DE TRINITATE LIBER.

 ARGUMENTUM.

 CAPUT PRIMUM. DE TRINITATE disputaturus Novatianus ex Regula fidei proponit, ut primo credamus in Deum Patrem et Dominum omnipotentem, rerum omnium pe

 CAPUT II. Deus super omnia, ipse continens omnia, immensus, aeternus, mente hominis major, sermone inexplicabilis, sublimitate omni sublimior.

 CAPUT III. Deum esse omnium conditorem, dominum et parentem, e sacris Scripturis probatur.

 CAPUT IV. Bonum quoque, semper sui similem, immutabilem, unum et solum, infinitum: cujus nec nomen proprium possit edici, et incorruptibilem, et immor

 CAPUT V. Cujus si iracundias et indignationes quasdam, et odia descripta in sacris paginis teneamus non tamen haec intelligi ad humanorum exempla vit

 CAPUT VI. Et licet Scriptura faciem divinam saepe ad humanam formam convertat, non tamen intra haec nostri corporis lineamenta modum divinae majestati

 CAPUT VII. ARGUMENTUM.--- Spiritus quoque cum Deus dicitur, claritas et lux, non satis Deum illis appellationibus explicari.

 CAPUT VIII. ARGUMENTUM.--- Hunc ergo Deum novisse et venerari Ecclesiam eique testimonium reddit tam invisibilium, quam etiam visibilium, et semper,

 CAPUT IX. Porro eamdem regulam veritatis docere nos, credere post Patrem etiam in Filium Dei Jesum Christum Dominum Deum nostrum, eumdem in Veteri Tes

 CAPUT X. Jesum Christum Dei Filium esse, et vere hominem: contra haereticos phantasiastas, qui veram carnem illum suscepisse negabant.

 CAPUT XI. Et vero non hominem tantum Christum, sed et Deum: sicuti hominis filium, ita et Dei filium.

 CAPUT XII. Deum enim Veteris Testamenti Scripturarum auctoritate probari.

 CAPUT XIII. Eamdem veritatem evinci e sacris Novi Foederis Litteris.

 CAPUT XIV. Idem argumentum persequitur auctor.

 CAPUT XV. al. XXIII. Rursum ex Evangelio Christum Deum comprobat.

 CAPUT XVI. al. XXIV. Iterum ex Evangelio Christum Deum comprobat.

 CAPUT XVII. al. XXV. Item ex Moyse in principio sacrarum Litterarum.

 CAPUT XVIII. al. XXVI. Inde etiam, quod Abrahae visus legatur Deus: quod de Patre nequeat intelligi, quem nemo vidit umquam sed de Filio in Angeli im

 CAPUT XIX. al. XXVII. Quod etiam Jacob apparuerit Deus Angelus, nempe Dei Filius.

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

 CAPUT XXI, al. XVI. Eamdem divinam majestatem in Christo aliis iterum Scripturis confirmari.

 CAPUT XXII, al. XVII. Eamdem divinam majestatem in Christo aliis iterum Scripturis confirmat.

 CAPUT XXIII, al. XVIII. Quod adeo manifestum est, ut quidam haeretici eum Deum Patrem putarint, alii Deum tantum sine carne fuisse.

 CAPUT XXIV, al. XIX. Illos autem propterea errasse, quod nihil arbitrarentur interesse inter Filium Dei et filium hominis, ob Scripturam male intellec

 CAPUT XXV, al. XX. Neque inde sequi, quia Christus mortuus, etiam Deum mortuum accipi: non enim tantummodo Deum, sed et hominem Christum Scriptura pro

 CAPUT XXVI, al. XXI. Adversus autem Sabellianos Scripturis probat alium esse Filium, alium Patrem.

 CAPUT XXVII. al. XXII. Pulchre respondet ad illud: sumus, quod illi pro se intendebant.

 CAPUT XXVIII. Pro Sabellianis etiam nihil facere illud: Qui videt me, videt et Patrem, probat.

 CAPUT XXIX. Deinceps fidei auctoritatem admonere nos docet, post Patrem et Filium, credere etiam IN SPIRITUM SANCTUM: cujus operationes ex Scripturis

 CAPUT XXX. Denique quantum dicti haeretici erroris sui originem inde rapuerint, quod animadverterent scriptum: unus Deus: etsi Christum Deum et Patrem

 CAPUT XXXI. Sed Dei Filium Deum, ex Deo Patre ab aeterno natum, qui semper in Patre fuerit, secundam personam esse a Patre, qui nihil agat sine Patris

Chapter XXIV.185    According to Pamelius, ch. xix.  Argument.—That These Have Therefore Erred, by Thinking that There Was No Difference Between the Son of God and the Son of Man; Because They Have Ill Understood the Scripture.

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 the Son of man; because if a distinction were made, Jesus Christ would easily be proved to be both man and God. For they will have it that the self-same that is man, the Son of man, appears also as the Son of God; that man and flesh and that same frail substance may be said to be also the Son of God Himself. Whence, since no distinction is discerned between the Son of man and the Son of God, but the Son of man Himself is asserted to be the Son of God, the same Christ and the Son of God is asserted to be man only; by which they strive to exclude, “The Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us.”186    John i. 14.  “And ye shall call His name Emmanuel; which is, interpreted, God with us.”187    Matt. i. 23. For they propose and put forward what is told in the Gospel of Luke, whence they strive to maintain not what is the truth, but only what they want it to be: “The Holy Spirit shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee; therefore also the Holy Thing which is born of thee shall be called the Son of God.”188    Luke i. 35. If, then, say they, the angel of God says to Mary, “that Holy Thing which is born of thee,” the substance of flesh and body is of Mary; but he has set forth that this substance, that is, that Holy Thing which is born of her, is the Son of God. Man, say they, himself, and that bodily flesh; that which is called holy, itself is the Son of God. That also when the Scripture says that “Holy Thing,” we should understand thereby Christ the man, the Son of man; and when it places before us the Son of God, we ought to perceive, not man, but God. And yet the divine Scripture easily convicts and discloses the frauds and artifices of the heretics. For if it were thus only, “The Spirit shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee; therefore that Holy Thing which is born of thee shall be called the Son of God,” perchance we should have had to strive against them in another sort, and to have sought for other arguments, and to have taken up other weapons, with which to overcome both their snares and their wiles; but since the Scripture itself, abounding in heavenly fulness, divests itself of the calumnies of these heretics, we easily depend upon that that is written, and overcome those errors without any hesitation. For it said, not as we have already stated, “Therefore the Holy Thing which shall be born of thee;” but added the conjunction, for it says, “Therefore also that Holy Thing which shall be born of thee,” so as to make it plain that that Holy Thing which is born of her—that is, that substance of flesh and body—is not the Son of God primarily, but consequently, and in the secondary place;189    “The miraculous generation is here represented as the natural, but by no means as the only cause for which He who had no human father was to receive the name of God’s Son.”—Oosterzee, in loco, on Luke.—Tr. but primarily, that the Son of God is the Word of God, incarnate by that Spirit of whom the angel says, “The Spirit shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee.” For He is the legitimate Son of God who is of God Himself; and He, while He assumes that Holy Thing, and links to Himself the Son of man, and draws Him and transfers Him to Himself, by His connection and mingling of association becomes responsible for and makes Him the Son of God, which by nature He was not, so that the original cause190    Principalitas. of that name Son of God is in the Spirit of the Lord, who descended and came, and that there is only the continuance of the name in the case of the Son of man;191    The edition of Pamelius reads:  ut sequela nominis in Filio Dei et hominis sit. The words Dei et were expelled by Welchman, whom we have followed. and by consequence He reasonably became the Son of God, although originally He is not the Son of God. And therefore the angel, seeing that arrangement, and providing for that order of the mystery, did not confuse every thing in such a way as to leave no trace of a distinction, but established the distinction by saying, “Therefore also that Holy Thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God;” lest, had he not arranged that distribution with his balances, but had left the matter all mixed up in confusion, it had really afforded occasion to heretics to declare that the Son of man, in that He is man, is the same as the Son of God and man. But now, explaining severally the ordinance and the reason of so great a mystery, he evidently set forth in saying, “And that Holy Thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God;” the proof that the Son of God descended, and that He, in taking up into Himself the Son of man, consequently made Him the Son of God, because the Son of God associated and joined Him to Himself. So that, while the Son of man cleaves in His nativity to the Son of God, by that very mingling He holds that as pledged and derived which of His own nature He could not possess. And thus by the word of the angel the distinction is made, against the desire of the heretics, between the Son of God and man; yet with their association, by pressing them to understand that Christ the Son of man is man, and also to receive the Son of God and man the Son of God; that is, the Word of God as it is written as God; and thus to acknowledge that Christ Jesus the Lord, connected on both sides, so to speak, is on both sides woven in and grown together, and associated in the same agreement of both substances, by the binding to one another of a mutual alliance—man and God by the truth of the Scripture which declares this very thing.

CAPUT XXIV, al. XIX. Illos autem propterea errasse, quod nihil arbitrarentur interesse inter Filium Dei et filium hominis, ob Scripturam male intellectam.

0932C

Sed erroris istius haereticorum inde, ut opinor, nata materia est, quia inter Filium Dei et Filium hominis nihil arbitrantur interesse; ne facta distinctione, et Homo et Deus Jesus Christus facile comprobetur. Eumdem enim atque ipsum, id est hominem filium hominis, etiam Filium Dei volunt videri; ut homo et caro, et fragilis illa substantia eadem atque ipsa Filius Dei esse dicatur. Ex quo, dum distinctio filii hominis et Filii Dei nulla secernitur, 0932D sed ipse filius hominis Dei Filius vindicatur; homo tantummodo Christus idem atque Filius Dei asseratur. Per quod nituntur excludere: Verbum caro 0933A factum est et habitavit in nobis (Joan. I, 14); Et vocabitis nomen ejus Emmanuel, quod est interpretatum Nobiscum Deus (Matth. I, 23). Proponunt enim atque illa praetendunt, quae in Evangelio Lucae relata sunt, ex quibus asserere conantur, non quod est, sed tantum illud quod volunt esse: Spiritus Sanctus veniet in te, et virtus Altissimi obumbrabit tibi; propterea et quod ex te nascetur sanctum, vocabitur Filius Dei (Luc. I, 35). Si ergo, inquiunt, Angelus Dei dicit ad Mariam, quod ex te nascetur sanctum, ex Maria est substantia carnis et corporis; hanc autem substantiam, id est sanctum hoc quod ex illa genitum est, Filium Dei esse proposuit: homo, inquiunt, ipse, et illa caro corporis, illud quod sanctum est dictum, ipsum est Filius Dei. Ut 0933B et cum dicit Scriptura sanctum, Christum filium hominis hominem intelligamus; et cum Filium Dei proponit, non hominem, sed Deum percipere debeamus. Sed enim Scriptura divina, haereticorum et fraudes et furta facile convincit et detegit. Si enim sic esset tantummodo, Spiritus veniet in te, et virtus Altissimi obumbrabit tibi, propterea quod nascetur es te sanctum, vocabitur Filius Dei; fortasse alio esset nobis genere adversus illos reluctandum, et alia nobis essent argumenta quaerenda et arma sumenda, quibus illorum et insidias et praestigias vinceremus: cum autem ipsa Scriptura coelesti abundans plenitudine sese haereticorum istorum calumniis exuat; facile ipso quod scriptum est nitimur, et errores istos sine ulla dubitatione superamus. Non enim dixit, ut jam expressimus, 0933C propterea quod ex te nascetur sanctum; sed adjecit conjunctionem: ait enim, propterea et quod ex te nascetur sanctum; ut illud ostenderet, non principaliter hoc sanctum quod ex illa nascitur, id est istam carnis corporisque substantiam Filium Dei esse, sed consequenter et in secundo loco: principaliter autem Filium Dei esse Verbum Dei incarnatum per illum Spiritum, de quo Angelus refert: Spiritus veniet in te, et virtus Altissimi obumbrabit tibi. Hic est enim legitimus Dei Filius qui ex ipso Deo est, qui dum sanctum istud assumit, et sibi Filium hominis annectit, et illum ad se rapit atque transducit, connexione sua et permixtione sociata praestat, et Filium illum Dei facit, quod ille naturaliter 0934A non fuit; ut principalitas nominis istius Filius Dei in Spiritu sit Domini, qui descendit et venit; ut sequela nominis in Filio Dei et hominis sit, et merito consequenter hic Filius Dei factus sit, dum non principaliter Filius Dei est. Atque ideo dispositionem istam Angelus videns, et ordinem istum sacramenti expediens, non sic cuncta confundens ut nullum vestigium distinctionis collocarit, distinctionem posuit, dicendo: Propterea et quod nascetur ex te sanctum, vocabitur Filius Dei: ne si distributionem istam cum libramentis suis non dispensasset, sed in confuso permixtam reliquisset, vere occasionem haereticis contulisset, ut hominis Filium, qua homo est, eumdem et Dei et hominis Filium pronuntiare deberent. Nunc autem particulatim exponens tam 0934B magni sacramenti ordinem atque rationem, evidenter expressit, ut diceret, et quod ex te nascetur sanctum, vocabitur Filius Dei; probans quoniam Filius Dei descendit: qui dum Filium hominis in se suscepit, consequenter illum Filium Dei fecit; quoniam illum Filius sibi Dei sociavit et junxit. Ut dum Filius hominis adhaeret in nativitatem Filio Dei; ipsa permixtione feneratum et mutuatum teneret, quod ex natura propria possidere non posset. Ac sic facta est Angeli voce, quod nolunt haeretici, inter Filium Dei hominisque, cum sua tamen sociatione, distinctio; urgendo illos uti Christum, hominis Filium, hominem intelligant quoque Dei Filium, et hominem Dei Filium, id est Dei Verbum (sicut scriptum est) Deum accipiant: atque ideo Christum Jesum Dominum, 0934C ex utroque connexum (ut ita dixerim), ex utroque contextum atque concretum, et in eadem utriusque substantiae concordia mutui ad invicem foederis confibulatione sociatum, hominem et Deum, Scripturae hoc ipsum dicentis veritate, cognoscant.