous advantages bestowed upon each.

Spiritus manifestatio. --Et quidem id, quod quartum esse diximus, id est, in datione utilitatis Spiritus manifestationem, absolutam habet intelligentiam. 234 Commemoratum enim est, per quas dationum utilitates haec esset Spiritus manifestatio. In his namque divisionum virtutibus non incerta doni hujus ostensio est, de quo Dominus ad Apostolos dixerat, praecipiens his, ne ab Jerosolymis discederent; sed exspectate, inquit, promissionem Patris, quam audistis de ore meo, Quoniam Joannes baptizavit aqua, vos autem Spiritu sancto tingemini, quem et accipietis non post multos hos dies. Et rursum: Sed accipietis virtutem superveniente Spiritu sancto in vos, et eritis mihi testes in Jerusalem, et omni Judaea, et Samaria, et usque ad ultimum terrae . Promissionem Patris, quae de ore ejus audita est, exspectari jubet. Certe etiam nunc ejus paternae promissionis eloquium est. Per has igitur virtutum efficientias manifestatio Spiritus est. Neque enim in occulto est Spiritus donum, ubi sermo sapientiae est, et verba vitae audiuntur: vel ubi divinae cognitionis scientia est, ne pecudum modo per ignorationem Dei, vitae nostrae ignoremus auctorem: vel per fidem Dei, ne non credentes Evangelium Dei, extra Evangelium Dei simus: vel per donum curationum, ut gratiam ejus, qui haec tribuit, infirmitatum curatione testemur: vel per operationem virtutum, ut quod agimus, Dei esse virtus intelligatur: vel per prophetiam, ut per doctrinae intelligentiam intelligamur ex Deo eruditi: vel per discretionem spirituum, ne ignari simus, sancto an perverso spiritu quis loquatur: vel per genera linguarum, ut in signum dati Spiritus sancti linguarum sermo donetur : vel in interpretatione linguarum, ne ignoratione fides audientium periclitetur, cum linguam ignorantibus linguae interpretator absolvit. In his igitur omnibus ad utilitatem unicuique divisis manifestatio Spiritus est, per has scilicet datae unicuique 235 utilitatis admirationes dono Spiritus non latente.

8.31 PL 10, 258

31. Now the blessed Apostle Paul in revealing the secret of these heavenly mysteries, most difficult to human comprehension, has preserved a clear enunciation and a carefully worded caution in order to shew that these diverse gifts are given through the Spirit and in the Spirit (for to be given through the Spirit and in the Spirit is not the same thing), because the granting of a gift which is exercised in the Spirit is yet bestowed through the Spirit. But he sums up these diversities of gifts thus: Now all these things worketh one and the same Spirit, dividing to each one as He will. Now, therefore, I ask what Spirit works these things, dividing to each one according as He wills: is it He by Whom or He in Whom there is this distribution of gifts? But if any one shall dare to say that it is the same Person which is indicated, the Apostle will refute so faulty an opinion, for he says above, And there are diversities of workings, but the same God Who worketh all things in all. So there is one Who distributes and another in Whom the distribution is vouchsafed. Yet know that it is always God Who worketh all these things, but in such a way that Christ works, and the Son in His working performs the Father’s work. And if in the Holy Spirit thou confessest Jesus to be Lord, understand the force of that threefold indication in the Apostle’s letter; forasmuch as in the diversities of gifts, it is the same Spirit, and in the diversities of ministrations it is the same Lord, and in the diversities of workings it is the same God; and again, one Spirit that worketh all things distributing to each according as He will. And grasp the idea if thou canst that the Lord in the distribution of ministrations, and God in the distribution of workings, are this one and the same Spirit Who both works and distributes as He will; because in the distribution of gifts there is one Spirit, and the same Spirit works and distributes.

Haec dona alius atque alius largitur, et tamen unus Spiritus. --Tenuit autem beatus apostolus Paulus in hoc difficillimo ad humanam intelligentiam coelestium sacramentorum mysterio, et absolutam demonstrationem et sollicitam cautelam, ut per Spiritum et in Spiritu dari haec divisionum dona monstraret (non enim idipsum est per Spiritum, et in Spiritu dari): quia datio doni, quae obtinetur in Spiritu, haec tamen indulta per Spiritum sit. Consummat autem has dationum divisiones hoc modo: Haec autem omnia operatur unus et idem Spiritus, dividens unicuique sicut vult . Nunc igitur quaero, quis haec Spiritus operetur, dividens unicuique prout velit: utrum per quem, aut in quo donorum divisio est. Quod si ipsum significatum esse loqui aliquis audebit, contradicet Apostolus, cur se vitiose lector intelligat: ait enim superius: Et divisiones operationum sunt, idem autem Deus qui operatur omnia in omnibus. Alius est ergo qui dividit, et alius est in quo indulta divisio est. Et intellige operantem haec omnia semper Deum, ita tamen, ut Christus operetur, ut paterno opere operans Filius fungatur. Et si in Spiritu sancto Jesum Dominum confiteris; intellige tripertitae significationis 236 in Apostolo ( Id est Apostoli loco) virtutem, cum in divisionibus donorum idem Spiritus est, et in divisionibus ministeriorum idem Dominus est, et in divisionibus operationum idem Deus est: et rursum omnia inoperans unus Spiritus, unicuique sicut vult dividens. Et apprehende, si potes, Dominum in divisione ministeriorum, et Deum in divisione operationum, hunc eumdem unum esse Spiritum, et inoperantem, et prout vult dividentem: quia in divisionibus donorum unus est Spiritus, et idem Spiritus operetur ac dividat.

8.32 PL 10, 260

32. But if this one Spirit of one Divinity, one in both God and Lord through the mystery of the birth, does not please thee, then point out to me what Spirit both works and distributes these diverse gifts to us, and in what Spirit He does this. But, thou must shew me nothing but what accords with our faith, because the Apostle shews us Who is to be understood, saying, For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of the body, being many, are one body, so also is Christ. He affirms that diversities of gifts come from one Lord Jesus Christ Who is the body of all. Because after he had made known the Lord in ministration, and made known also God in workings, he yet shews that one Spirit both works and distributes all these things, distributing these varieties of His gracious gifts for the perfecting of one body.

Christus charismata dividit. --Aut si displicet in Deo et Domino unus hic ejusdem, per nativitatis sacramentum, divinitatis Spiritus: ostende quis spiritus, et in quo spiritu has nobis divisiones et inoperetur et dividat. Sed nihil aliud, quam quod fidei nostrae est, ostendes; quia Apostolus qui esset intelligendus ostendit, dicens: Sicut enim corpus unum est, membra autem habet multa; omnia autem membra ex uno corpore, cum sint multa, unum est corpus: sic et Christus . Divisiones ergo charismatum ex uno Domino Jesu Christo, qui corpus est omnium, esse significat: quia cum ostendisset Dominum in ministerio, ostendisset etiam Deum in operationibus, unum tamen haec omnia Spiritum 237 et inoperari et dividere demonstrat, membra haec gratiarum in perfectione unius corporis dividentem.

8.33 PL 10, 261

33. Unless perchance we think that the Apostle did not keep to the principle of unity in that he said, And there are diversities of ministrations, and the same Lord, and there are diversities of workings, but the same God. So that because he referred ministrations to the Lord and workings to God, he does not appear to have understood one and the same Being in ministrations and operations. Learn how these members which minister are also members which work, when he says, Ye are the body of Christ, and of Him members indeed. For God hath set some in the Church, first apostles, in whom is the word of wisdom; secondly prophets, in whom is the gift of knowledge; thirdly teachers, in whom is the doctrine of faith; next mighty works, among which are the healing of diseases, the power to help, governments by the prophets, and gifts of either speaking or interpreting divers kinds of tongues. Clearly these are the Church’s agents of ministry and work of whom the body of Christ consists; and God has ordained them. But perhaps thou maintainest that they have not been ordained by Christ, because it was God Who ordained them. But thou shalt hear what the Apostle says himself: Now to each one of us was the grace given according to the measure of the gift of Christ. And again, He that descended is the same also that ascended far above all the heavens that He might fill all things. And he gave some to be apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of ministering. Are not then the gifts of ministration Christ’s, while they are also the gifts of God?

Operationes et ministeria Deus statuit. Statuit et Christus. --Nisi forte non tenuisse rationem unitatis in eo Apostolus existimatur, quod dixit: Et divisiones ministeriorum sunt, idem ipse Dominus; et divisiones operationum sunt, idem autem Deus : ut quia ministeria ad Dominum retulit, et operationes ad Deum, non unum atque idipsum in ministeriis atque operationibus videatur intelligi. Accipe quam haec membra ministeriorum membra operationum sunt, cum ait: Vos estis corpus Christi et membra. Et quosdam quidem posuit Deus in Ecclesia, primum Apostolos , in quibus est verbum sapientiae; secundo prophetas, in quibus est donum scientiae; tertio magistros, in quibus est doctrina fidei; deinde virtutes, in quibus sunt curationes infirmitatum, auxiliorum potestates, gubernationes prophetales, et dona genera linguarum vel loquendi vel interpretandi. Certe haec Ecclesiae et ministeria sunt et operationes, in quibus est corpus Christi; et haec Deus statuit. Aut profitere non per Christum statuta, quia ea Deus statuit. Sed audies ipsum dicentem: Unicuique autem nostrum data est gratia secundum mensuram donationis Christi. Et iterum: Qui descendit, ipse est qui et ascendit super omnes coelos, ut adimpleat omnia. Et ipse dedit quosdam Apostolos, quosdam autem prophetas, quosdam autem evangelizantes, quosdam autem pastores et doctores, ad consummationem sanctorum, in opus ministerii . Numquid ministeriorum dona non Christi sunt, cum tamen et Dei dona sint?

8.34 PL 10, 261

34. But if impiety has assumed to itself that because he says, The same Lord and the same God, they are not in unity of nature, I will support this interpretation with what you deem still stronger arguments. For the same Apostle says, But for us there is one God, the Father, of Whom are all things, and we in Him, and one Lord Jesus Christ, through Whom are all things, and we through Him. And again, One Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, Who is both through all, and in us all. By these words one God and one Lord it would seem that to God only is attributed, as to one God, the property of being God; since the property of oneness does not admit of partnership with another. Verily how rare and hard to attain are such spiritual gifts! How truly is the manifestation of the Spirit seen in the bestowal of such useful gifts! And with reason has this order in the distribution of graces been appointed, that the foremost should be the word of wisdom; for true it is, And no one can call Jesus Lord but in the Holy Spirit, because but through this word of wisdom Christ could not be understood to be Lord; that then there should follow next the word of understanding, that we might speak with understanding what we know, and might know the word of wisdom; and that the third gift should consist of faith, seeing that those leading and higher graces would be unprofitable gifts did we not believe that He is God. So that in the true sense of this greatest and most noble utterance of the Apostle no heretics possess either the word of wisdom or the word of knowledge or the faith of religion, inasmuch as wilful wickedness, being incapable of understanding, is void of knowledge of the word and of genuineness of faith. For no one utters what he does not know; nor can he believe that which he cannot utter; and thus when the Apostle preached one God, a proselyte as He was from the Law, and called to the gospel of Christ, he has attained to the confession of a perfect faith. And lest the simplicity of a seemingly unguarded statement might afford heretics any opportunity for denying through the preaching of one God the birth of the Son, the Apostle has set forth one God while indicating His peculiar attribute in these words, One God the Father, of Whom are all things, and we in Him, in order that He Who is God might also be acknowledged as Father. Afterwards, inasmuch as this bare belief in one God the Father would not suffice for salvation, he added, And one, our Lord Jesus Christ, through Whom are all things, and we through Him, shewing that the purity of saving faith consists in the preaching of one God and one Lord, so that we might believe in one God the Father and one Lord Jesus Christ. For he knew full well how our Lord had said, For this is the will of My Father, that every one that seeth the Son and believeth on Him should have eternal life. But in fixing the order of the Church’s faith, and basing our faith upon the Father and the Son, he has uttered the mystery of that indivisible and indissoluble unity and faith in the words one God and one Lord.

Paulus de Patre dicens DEUS, de Filio DOMINUS, non distinxit eos natura. --Sed si id sibi usurpavit impietas, ut quia ait, idem Dominus et idem Deus , non sint in unitate naturae: adjungam vero huic intelligentiae tuae, ut putas firmiora praesidia. Ipse enim Apostolus ait: Sed nobis unus Deus pater ex quo omnia, et nos in ipso, et unus Dominus Jesus Christus per 238 quem omnia, et nos per ipsum . Et rursum: Unus Dominus, una fides, unum baptisma. Unus Deus et pater omnium et per omnes et in omnibus nobis . Per id enim, quod dicitur unus Deus et unus Dominus, Deo tantum quasi uni Deo proprium deputari videtur ut Deus sit: cum proprietas unius consortium non patiatur alterius. O plane rara ac difficilia charismatum dona, et vere in hac utilitatum datione manifestatio Spiritus constituta! Et merito hic dividendarum gratiarum ordo servatus est, ut principalis esset sermo sapientiae; vere enim illud est, Et nemo potest dicere Dominum Jesum, nisi in Spiritu sancto , quia nisi per hoc sapientiae verbum Christus Dominus non posset intelligi, tum deinde sequens esset sermo scientiae; ut quod sapimus, scienter loquamur, ita ut sapiamus sapientiae verbum: tertium vero donum in fide esset; quia illa principalia et superiora utilitatem doni, nisi Deus crederetur, amitterent: ut nunc in hujus maximi et pulcherrimi dicti apostolici sacramento, haereticis omnibus nec verbum sapientiae est, nec sermo scientiae, nec religionis fides; quia impietas, quae non capit intelligentiam, extra sermonis scientiam et extra simplicitatem fidei est. Nec enim quisquam quod non sapit, loquitur: nec quod loqui non potest, potest credere. Unum itaque Deum Apostolus praedicans, et ex Lege veniens, atque in Evangelium Christi vocatus, perfectae fidei tenuit confessionem. Et ne aliquam haereticis occasionem tamquam incauti sermonis simplicitas praestaret, ut nativitatem Filii per unius Dei praedicationem negarent; unum Deum sub proprietatis significatione confessus est, dicens ita: Unus Deus pater ex quo omnia, et nos in ipso : ut qui Deus est, et pater crederetur. Dehinc quia nudum hoc, in unum Deum patrem credere, non proficeret ad salutem; subjecit: Et unus Dominus noster 239 Jesus Christus per quem omnia, et nos per ipsum; sinceritatem fidei salutaris in unius Dei et in unius Domini praedicatione demonstrans: ut nobis et unus Deus pater, et unus Dominus Jesus Christus in fide esset. Non enim dictum ignorabat a Domino: Haec est enim voluntas patris mei, ut omnis qui videt Filium, et credit in eum, habeat vitam aeternam . Sed fidei ecclesiasticae ordinem ponens, et fidem nostram in Patre et Filio statuens, inseparabilis illius atque indissolubilis unitatis et fidei sacramentum locutus est, dicens: Unus Deus, et unus Dominus.

8.35 PL 10, 263

35. First of all, then, O heretic that hast no part in the Spirit which spoke by the Apostle, learn thy folly. If thou wrongly employest the confession of one God to deny the Godhead of Christ, on the ground that where one God exists He must be regarded as solitary, and that to be One is characteristic and peculiar to Him Who is One,—what sense wilt thou assign to the statement that Jesus Christ is one Lord? For if, as thou assertest, the fact that the Father alone is God has not left to Christ the possibility of Godhead, it must needs be also according to thee that the fact of Christ being one Lord does not leave God the possibility of being Lord, seeing that thou wilt have it that to be One must be the essential property of Him Who is One. Hence if thou deniest that the one Lord Christ is also God, thou must needs deny that the one God the Father is also Lord. And what will the greatness of God amount to if He be not Lord, and the power of the Lord if He be not God: since it (viz., the greatness or power) causes that to be God which is Lord, and makes that Lord which is God?

Si Christus negatur Deus, quia unus Deus Pater; nec Pater Dominus, quia unus Dominus Christus. --Ac primum extra apostolicum spiritum vivens, stultitiam tuam, haeretice, intellige. Si enim professionem unius Dei ad id usurpas, ne Christus Deus sit; quia ubi unus est, solitarius sit intelligendus, et id, quod unus est, proprium ei sit ac singulare qui unus est: quid de eo profiteberis, quod Jesus Christus unus est Dominus? Si enim secundum te, quod unus Pater Deus est, Christo non reliquit ut Deus sit: necesse est, ut etiam secundum te unus Dominus Christus Deo non relinquat ut Dominus sit; quia quod unus est, proprium ei velis esse qui unus est. Si itaque unum Dominum Christum esse etiam Deum negabis, unum quoque Deum patrem esse negabis et Dominum: et quid erit in Dei virtute, nisi Dominus est, et in Domini potestate , nisi Deus est; cum et Deum id perficiat esse quod Dominus est, et Dominum id constituat esse quod Deus est?

8.36 PL 10, 263

36. Now the Apostle, maintaining the true sense of the Lord’s saying, I and the Father are one, whilst He asserts that Both are One, signifies that Both are One not after the manner of the soleness of a single being, but in the unity of the Spirit; for one God the Father and one Christ the Lord, since Each is both Lord and God, do not yet admit in our creed either two Gods or two Lords. So then Each is one, and though one, neither is sole. We shall not be able to express the mystery of the faith except in the words of the Apostle. For there is one God and one Lord, and the fact that there is one God and one Lord proves that there is at once Lordship in God, and Godhead in the Lord. Thou canst not maintain a union of person, so making God single; nor yet canst thou divide the Spirit, so preventing the Two from being One. Nor in the one God and one Lord wilt thou be able to separate the power, so that He Who is Lord should not also be God, and He Who is God should not also be Lord. For the Apostle in the enunciation of the Names has taken care not to preach either two Gods or two Lords. And for this reason he has employed such a method of teaching as in the one Lord Christ to set forth also one God, and in the one God the Father to set forth also one Lord. And, not to misguide us into the blasphemy that God is solitary, which would destroy the birth of the Only-begotten God, he has confessed both Father and Christ.

Unus est uterque spiritu, non persona. --Sed sacramentum dicti dominici Apostolus tenens, quod est: Ego et Pater unum sumus (Joan, X, 30), dum utrumque unum profitetur, unum utrumque sic significat, non ad solitudinem singularis, sed ad spiritus unitatem: quia unus Deus Pater et unus Christus Dominus, cum uterque et Dominus et Deus sit, 240 duos tamen in fide nostra nec deos patiuntur esse nec dominos. Unus igitur uterque est: et unus cum sit uterque non solus est. Nec loqui sacramentum fidei nisi apostolica voce poterimus. Unus est enim Deus, et unus est Dominus: et per id, quod unus est Deus et unus est Dominus, in Deo demonstratur et Dominus, sicut et Deus demonstratur in Domino. Non tenes unionem, ut Deus singularis sit: nec tamen dividis spiritum, ut uterque non unus sit. Neque in uno Deo et in uno Domino discernere poteris potestatem: ne qui Dominus est, non sit et Deus; vel qui Deus est, non sit et Dominus. Cavit enim Apostolus, per eloquia nominum, duos vel deos praedicare vel dominos. Et idcirco usus est eo genere doctrinae, ut in uno Domino Christo unum significaret et Deum, et in uno Deo patre unum significaret et Dominum; nec tamen impiam nobis ad perimendam unigeniti Dei nativitatem inveheret unionem, et Patrem professus et Christum.

8.37 PL 10, 264

37. Unless perchance the frenzy of utter desperation will venture to rush to such lengths that, inasmuch as the Apostle has called Christ Lord, no one ought to acknowledge Him as aught else save Lord, and that because He has the property of Lord He has not the true Godhead. But Paul knows full well that Christ is God, for he says, Whose are the fathers, and of whom is Christ, Who is God over all. It is no creature here who is reckoned as God; nay, it is the God of things created Who is God over all.

Christum non modo Dominum, sed et Deum docuit Paulus. --Nisi forte eo usque ultimae desperationis furor audebit erumpere, ut quia Christum Dominum Apostolus dixerit, nemo aliud eum praeter quam Dominum debeat confiteri, et habens Domini proprietatem, non habeat Dei veritatem. Sed non ignorat Paulus Christum Deum, dicens: Quorum patres, et ex quibus Christus, qui est super omnia Deus . Non hic creatura in Deum deputatur: sed creaturarum Deus est, qui super omnia Deus est.

8.38 PL 10, 264

38. Now that He Who is God over all is also Spirit inseparable from the Father, learn also from that very utterance of the Apostle, of which we are now speaking. For when he confessed one God the Father from Whom are all things, and one Lord Jesus Christ through Whom are all things; what difference, I ask, did he intend by saying that all things are from God and that all things are through Christ? Can He possibly be regarded as of a nature and spirit separable from Himself, He from Whom and through Whom are all things? For all things have come into being through the Son out of nothing, and the Apostle has referred them to God the Father, From Whom are all things, but also to the Son, through Whom are all things. And I find here no difference, since by Each is exercised the same power. For if with regard to the subsistence of the universe it was an exact sufficient statement that things created are from God, what need was there to state that the things which are from God are through Christ, unless it be one and the same thing to be through Christ and from God? But as it has been ascribed to Each of Them that They are Lord and God in such wise that each title belongs to Both, so too from Whom and through Whom is here referred to Both; and this to shew the unity of Both, not to make known God’s singleness. The language of the Apostle affords no opening for wicked error, nor is his faith too exalted for careful statement. For he has guarded himself by those specially appropriate words from being understood to mean two Gods or a solitary God: for while he rejects oneness of person he yet does not divide the unity of Godhead. For this from Whom are all things and through Whom are all things, although it did not posit a solitary Deity in the sole possession of majesty, must yet set forth One not different in efficiency, since from Whom are all things and through Whom are all things must signify an Author of the same nature engaged in the same work. He affirms, moreover, that Each is properly of the same nature. For after announcing the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God, and after asserting the mystery of His inscrutable judgments and avowing our ignorance of His ways past finding out, he has yet made use of the exercise of human faith, and rendered this homage to the depth of the unsearchable and inscrutable mysteries of heaven, For of Him and through Him and in Him are all things: to Him be glory for ever. Amen. He employs to indicate the one nature, that which cannot but be the work of one nature.

Distinxit illum a Patre, non divisit. --Quam vero super omnia Deus et inseparabilis sit a Patre Spiritus, disce etiam hoc ipso de quo nunc agitur Apostoli dicto. Confessus enim unum Deum patrem ex quo omnia sunt, et unum Dominum Jesum Christum per quem omnia: quaero quid diversitatis attulerit, dicens ex 241 Deo omnia, et per Christum omnia ? Anne possit separabilis a se naturae et spiritus intelligi ex quo, et per quem omnia? Omnia enim per Filium ex nihilo substiterunt, et ad Deum ex quo omnia, ad Filium vero per quem omnia Apostolus retulit. Et non invenio quid differat, cum per utrumque opus sit virtutis ejusdem. Si enim ad universitatis substantiam proprium ac sufficiens creaturis esset quod ex Deo sunt; quid habuit necessitatis memorasse, quod quae ex Deo sunt, per Christum sint, nisi quod unum idem est, per Christum esse et ex Deo esse? Sed quemadmodum Dominum et Deum utrique eorum, ut mutuum esset, adscriptum est: ita ex quo et per quem relatum ad utrumque est, et ad demonstrationem unitatis utriusque, nec ad intelligentiam singularis. Non patet ad occasionem impietatis ipsius sermo, et apostolica fides non est extra praedicationis diligentiam. His enim se verborum proprietatibus temperavit, quibus nec duos deos intelligeretur significare, neque unicum: dum et unionem detestatur, nec separat unitatem, hoc enim ex quo omnia, et per quem omnia, licet non singularem constitueret in potestate virtutis, non tamen diversum demonstraret in efficientia; cum ex quo omnia, et per quem omnia, ejusdem naturae ad id demonstraret auctorem. Utrumque autem ejusdem naturae proprium esse declarat. Namque post illud divitiarum et sapientiae et scientiae Dei protestatum profundum, et inscrutabilium judiciorum confessam inintelligentiam , et ininvestigabilium viarum demonstratam ignorationem, humanae tamen fidei usus officio, hunc honorem investigabilium et inscrutabilium 242 coelestium sacramentorum profundo reddidit, dicens: Quoniam ex ipso, et per ipsum, et in ipso sunt omnia, ipsi gloria in saecula amen : id nunc ad unius naturae significationem referens, quod non nisi opus unius possit esse naturae.

8.39 PL 10, 266

39. For whereas he has specially ascribed to God that all things are from Him, and he has assigned as a peculiar property to Christ, that all things are through Him, and it is now the glory of God that from Him and through Him and in Him are all things; and whereas the Spirit of God is the same as the Spirit of Christ, or whereas in the ministration of the Lord and in the working of God, one Spirit both works and divides, They cannot but be one Whose properties are those of one; since in the same Lord the Son, and in the same God the Father, one and the same Spirit distributing in the same Holy Spirit accomplishes all things. How worthy is this saint of the knowledge of exalted and heavenly mysteries, adopted and chosen to share in the secret things of God, preserving a due silence over things which may not be uttered, true apostle of Christ! How by the announcement of his clear teaching has he restrained the imaginations of human wilfulness, confessing, as he does, one God the Father and one Lord Jesus Christ, so that meanwhile no one can either preach two Gods or one solitary God; although He Who is not one person cannot multiply into two Gods, nor on the other hand can They Who are not two Gods be understood to be one single person; while meantime the revelation of God as Father demonstrates the true nativity of Christ.

Epilogus: ex praedictis Pauli locis quid confectum sit. --Cum enim specialiter Deo id adscripserit, ut ex eo omnia; et proprium Christo detulerit, ut per eum omnia; et nunc honor Dei sit, quod ex ipso et per ipsum et in ipso sint omnia; et cum Spiritus Dei idem sit et Spiritus Christi; vel cum in ministerio Domini et in operatione Dei Spiritus unus operetur et dividat, non possunt non unum esse, quorum propria unius sunt; cum in eodem Domino Filio, et in eodem Deo Patre, unus atque idem Spiritus in eodem Spiritu sancto dividens, universa perficiat. O dignus ille magnorum et coelestium arcanorum conscientia, et assumptus secretorum divinorum electusque particeps, ea ipsa illiciti eloquii silentio necessario tacens, et vere Apostolus Christi, quali humanae perversitatis ingenia absoluti sermonis sui praedicatione conclusit, unum Patrem Deum, et unum Dominum Jesum Christum confitendo; ut inter haec nec duos quisquam possit praedicare, neque unicum: cum tamen qui non unicus est, non in duos proficeret; nec qui duo non sunt, solitarius posset intelligi; et inter haec perfectam Christi nativitatem pater demonstratus ostenderet!

8.40 PL 10, 267

40. Thrust out now your quivering and hissing tongues, ye vipers of heresy, whether it be thou Sabellius or thou Photinus, or ye who now preach that the Only-begotten God is a creature. Whosoever denies the Son shall hear of one God the Father, because inasmuch as a father becomes a father only by having a son, this name Father necessarily connotes the existence of the Son. And again, let him who takes away from the Son the unity of an identical nature, acknowledge one Lord Jesus Christ. For unless through unity of the Spirit He is one Lord room will not be left for God the Father to be Lord. Again, let him who holds the Son to have become Son in time and by His Incarnation, learn that through Him are all things and we through Him, and that His timeless Infinity was creating all things before time was. And meanwhile let him read again that there is one hope of our calling, and one baptism, and one faith; if, after that, he oppose himself to the preaching of the Apostle, he, being accursed because he framed strange doctrines of his own device, is neither called nor baptized nor believing; because in one God the Father and in one Lord Jesus Christ there lies the one faith of one hope and baptism. And no alien doctrine can boast that it has a place among the truths which belong to one God and Lord and hope and baptism and faith.

Haereticis nec fides, nec spes, nec baptisma. --Extendite nunc vibratas sibilis linguas, haeretici serpentes, sive Sabelli, sive Photine, sive qui nunc creaturam esse unigenitum Deum praedicatis. Audiet unum Deum patrem, quisquis negat filium: quia cum Pater non nisi per filium pater sit, Filius 243 per id significatur in Patre. Qui vero unitatem naturae indifferentis Filio adimit, cognoscat unum Dominum Jesum Christum. Nisi enim per unitatem Spiritus unus est Dominus, Deo patri non relinquetur ut Dominus sit. At qui de tempore atque ex carne Filium deputat, cognoscat quia per eum omnia, et nos per ipsum; et extra tempora sit condens omnia intemporalis immensitas. Et interea relegat, quia una spes vocationis est, et unum baptisma, et fides una. Et post haec adversans praedicationi Apostoli ipse anathema constitutus, cum aliter ex sensu suo sapiat, nec vocatus, nec baptizatus est, nec fidelis: quia in uno Deo patre, et in uno Domino Jesu Christo unius spei atque baptismi fides una sit. Nec doctrinarum diversitas in his se esse poterit gloriari, quae unius et Dei et Domini et spei et baptismi sint et fidei.

8.41 PL 10, 267

41. So then the one faith is, to confess the Father in the Son and the Son in the Father through the unity of an indivisible nature, not confused but inseparable, not intermingled but identical, not conjoined but coexisting, not incomplete but perfect. For there is birth not separation, there is a Son not an adoption; and He is God, not a creature. Neither is He a God of a different kind, but the Father and Son are one: for the nature was not altered by birth so as to be alien from the property of its original. So the Apostle holds the faith of the Son abiding in the Father and the Father in the Son when he proclaims that for him there is one God the Father and one Lord Christ, since in Christ the Lord there was also God, and in God the Father there was also Lord, and They Two are that unity which is God, and They Two are also that unity which is the Lord, for reason indicates that there must be something imperfect in God unless He be Lord, and in the Lord unless He were God. And so since Both are one, and Both are implied under either name, and neither exists apart from the unity, the Apostle has not gone beyond the preaching of the Gospel in his teaching, nor does Christ when He speaks in Paul differ from the words which He spoke while abiding in the world in bodily form.

Fides de Patre et Filio. --Una igitur fides est Patrem in Filio et Filium in Patre per inseparabilis naturae unitatem confiteri, non confusam, sed indiscretam: neque permixtam, sed indifferentem; neque cohaerentem, sed exsistentem; neque inconsummatam, sed perfectam. Nativitas est enim, non divisio; et filius est, non adoptio; et Deus est, non creatio. Neque alterius generis Deus est, sed Pater et Filius unum sunt: non enim innovata est natura nascendo, ut ab originis suae proprietate esset aliena. Tenet hanc itaque manentis in Patre Filii et Patris in Filio fidem, unum Deum patrem et unum Dominum Christum sibi esse Apostolus praedicans: cum in Domino Christo et Deus esset, et in Deo patre esset et Dominus; et unum esset uterque quod Deus est, et unum esset uterque quod Dominus est: quia imperfectum et Deo, nisi Dominus sit, et Domino intelligatur esse, nisi Deus sit. Atque ita cum uterque unus est, et unus significatur in utroque, et non est uterque sine uno; non excedit evangelicam praedicationem Apostolus docens, nec loquens in Paulo Christus diversus ab his est ( post adscensionem in coelum ) quae corporeus in mundo manens locutus est.

8.42 PL 10, 268

42. For the Lord had said in the gospels, Work not for the meat which perisheth, but for the meat which abideth unto life eternal, which the Son of Man shall give unto you: for Him the Father, even God, hath sealed. They said therefore unto Him, What must we do that we may work the works of God? And He said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on Him Whom He hath sent. In setting forth the mystery of His Incarnation and His Godhead our Lord has also uttered the teaching of our faith and hope that we should work for food, not that which perisheth but that which abideth for ever; that we should remember that this food of eternity is given us by the Son of Man; that we should know the Son of Man as sealed by God the Father; that we should know that this is the work of God, even faith in Him Whom He has sent. And Who is it Whom the Father has sent? Even He Whom the Father has sealed. And Who is He Whom the Father has sealed? In truth, the Son of Man, even He who gives the food of eternal life. And further who are they to whom He gives it? They who shall work for the food that does not perish. Thus, then, the work for this food is at the same time the work of God, namely, to believe on Him Whom He has sent. But these words are uttered by the Son of Man. And how shall the Son of Man give the food of life eternal? Why, he knows not the mystery of his own salvation, who knows not that the Son of Man, bestowing food unto life eternal, has been sealed by God the Father. At this point I now ask in what sense are we to understand that the Son of Man has been sealed by God the Father?

Filius hominis vitam aeternam dat, quia signatus a Patre. --Dixerat enim in Evangeliis Dominus: 244 Operamini escam, non quae interit, sed escam quae permanet in vitam aeternam, quam filius hominis dabit vobis. Hunc enim Pater signavit Deus. Dixerunt igitur ad eum: Quid faciemus, ut operemur opera Dei? Et dixit illis: Hoc est opus Dei, ut credatis in eum, quem misit ille . Sacramentum et corporationis et divinitatis suae Dominus exponens, fidei quoque nostrae et spei doctrinam locutus est: ut escam non intereuntem, sed permanentem in aeternum operaremur, ut hanc aeternitatis escam dari nobis a filio hominis meminissemus, ut filium hominis signatum a Deo patre sciremus, ut hoc esse opus Dei nosceremus, credere in eum quem misisset. Et quis est, quem Pater misit? Nempe quem signavit Deus. Et quis est, quem signavit Deus? Filius utique hominis, escam scilicet praebens vitae aeternae. Et qui tandem sunt, quibus praebet eam? Illi namque qui operabuntur escam non intereuntem. Atque ita quae opera escae est, eadem operatio Dei est, in eum scilicet credidisse quem misit. Sed haec loquitur filius hominis. Et quomodo escam vitae aeternae filius hominis dabit? Sed sacramentum salutis suae nescit, qui nescit filium hominis dantem escam in vitam aeternam, a Deo patre esse signatum. Hic nunc quaero, qui tandem intelligentiae sensus sit, filium hominis a Patre signatum Deo?

8.43 PL 10, 268

43. Now we ought to recognise first of all that God has spoken not for Himself but for us, and that He has so far tempered the language of His utterance as to enable the weakness of our nature to grasp and understand it. For after being rebuked by the Jews for having made Himself the equal of God by professing to be the Son of God, He had answered that He Himself did all things that the Father did, and that He had received all judgment from the Father; moreover that He must be honoured even as the Father. And in all these things having before declared Himself Son, He had made Himself equal to the Father in honour, power and nature. Afterwards He had said that as the Father had life in Himself, so He had given the Son to have life in Himself, wherein He signified that by virtue of the mystery of the birth He possessed the unity of the same nature. For when He says that He has what the Father has, He means that He has the Father’s self. For that God is not after human fashion of a composite being, so that in Him there is a difference of kind between Possessor and Possessed; but all that He is is life, a nature, that is, complete, absolute and infinite, not composed of dissimilar elements but with one life permeating the whole. And since this life was in such wise given as it was possessed, although the fact that it was given manifestly reveals the birth of the Recipient, it yet does not involve a difference of kind since the life given was such as was possessed.

Deus sermonem suum sensui nostro accommodat. Filius aequalis Patri. Deus est incompositus. --Ac primum cognosci oportet Deum non sibi, sed nobis locutum, et in tantum ad intelligentiam nostram eloquii sui temperasse sermonem, quantum comprehendere ad sentiendum naturae nostrae possit infirmitas. Namque cum superius increpatus a Judaeis fuisset, cur se aequalem Deo, filium se Dei profitendo, fecisset ; responderat omnia se, quae faceret Pater, facere ; et omne se a Patre adeptum esse judicium; etiam se, ut Patrem, honorandum. Et in his omnibus, professus ante se filium, Patri exaequaverat honore, potestate, natura. Dehinc dixerat, ut Patrem vitam in se habere, ita eum Filio vitam in se habendam dedisse : in quo significaverat naturae ejusdem per sacramentum nativitatis unitatem. Per id enim, quod habet Pater, ipsum illum 245 significavit in habendo: quia non humano modo ex compositis Deus est, ut in eo aliud sit quod ab eo habetur, et aliud sit ipse qui habeat: sed totum quod est, vita est, natura scilicet perfecta et absoluta et infinita, et non ex disparibus constituta, sed vivens ipsa per totum. Quae cum qualis habetur, talis et data est, etsi nativitatem ejus intelligatur significare cui data est; non tamen diversitatem generis affert, cum talis data est, qualis et habetur.

8.44 PL 10, 269

44. Therefore after this manifold and precise revelation of the presence of the Father’s nature in Himself, He goes on to say, For Him hath the Father sealed, even God. It is the nature of a seal to exhibit the whole form of the figure graven upon it, and that an impression taken from it reproduces it in every respect; and since it receives the whole of that which is impressed, it displays also in itself wholly whoever has been impressed upon it. Yet this comparison is not adequate to exemplify the Divine birth, because in seals there is a matter, difference of nature, and an act of impression, whereby the likeness of stronger natures is impressed upon things of a more yielding nature. But the Only-begotten God, Who was also through the Mystery of our salvation the Son of Man, desiring to point out to us the likeness of His Father’s proper nature in Himself, said that He was sealed by God; because the Son of Man was about to give the food of eternal life, and that we thereby might perceive in Him the power of giving food unto eternity, in that He possessed within Himself all the fulness of His Father’s form, even of the God Who sealed Him: so that what God had sealed should display in itself none other than the form of the God Who sealed it. These things indeed the Lord spoke to the Jews, who could not receive His saying because of unbelief.

Quo sensu filius hominis a Patre signatus. --Post hanc ergo tam multiplicem ac propriam demonstrandae in se paternae naturae significationem, usus hoc dicto est: Hunc enim Pater signavit Deus . Signaculorum natura ea est, ut omnem impressae in se speciei explicent formam, et nihil minus ex eo in se habeant unde signentur: et dum totum accipiunt quod imprimitur, totum ex se praeferunt quidquid impressum est. Verum hoc ( Istud hoc refer ad sequentia ) ad divinae nativitatis non proficit exemplum, quia in signaculis et materies sit et diversitas et impressio, per quae mollioribus naturis validiorum generum species imprimuntur. Unigenitus vero Deus, et per sacramentum salutis nostrae hominis filius, volens proprietatis nobis paternae in se significare speciem, signatum se a Deo ait: et hoc ideo, quia vitae aeternae escam filius hominis esset daturus; ut per hoc potestas in eo dandae ad aeternitatem escae intelligi posset, quia omnem in se paternae formae plenitudinem signantis se Dei contineret; ut quod signasset Deus, non aliud ex se quam formam Dei signantis efferret. Haec quidem ad Judaeos Dominus ob infidelitatem suam dicti istius incapaces locutus est.

8.45 PL 10, 269

45. But in us the preacher of the Gospel by the Spirit of Christ Who spoke through him, instils the knowledge of this His proper nature when he says, Who, being in the form of God, thought it not a thing to grasp at that He was equal with God, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a servant. For He, Whom God had sealed, could be naught else than the form of God, and that which has been sealed in the form of God must needs present at the same time imaged forth within itself all that God possesses. And for this cause the Apostle taught that He Whom God sealed is God abiding in the form of God. For when about to speak of the Mystery of the body assumed and born in Him, he says, He thought it not a thing to grasp at that He was equal with God, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a servant. As regards His being in the form of God, by virtue of God’s seal upon Him, he still remained God. But inasmuch as He was to take the form of a servant and become obedient unto death, not grasping at His equality with God, He emptied Himself through obedience to take the form of a slave. And He emptied Himself of the form of God, that is, of that wherein He was equal with God—not that He regarded His equality with God as any encroachment,—although He was in the form of God and equal with God and sealed by God as God.

Signatum a Deo exponit Paulus dicens in Dei forma. --Sed nobis Evangelii praedicator proprietatis hujus intelligentiam Spiritu Christi per se loquentis insinuat, dicens: Qui cum in forma Dei esset, non rapinam arbitratus est esse se aequalem Deo, sed se exinanivit, formam servi accipiens . Quem enim signaverat Deus, aliud praeter quam Dei forma esse 246 non potuit: et id, quod signatum in Dei forma est, hoc necesse est totum in se coimaginatum habere, quod Dei est. Et idcirco Apostolus eum, quem signavit Deus, in Dei forma manentem Deum praedicavit. Nam assumpti et connati in eo corporis sacramentum locuturus ait, Non rapinam arbitratus est esse se aequalem Deo, sed se exinanivit, formam servi accipiens. Quod enim in forma Dei erat, per signantem se Deum Deus manebat. Sed quia suscipienda erat forma servi, et obediens esset futurus ad mortem; non sibi rapiens esse se aequalem Deo, ad susceptionem se formae servilis per obedientiam exinanivit. Exinanivit autem se ex Dei forma, id est, ex eo quod aequalis Deo erat: non tamen aequalem se Deo per rapinam existimans, quamvis in forma Dei, et aequalis Deo, per Deum Deus signatus exstaret.

8.46 PL 10, 270

46. At this point I ask whether He Who abides as God in the form of God is a God of another kind, as we perceive in the case of seals in respect of the likenesses which stamp and those which are stamped, since a steel die impressed upon lead or a gem upon wax shapes the figure cut in it or imprints that which stands in relief upon it. But if there be any one so foolish and senseless as to think that that, pertaining to Himself, which God fashions to be God, is aught but God, and that He Who is in the form of God is in any respect anything else save God after the mystery of His Incarnation and of His humility, made perfect through obedience even unto the death of the cross, he shall hear, by the confession of things in heaven and things on earth and things under the earth and of every tongue, that Jesus is in the glory of God the Father. If then, when His form had become that of a slave He abides in such glory, how, I ask, did He abide when in the form of God? Must not Christ the Spirit have been in the nature of Gods—for this is what is meant by ‘in the glory of God’—when Christ as Jesus, that is, born as man, exists in the glory of God the Father?

Christus verus Deus, etiam post assumptum hominem: quanto magis ante. -- Hic nunc quaero, utrum alterius generis Deus est, qui in forma Dei Deus maneat, ut secundum consignatas consignantesque species in sigillis cernimus, cum impressum plumbo ferrum, et gemma cerae, speciem vel concavae in se imaginis fingat, vel exstantis de se exprimat formae? Sed si quis exstiterit tam stultus et vecors, ut putet quod aliud ex se Deus in Deum quam Deum formet; et qui in forma Dei sit, aliud aliquid totus ipse quam Deus sit, post sacramenta hominis assumpti , et per obedientiam consummatae usque ad crucis mortem humilitatis: audiet, coelestium et terrestrium et infernorum et omnis linguae confessione, Jesum in gloria Dei patris . In hac igitur gloria, si cum jam forma servilis fuerit, manebit; tum cum in forma Dei esset, quaero quid manserit? utrumne in natura Dei, quae significatur in gloria, Christus Spiritus fuerit; cum in gloria Dei patris Christus Jesus, id est, homo natus exstabit?

8.47 PL 10, 271

47. In all things the blessed Apostle preserves the unchangeable teaching of the Gospel faith. The Lord Jesus Christ is proclaimed as God in such wise that neither does the Apostle’s faith, by calling Him a God of a different order, fall away to the confession of two Gods, nor by making God the Son inseparable from the Father does it leave an opening for the unholy doctrine of a single and solitary God. For when he says, in the form of God and in the glory of the Father the Apostle neither teaches that They differ one from another, nor allows us to think of Him as not existing. For He Who is in the form of God neither ends by becoming another God nor Himself loses His Godhead: for He cannot be severed from the form of God since He exists in it, nor is He, Who is in the form of God, not God Just as He Who is in the glory of God cannot be aught else than God, and, since He is God in the glory of God, cannot be proclaimed as another god and one different from the true God, seeing that by reason of the fact that He is in the glory of God He possesses naturally from Him in Whose glory He is, the property of divinity.

Deus unus, non unicus. --Tenet in omnibus beatus Apostolus fidei evangelicae indemutabilem praedicationem, 247 ita Dominum Jesum Christum Deum praedicans, ut neque per alterius generis Deum in deos duos fides apostolica depereat, neque inseparabilis a Patre Filius Deus unici ac singularis Dei praedicandi occasionem impiam praebeat. Dicens enim, in forma Dei, et in gloria Dei patris, neque differre docuit, neque non exsistentem nos existimare permisit. Nam qui in forma Dei est, neque in alterum Deum proficit, neque etiam ipse non Deus est: quia nec separari potest a Dei forma, cum in ea sit; nec qui in Dei est forma, non Deus est. Sicut qui in gloria Dei est, non potest aliud esse quam Deus est; et dum in gloria Dei Deus est, alterius Dei atque a Deo diversi non habet praedicationem; quia per id, quod in gloria Dei est, ex eo in cujus gloria est, habet in se naturale quod Deus est.

8.48 PL 10, 271

48. But there is no danger that the one faith will cease to be such through diversity in its preaching. The Evangelist had taught that our Lord said, He that hath seen Me, hath seen the Father also. But has Paul, the teacher of the Gentiles, forgotten or kept back the meaning of the Lord’s words, when he says, Who is the image of the invisible God? I ask whether He is the visible likeness of the invisible God, and whether the infinite God can also be presented to view under the likeness of a finite form? For a likeness must needs repeat the form of that of which it is the likeness. Let those, however, who will have a nature of a different sort in the Son determine what sort of likeness of the invisible God they wish the Son to be. Is it a bodily likeness exposed to the gaze, and moving from place to place with human gait and motion? Nay, but let them remember that according to the Gospels and the Prophets both Christ is a Spirit and God is a Spirit. If they confine this Christ the Spirit within the bounds of shape and body, such a corporeal Christ will not be the likeness of the invisible God, nor will a finite limitation represent that which is infinite.

Christus ut imago Dei, non alterius est naturae. --Non periclitatur, per plures praedicationes fides una, ne una sit. Evangelista enim dictum a Domino docuerat, Qui me vidit, vidit et Patrem . Sed numquid doctor gentium Paulus virtutem dicti dominici aut ignoravit, aut tacuit, dicens: Qui est imago Dei invisibilis ? Interrogo utrum visibilis imago est invisibilis Dei: et utrum infinitus Deus per formae circumscriptae imaginem coimaginari possit ad speciem? Imago enim formam necesse est ejus reddat, cujus et imago est. Qui volunt autem alterius generis in Filio esse naturam, constituant cujusmodi Filium imaginem esse invisibilis Dei velint. Anne corpoream, et contemplabilem, et ex locis in loca motu incessuque circumvagam? Meminerint tamen, secundum Evangelia et prophetas, et Christum spiritum et Deum spiritum. Qui 248 si circumscribent hunc spiritum Christum formabili et corporali modo; non erit invisibilis Dei imago corporeus, nec indefiniti species definita moderatio.

8.49 PL 10, 272

49. But, as it is, neither did the Lord leave us in doubt: He who hath seen Me, hath seen the Father also; nor was the Apostle silent as to His nature, Who is the image of the invisible God. For the Lord had said, If I do not the works of My Father, believe Me not, teaching them to see the Father in Himself in that He did the works of the Father; that through perceiving the power of His nature they might understand the nature of that power which they perceived. Wherefore the Apostle proclaiming that this is the image of God, says, Who is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of all creation; for in Him were all things made in the heavens and upon the earth, things visible and things invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers; all things have been created through Him and in Him, and He is before all, and for Him all things consist. And He is the head of the body, the Church, Who is the beginning, the first-born from the dead, that in all things He might have the pre-eminence. For it was the good pleasure of the Father that in Him should all the fulness dwell, and through Him all things should be reconciled to Him. So through the power of these works He is the image of God. For assuredly the Creator of things invisible is not compelled by any necessity inherent in His nature to be the visible image of the invisible God. And lest He should be regarded as the likeness of the form and not of the nature, He is styled the likeness of the invisible God in order that we may understand by His exercise of the powers (not the invisible attributes) of the Divine nature, that that nature is in Him.

Imago Dei est, quatenus ei divinae naturae virtus. --Sed neque Dominus incertum reliquit, Qui me vidit, vidit et Patrem ; neque Apostolus tacuit qualis esset, Qui est imago Dei invisibilis . Dominus enim dixerat, Si non facio opera patris mei, nolite mihi credere , hinc videri in se Patrem docens, quod opera ejus efficeret; ut intellecta naturae virtus naturam intellectae virtutis ostenderet, per quod Apostolus hanc imaginem Dei esse significans, ait, Qui est imago Dei invisibilis, primogenitus omnis creaturae; quia in ipso constituta sunt omnia in coelis et in terra, visibilia et invisibilia, sive Throni, sive Principatus, sive Potestates, sive Dominationes, omnia per ipsum et in ipso condita sunt, et ipse est ante omnes, et omnia ipsi constant, et ipse est caput corporis Ecclesiae, qui est initium, primogenitus ex mortuis, ut fieret in omnibus ipse primatum tenens; quia in ipso complacuit omnem plenitudinem habitare, et per ipsum reconciliari omnia in eum . Per horum igitur operum virtutem imago Dei est. Nam utique invisibilium Conditor non est in ea naturae necessitate, ut invisibilis Dei imago visibilis sit. Ac ne formae potius, quam naturae imago esse intelligeretur; idcirco invisibilis Dei imago est, natura in eo Dei per naturae suae virtutem intelligenda, non invisibili qualitate.

8.50 PL 10, 273

50. He is accordingly the first-born of every creature because in Him all things were created. And lest any one should dare to refer to any other than Him the creation of all things in Himself, he says, All things have been created through Him and in Him, and He is before all, and for Him all things consist. All things then consist for Him Who is before all things, and in Whom are all things. Now this indeed describes the origin of created things. But concerning the dispensation by which He assumed our body, he adds, And He is the head of the body, the Church: Who is the beginning, the first-born from the dead: that in all things He might have the pre-eminence. For it was the good pleasure of the Father that in Him should all the fulness dwell, and that through Him all things should be reconciled to Him. The Apostle has assigned to the spiritual mysteries their material effects. For He Who is the image of the invisible God is Himself the head of His body, the Church, and He Who is the first-born of every creature is at the same time the beginning, the first born from the dead: that in all things He might have the pre-eminence, being for us the Body, while He is also the image of God, since He, Who is the first-born of created things, is at the same time the first-born for eternity; so that as to Him things spiritual, being created in the First-born, owe it that they abide, even so all things human also owe it to Him that in the First-born from the dead they are born again into eternity. For He is Himself the beginning, Who as Son is therefore the image, and because the image, is of God. Further He is the first-born of every created thing, possessing in Himself the origin of the universe: and again He is the head of His body, the Church, and the first-born from the dead, so that in all things He has the pre-eminence. And because all things consist for Him, in Him the fulness of the Godhead is pleased to dwell, for in Him all things are reconciled through Him to Him, through Whom all things were created in Himself.

Qui primogenitus, qui primatum in omnibus tenens. --Primogenitus itaque omnis creaturae est, quia in ipso creata omnia sunt. Et ne quod in ipso creata omnia sunt, non ad ipsum quisquam auderet referre, ait, Omnia per ipsum et in ipso condita sunt, et ipse est 249 ante omnes, et omnia ipsi constant . Omnia itaque ipsi constant, qui ante omnia est, et in quo omnia sunt. Et haec quidem ad exordia pertinent creaturarum. Caeterum ob dispensationem corporis nostri ait: Et ipse est caput corporis Ecclesiae, qui est initium, primogenitus ex mortuis, ut fieret in omnibus ipse primatum tenens; quia in ipso complacuit omnem plenitudinem habitare, et per ipsum omnia reconciliari in eum . Reddidit Apostolus spiritalibus sacramentis corporeas operationes. Namque qui imago Dei invisibilis est, et ipse est caput corporis Ecclesiae: et qui primogenitus omnis creaturae est, idem initium, primogenitus ex mortuis est: ut in omnibus teneat primatum, dum nobis corpus est, qui Dei imago est; dum qui primogenitus creaturae est, idem primogenitus ad aeternitatem est, ut cui spiritalia debent, in primogenito creata, quod maneant; ei et humana debeant, quod in primogenito ex mortuis renascantur aeterna. Ipse est enim initium, qui cum filius sit, imago est; cum imago est, Dei est. Primogenitus quoque omnis creaturae est, continens in se universitatis exordium. Et rursum ipse caput corporis Ecclesiae est, et primogenitus ex mortuis, ut in omnibus teneat ipse primatum. Et quia omnia ei constant, in ipso complacita plenitudo consistit; dum in eo per ipsum in eum reconciliantur omnia, in quo per ipsum in ipso omnia sunt creata.

8.51 PL 10, 274

51. Do you now perceive what it is to be the image of God? It means that all things are created in Him through Him. Whereas all things are created in Him, understand that He, Whose image He is, also creates all things in Him. And since all things which are created in Him are also created through Him, recognize that in Him Who is the image there is present the nature of Him, Whose image He is. For through Himself He creates the things which are created in Him, just as through Himself all things are reconciled in Him. Inasmuch as they are reconciled in Him, recognise in Him the nature of the Father’s unity, reconciling all things to Himself in Him. Inasmuch as all things are reconciled through Him, perceive Him reconciling to the Father in Himself all things which He reconciled through Himself. For the same Apostle says, But all things are from God, Who reconciled us to Himself through Christ, and gave unto us the ministry of reconciliation: to wit, that God was in Christ reconciling the world unto Himself. Compare with this the whole mystery of the faith of the Gospel. For He Who is seen when Jesus is seen, Who works in His works, and speaks in His words, also reconciles in His reconciliation. And for this cause, in Him and through Him there is reconciliation, because the Father abiding in Him through a like nature restored the world to Himself by reconciliation through and in Him.

Imago Dei est, quatenus omnia in eo creantur. Creatio ut reconciliatio et Patris et Filii est. --Sentisne jam quid sit esse imaginem Dei? Creari utique omnia in eo per eum. Cum in eo creantur omnia, intellige etiam eum cujus imago est creantem in eo omnia. Cum autem quae in eo creantur, per ipsum creantur; in hoc quoque, qui imago est, naturam ejus cujus imago est inesse 250 cognosce. Per se enim creat, quae in ipso creantur: sicuti per ipsum reconciliantur in eo omnia. Cum in eo reconciliantur, paternae in eo unitatis apprehende naturam reconciliantem sibi in eo omnia. Cum per eum reconciliantur omnia, ipsum Patri reconciliantem in se omnia quae per se reconciliabat intellige. Ait enim idem Apostolus: Omnia autem a Deo, qui reconciliavit nos sibi per Christum, et dedit nobis ministerium reconciliationis; quoniam quidem Deus erat in Christo mundum reconcilians sibi . Confer cum his omne evangelicae fidei sacramentum. Qui enim videtur in viso, qui operatur in operante, qui loquitur in loquente, idem in reconciliante reconciliat . Et idcirco in eo et per eum reconciliatio est, quia per indifferentem naturam Pater in eo manens, mundum sibi ipse per eum et in eo reconciliatione reddebat.

8.52 PL 10, 275

52. Thus God out of regard for human weakness has not set forth the faith in bare and uncertain statements. For although the authority of our Lord’s mere words of itself compelled their acceptance, He nevertheless has informed our reason by a revelation which explains their meaning, that we might learn to know His words, I and the Father are one, by means of that which was itself the cause of the unity in question. For in saying that the Father speaks in His words, and works through His working, and judges through His judgment, and is seen in His manifestation, and reconciles through His reconciliation, and abides in Him, while He in turn abides in the Father,—what more fitting words, I ask, could He have employed in His teaching to suit the faculties of our reason, that we might believe in Their unity, than those by which, through the truth of the birth and the unity of the nature, it is declared that whatever the Son did and said, the Father said and did in the Son? This says nothing of a nature foreign to Himself, or added by creation to God, or born into Godhead by a partition of God, but it betokens the divinity of One Who by a perfect birth is begotten perfect God, Who has so confident an assurance of His nature that He says, I in the Father and the Father in Me, and again, All things whatsoever the Father hath are Mine. For nought of the Godhead is lacking in Him, in Whose working and speaking and manifestation God works and speaks and is beheld. They are not two Gods, Who in their working and words and manifestation put on a semblance of unity. Neither is He a solitary God. Who in the works and words and sight of God, Himself worked and spoke and was seen as God. The Church understands this. The Synagogue does not believe, philosophy does not know, that being One of One, Whole of Whole, God and Son, He has neither by His birth deprived the Father of His completeness, nor failed to possess the same completeness in Himself by right of His birth. And whosoever is caught in this folly of unbelief is a disciple either of the Jews or of the heathen.

Unitatem suam cum Patre quam potuit aptius Christus declaravit. --Consulens itaque humanae infirmitati Deus non incerta verborum nuditate fidem docuit. Namque cum credendi necessitatem dicti dominici auctoritas sola praestaret, tamen sensum nostrum per intelligentiam editae rationis instituit: ut id quod dixerat: Ego et Pater unum sumus , per causam ipsam unitatis expositae nosceremus. Dicens enim se per loquentem loqui, et per operantem operari, et per judicantem judicare, et per visum videri, et per reconciliantem reconciliare, et manere se in eo qui in se maneret: quaero quo alio ad intelligentiae nostrae sensum expositionis suae uti potuerit aptiore sermone, ut unum esse intelligerentur, quam isto, quo per nativitatis veritatem, et naturae unitatem, quidquid Filius ageret ac diceret, id in Filio Pater et loqueretur et gereret? Non est hoc itaque naturae a se alienae, neque per creationem 251 in Deum comparatae, neque ex portione Dei in Deum natae; sed perfecta nativitate in Deum perfectum genitae divinitatis, cujus haec naturalis conscientiae fiducia est, ut dicat: Ego in Patre, et Pater in me : et rursum: Omnia quae Patris sunt, mea sunt . Nihil enim ei ex Deo deest, quo operante et loquente et viso, Deus et operatur et loquitur et videtur. Non sunt duo (supple, naturis distincti ) in unius vel operatione, vel sermone, vel visu. Nec solitarius Deus est, qui in operante et loquente et viso Deo, Deus et operatus et locutus et visus sit. Hoc Ecclesia intelligit, hoc Synagoga non credit, hoc philosophia non sapit, unum ex uno, et totum a toto, Deum et filium, neque per nativitatem Patri ademisse quod totum est, neque hoc ipsum totum non secum nascendo tenuisse. Et quisquis in hac infidelitatis stultitia detinebitur, aut Judaeorum sectator, aut gentium est.

8.53 PL 10, 276

53. Now that you may understand the saying of the Lord, when He said, All things whatsoever the Father hath are Mine, learn the teaching and faith of the Apostle who said, Take heed lest any lead you astray through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the elements of the world and not after Christ; for in Him dwelleth the fulness of Godhead bodily. That man is of the world and savours of the teaching of men and is the victim of philosophy, who does not know Christ to be the true God, who does not recognise in Him the fulness of Godhead. The mind of man knows only that which it understands, and the world’s powers of belief are limited, since it judges according to the laws of the material elements that that alone is possible which it can see or do. For the elements of the world have come into being out of nothing, but Christ’s continuity of existence did not begin in the non-existent, nor did He ever begin to exist, but He took from the beginning a beginning which is eternal. The elements of the world are either without life, or have issued out of this stage into life, but Christ is life, born to be living God from the living God. The elements of the world have been established by God, but they are not God: Christ as God of God is Himself wholly all that God is. The elements of the world, since they are within it, cannot possibly rise out of their condition and cease to be within it, but Christ, while having God within Himself through the Mystery, is Himself in God. The elements of the universe, generating from themselves creatures with a life like their own, do indeed through the exercise of their bodily functions bestow upon them from their own bodies the beginnings of life, but they are not themselves present as living beings in their offspring, whereas in Christ all the fulness of the Godhead is present in bodily shape.

Sapientia humana. Elementorum mundi et Christi discrimen. --Ut autem dictum Domini intelligas quo ait: Omnia quae Patris sunt, mea sunt; Apostoli et doctrinam et fidem disce dicentis: Videte ne quis vos seducat per philosophiam et inanem deceptionem secundum traditionem hominum, secundum elementa mundi, et non secundum Christum: quia in ipso inhabitat omnis plenitudo divinitatis corporaliter . De mundo est, et doctrinas hominum sapit, et philosophiae praeda est, quisquis Christum verum Deum nescit, quisquis in eo plenitudinem divinitatis ignorat. Humana mens hoc solum sapit quod intelligit, et mundus hoc tantum quod potest credit, secundum elementorum naturas id tantum possibile existimans, quod aut videret, aut ageret. Elementa enim mundi ex nihilo substiterunt: 252 sed Christus non de non substantibus manet, nec coepit ad originem, sed originem ab origine sumpsit aeternam. Elementa enim mundi aut inanima sunt, aut ad animam profecerunt: sed Christus vita est, ex Deo vivente in viventem Deum natus. Elementa mundi a Deo sunt instituta, non Deus sunt: Christus ex Deo Deus hoc totum est ipse quod Deus est. Elementa mundi cum intra sint, non possunt a se exstare ne intra sint: Deum sub sacramento in se habens Christus in Deo est. Elementa mundi cum ex se sui generis generant ad vitam, per corporales quidem passiones praebent ex se initia nascendi; caeterum non insunt viva ipsa nascentibus: omnis vero corporaliter plenitudo divinitatis in Christo est.

8.54 PL 10, 276

54. Now I ask, whose Godhead is it whereof the fulness dwells in Him? If it be not that of the Father, what other God do you, misleading preacher of one God, thrust upon me as Him Whose Godhead dwells fully in Christ? But if it be that of the Father, inform me how this fulness dwells in Him in bodily fashion. If you hold that the Father abides in the Son in bodily fashion, the Father, while dwelling in the Son, will not exist in Himself. If on the other hand, and this is more true, the Godhead abiding in Him in bodily shape displays within Him the verity of the nature of God from God, inasmuch as God is in Him, abiding neither through condescension nor through will but by birth, true and wholly in bodily fulness according as He is; and inasmuch as, in the whole compass of His being, He was born by His divine birth to be God, and within the Godhead there is no difference or dissimilarity, except that in Christ He dwells in bodily form, and yet whatever dwells in Him bodily is according to the fulness of Godhead; why follow after the doctrines of men? Why cleave to the teaching of empty falsehoods? Why talk of ‘agreement’ or ‘harmony of will’ or ‘a creature?’ The fulness of Godhead dwells in Christ bodily.

Qui divinitatis plenitudo in Christo corporaliter habitet. --Et interrogo, cujus in eo divinitatis plenitudo est? Quae si non Patris est, quem mihi Deum alium unius Dei fallax praedicator imponis, cujus divinitatis plenitudo habitet in Christo? Si vero Patris est, edoce quomodo corporaliter haec in eo habitet plenitudo. Si enim corporali modo Patrem in Filio credis; Pater in Filio habitans non exstabit in sese. Si vero, quod est potius, corporaliter in eo manens divinitas naturae in eo Dei ex Deo significat veritatem; dum in eo Deus est, non aut per dignationem aut per voluntatem, sed per generationem verus et totus corporali secundum se plenitudine manens; dum quod ipse est, id etiam per nativitatem Dei in Deum natum est; neque diversum aut differens aliquid in Deo est, quam id quod corporaliter habitet in Christo; et quidquid inhabitet corporaliter, id ipsum secundum divinitatis est plenitudinem: quid humana sectaris? 253 quid inanium deceptionum doctrinis inhaeres? quid mihi affers unanimitatem, concordiam, creaturam? Plenitudo divinitatis in Christo est corporaliter.

8.55 PL 10, 277

55. The Apostle has herein held fast to the canon of his faith, by teaching that the fulness of the Godhead dwelt in Christ bodily; and this, in order that the teaching of the faith might not degenerate into an unholy profession of a oneness of Persons or sinful frenzy break forth into the belief of two different natures. For the fulness of Godhead which dwells in Christ in bodily fashion is neither solitary nor separable; for the fulness in bodily form does not admit any partition from the other bodily fulness, and the indwelling Godhead cannot be regarded as also the dwelling-place of the Godhead. And Christ is so constituted that the fulness of Godhead dwells in Him in bodily fashion, and that this fulness must be held one in nature with Christ. Lay hands on every chance that offers for your quibbles, sharpen the points of your blasphemous wit. Name, at least, the imaginary being whose fulness of Godhead it is which dwells in Christ in bodily fashion. For He is Christ, and there is dwelling in Him in bodily fashion the fulness of Godhead.

Alius habitans, alius habitatio; perfectus uterque Deus. --Tenuit autem etiam in hoc Apostolus fidei suae legem, ut corporaliter in Christo inhabitare plenitudinem divinitatis doceret: ne ad unionem impiam fidei sermo decideret, nec ad alterius naturae intelligentiam furor irreligiosus erumperet. Habitans enim in Christo plenitudo divinitatis corporaliter, nec singularis nec separabilis est: dum nec se patitur a corporali plenitudine corporalis plenitudo discerni, nec habitans divinitas ea ipsa intelligi potest esse divinitatis habitatio. Atque ita Christus est, ut corporaliter plenitudo divinitatis in Christo sit; sic vero in Christo sit divinitatis corporaliter plenitudo, ut in eo inhabitans plenitudo non aliud intelligatur esse quam Christus. Furare quas voles verborum occasiones, et irreligiosi ingenii aculeos excita. Ementire saltem cujus plenitudo divinitatis in Christo inhabitet 254 corporaliter. Est enim Christus, est et inhabitans in eo divinitatis corporaliter plenitudo.

8.56 PL 10, 278

56. And if you would know what it is to ‘dwell in bodily fashion,’ understand what it is to speak in one that speaks, to be seen in one who is seen, to work in one who works, to be God in God, whole of whole, one of one; and thus learn what is meant by the fulness of God in bodily shape. Remember, too, that the Apostle does not keep silence on the question, whose Godhead it is, which dwells fully in Christ in bodily fashion, for he says, For the invisible things of Him since the creation of the world are clearly seen, being perceived through the things that are made, even His everlasting power and divinity. So it is His Godhead that dwells in Christ in bodily fashion, not partially but wholly, not parcelwise but in fulness; and so dwelling that the Two are one, and so one, that the One Who is God does not differ from the Other Who is God: Both so equally divine, as a perfect birth engendered perfect God. And the birth exists thus in its perfection, because the fulness of the Godhead dwells bodily in God born of God.

Quae sit habitatio corporalis. Cujus sit. --Et si quaeras quae sit habitatio corporalis; intellige quid sit loqui in loquente, et in viso videri, et in operante operari, et in Deo Deum, et ex toto totum, et ex uno unum: et ita corporalis divinitatis plenitudinem recognosce. Et cujus haec divinitatis corporaliter inhabitans plenitudo sit, memento Apostolum non tacere dicentem: Ea enim, quae invisibilia sunt ejus, a constitutione mundi, per ea quae facta sunt, intellecta conspiciuntur aeterna quoque ejus virtus et divinitas . Hujus itaque divinitas corporalis in Christo est, non ex parte, sed tota; neque portio est, sed plenitudo: ita corporaliter manens, ut unum sint; ita unum sunt, ut a Deo non differat Deus; ita indifferens a Deo Deus, ut perfectum Deum substituerit perfecta nativitas; ita autem perfecta nativitas subsistat, quia in Deo ex Deo nato corporaliter divinitatis inhabitet plenitudo.

Philip Schaff and Henry Wace (eds.), New York: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1890-1900. Public domain: English translation first published 1885-1900 (Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series). Latin: Migne, Patrologia Latina (1844-1855), public domain; transcription from Corpus Corporum (University of Zurich).

Salva per dopo

Inserisci la tua email: ti invieremo un link per accedere. Nessuna password. Ciò che salvi (voci, versetti, capitoli, documenti) ti segue su ogni dispositivo.