A Treatise of Novatian Concerning the Trinity.

 A Treatise of Novatian Concerning the Trinity.

 The Rule of truth requires that we should first of all things believe on God the Father and Lord Omnipotent that is, the absolutely perfect Founder o

 And over all these things He Himself, containing all things, having nothing vacant beyond Himself, has left room for no superior God, such as some peo

 Him, then, we acknowledge and know to be God, the Creator of all things—Lord on account of His power, Parent on account of His discipline—Him, I say,

 Him alone the Lord rightly declares good, of whose goodness the whole world is witness which world He would not have ordained if He had not been good

 Moreover, if we read of His wrath, and consider certain descriptions of His indignation, and learn that hatred is asserted of Him, yet we are not to u

 And although the heavenly Scripture often turns the divine appearance into a human form,—as when it says, “The eyes of the Lord are over the righteous

 But when the Lord says that God is a Spirit, I think that Christ spoke thus of the Father, as wishing that something still more should be understood t

 This God, then, setting aside the fables and figments of heretics, the Church knows and worships, to whom the universal and entire nature of things as

 The same rule of truth teaches us to believe, after the Father, also on the Son of God, Christ Jesus, the Lord our God, but the Son of God—of that God

 But of this I remind you , that Christ was not to be expected in the Gospel in any other wise than as He was promised before by the Creator, in the Sc

 Chapter XI.—And Indeed that Christ Was Not Only Man, But God Also That Even as He Was the Son of Man, So Also He Was the Son of God.

 Why, then, should we hesitate to say what Scripture does not shrink from declaring? Why shall the truth of faith hesitate in that wherein the authorit

 And thus also John, describing the nativity of Christ, says: “The Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, the glory as of the o

 And yet the heretic still shrinks from urging that Christ is God, whom he perceives to be proved God by so many words as well as facts. If Christ is o

 If Christ is only man, how is it that He says, “Though I bear record of myself, yet my record is true:  because I know whence I came, and whither I go

 If Christ was only man, how is it that He Himself says, “And every one that believeth in me shall not die for evermore?” And yet he who believes in ma

 What if Moses pursues this same rule of truth, and delivers to us in the beginning of his sacred writings, this principle by which we may learn that a

 Behold, the same Moses tells us in another place that “God was seen of Abraham.” And yet the same Moses hears from God, that “no man can see God and l

 What if in another place also we read in like manner that God was described as an angel? For when, to his wives Leah and Rachel, Jacob complained of t

 But if some heretic, obstinately struggling against the truth, should persist in all these instances either in understanding that Christ was properly

 And indeed I could set forth the treatment of this subject by all heavenly Scriptures, and set in motion, so to speak, a perfect forest of texts conce

 But why, although we appear to hasten to another branch of the argument, should we pass over that passage in the apostle: “Who, although He was in the

 In this place I may be permitted also to collect arguments from the side of other heretics. It is a substantial kind of proof which is gathered even f

 But the material of that heretical error has arisen, as I judge, from this, that they think that there is no distinction between the Son of God and th

 Therefore, say they, if Christ is not man only, but God also—and Scripture tells us that He died for us, and was raised again—then Scripture teaches u

 But from this occasion of Christ being proved from the sacred authority of the divine writings not man only, but God also, other heretics, breaking fo

 But since they frequently urge upon us the passage where it is said, “I and the Father are one,” in this also we shall overcome them with equal facili

 Hereto also I will add that view wherein the heretic, while he rejoices as if at the loss of some power of seeing special truth and light, acknowledge

 Moreover, the order of reason, and the authority of the faith in the disposition of the words and in the Scriptures of the Lord, admonish us after the

 And now, indeed, concerning the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, let it be sufficient to have briefly said thus much, and to have laid down t

 Thus God the Father, the Founder and Creator of all things, who only knows no beginning, invisible, infinite, immortal, eternal, is one God to whose

Chapter XX.158    According to Pamelius, ch. xv.Argument.—It is Proved from the Scriptures that Christ Was Called an Angel. But Yet It is Shown from Other Parts of Holy Scripture that He is God Also.

But if some heretic, obstinately struggling against the truth, should persist in all these instances either in understanding that Christ was properly an angel, or should contend that He must be so understood, he must in this respect also be subdued by the force of truth. For if, since all heavenly things, earthly things, and things under the earth, are subjected to Christ, even the angels themselves, with all other creatures, as many as are subjected to Christ, are called gods,159    [Ps. xcvii. 7; John x. 36; Hippol., p. 153, supra.] rightly also Christ is God. And if any angel at all subjected to Christ can be called God, and this, if it be said, is also professed without blasphemy, certainly much more can this be fitting for Christ, Himself the Son of God, for Him to be pronounced God. For if an angel who is subjected to Christ is exalted as God, much more, and more consistently, shall Christ, to whom all angels are subjected, be said to be God. For it is not suitable to nature, that what is conceded to the lesser should be denied to the greater. Thus, if an angel be inferior to Christ, and yet an angel is called god, rather by consequence is Christ said to be God, who is discovered to be both greater and better, not than one, but than all angels. And if “God standeth in the assembly of the gods, and in the midst God distinguisheth between the gods,”160    Ps. lxxxii. 1, 2, etc. and Christ stood at various times in the synagogue, then Christ stood in the synagogue as God,—judging, to wit, between the gods, to whom He says, “How long do ye accept the persons of men?”  That is to say, consequently, charging the men of the synagogue with not practising just judgments. Further, if they who are reproved and blamed seem even for any reason to attain this name without blasphemy, that they should be called gods, assuredly much more shall He be esteemed God, who not only is said to have stood as God in the synagogue of the gods, but moreover is revealed by the same authority of the reading as distinguishing and judging between gods. But even if they who “fall like one of the princes” are still called gods, much rather shall He be said to be God, who not only does not fall like one of the princes, but even overcomes both the author and prince of wickedness himself. And what in the world is the reason, that although they say that this name was given even to Moses, since it is said, “I have made thee as a god to Pharaoh,”161    Ex. vii. 1. it should be denied to Christ, who is declared to be ordained162    [The full meaning of which only comes out in the Gospel and in 2 Pet. i. 4. The lie of Gen. iii. 5, is made true in Christ.] not to Pharaoh only, but to every creature, as both Lord and God? And in the former case indeed this name is given with reserve, in the latter lavishly; in the former by measure, in the latter above all kind of measure:  “For,” it is said, “the Father giveth not to the Son by measure, for the Father loveth the Son.”163    John iii. 34, 35. In the former for the time, in the latter without reference to time;164    [Rev. xi. 15.]for He received the power of the divine name, both above all things and for all time. But if he who has received the power of one man, in respect to this limited power given him, still without hesitation attains that name of God, how much more shall He who has power over Moses himself as well be believed to have attained the authority of that name?

CAPUT XX, al. XV. Ex Scripturis probatur, Christum fuisse Angelum appellatum. Attamen et Deum esse, ex aliis sacrae Scripturae locis ostenditur.

At si aliquis haereticus, pertinaciter obluctans adversus veritatem, voluerit in his omnibus exemplis 0926A proprie Angelum aut intelligere, aut intelligendum esse contenderit, in hoc quoque viribus veritatis frangatur necesse est. Nam si omnibus coelestibus terrenis et infernis Christo subditis, etiam ipsi Angeli cum omnibus caeteris quaecumque subjecta sunt Christo dicuntur dii, jure et Deus Christus. Et si quivis Angelus subditus Christo deus potest dici; et hoc si dicitur et sine blasphemia profertur: multo magis utique et hoc ipsi Dei Filio Christo competere potest, ut Deus pronuntietur. Si enim qui subjectus Christo Angelus, Deus promitur; multo magis et constantius Christus, cui sunt omnes Angeli subjecti, Deus esse dicetur. Nec enim naturae congruit, ut quae minoribus concessa sunt, majoribus denegentur. Ita si Angelus Christo minor est, Angelus autem deus dicitur, 0926B magis consequenter Christus Deus esse dicitur, qui non uno, sed omnibus Angelis et major et melior invenitur. Ac si stetit Deus in synagoga deorum in medio autemDeus deos discernit (Psal. LXXXI, 1, 2); in synagoga autem aliquotiens Christus stetit; Christus ergo in synagoga Deus stetit, dijudicans scilicet deos quibus dicit: Usquequo personas hominum accipitis? accusans scilicet consequenter homines synagogae non exercentes justa judicia. Porro si illi qui reprehenduntur atque culpantur, propter aliquam tamen causam hoc nomen adipisci sine blasphemia videntur, ut dii nuncupentur: multo magis utique hic Deus habebitur qui non tantum Deus in synagoga deorum stetisse dicitur, sed etiam deos discernens et dijudicans, ex eadem lectionis 0926C auctoritate aperitur. At si illi, qui tamquam unus de principibus cadunt (Ibid. vers. 7), dii tamen nuncupantur; multo magis Deus esse dicetur, qui non tantum tamquam unus ex principibus non cadit; sed ipsum quoque malitiae et auctorem et principem vincit. Quae autem, malum, ratio est, ut cum legant hoc etiam Moysi nomen datum, dum dicitur, Deum te posui Pharaoni (Exod. VII, 1); Christo negetur, qui non Pharaoni Deus, sed universae creaturae et Dominus et 0927A Deus constitutus esse reperitur? Et in illo quidem hoc nomen temperate datum, in hoc profuse: in illo ad mensuram, in hoc supra omnem omnino mensuram. Non enim ad mensuram, inquit, dat Filio Pater: Pater enim, inquit, diligit Filium (Joan. III, 34, 35). In illo ad tempus, in hoc sine tempore; divini enim nominis potestatem et super omnia et in omne tempus accepit. Quod si qui unius hominis accepit potestatem, in hac exiguitate hujus datae potestatis nomen tamen istud Dei incunctanter consequitur; quanto magis qui in ipsum quoque Moysen habet potestatem, nominis istius auctoritatem consecutus esse credetur?