By evidence gathered from Scripture the unity of Father and Son is proved, and firstly, a passage, taken from the Book of Isaiah, is compared with others and expounded in such sort as to show that in the Son there is no diversity from the Father’s nature, save only as regards the flesh; whence it follows that the Godhead of both Persons is One. This conclusion is confirmed by the authority of Baruch.
20. Now the oracles45 Rom. iii. 2; Acts vii. 38. The Hebrew word translated “burden” in the A.V.—e.g. Isa. xiii. 1—may be rendered “oracle.” The “oracles” of the Hebrew prophets were of a different order from those of Delphi or Lebadeia, which are rather comparable to the “oracles” of such persons as the witch of Endor. of the prophets bear witness what close unity holy Scripture declares to subsist between the Father and the Son as regards their Godhead. For thus saith the Lord of Sabaoth:46 Or “the Lord of Hosts.” Cf. Isa. vi. 3, and the Te Deum, verse 5 (the Trisagion). “Egypt hath laboured, and the commerce of the Ethiopians and Sabeans: mighty men shall come over to thee, and shall be thy servants, and in thy train shall they follow, bound in fetters, and they shall fall down before thee, and to thee shall they make supplication: for God is in thee, and there is no God beside thee. For thou art God, and we knew it not, O God of Israel.”47 Isa. xlv. 14. St. Ambrose’s version differs somewhat from the A.V.
21. Hear the voice of the prophet: “In Thee,” he saith, “is God, and there is no God beside Thee.” How agreeth this with the Arians’ teaching? They must deny either the Father’s or the Son’s Divinity, unless they believe, once for all, unity of the same Divinity.
22. “In Thee,” saith he, “is God”—forasmuch as the Father is in the Son. For it is written, “The Father, Who abideth in Me, Himself speaketh,” and “The works that I do, He Himself also doeth.”48 S. John xiv. 10. And yet again we read that the Son is in the Father, saying, “I am in the Father, and the Father in Me.”49 S. John xiv. 10. Let the Arians, if they can, make away with this kinship50 Latin proprietas, Greek οικειότης. in nature and unity in work.
23. There is, therefore, God in God, but not two Gods; for it is written that there is one God,51 Isa. xlv. 18; 1 Cor. viii. 4, 6. and there is Lord in Lord,52 or “Jehovah in Jehovah.” but not two Lords, forasmuch as it is likewise written: “Serve not two lords.”53 S. Matt. vi. 24. And the Law saith: “Hear, O Israel! The Lord thy God is one God;”54 Deut. vi. 4. moreover, in the same Testament it is written: “The Lord rained from the Lord.”55 Gen. xix. 24. The Lord, it is said, sent rain “from the Lord.” So also you may read in Genesis: “And God said,—and God made,”56 Gen. i. 6, 7. and, lower down, “And God made man in the image of God;”57 Gen. i. 26, 27. yet it was not two gods, but one God, that made [man]. In the one place, then, as in the other, the unity of operation and of name is maintained. For surely, when we read “God of God,”58 Nicene Creed. we do not speak of two Gods.
24. Again, you may read in the forty-fourth psalm59 Ps. xlv. in Bible and Prayer-book. how the prophet not only calls the Father “God” but also proclaims the Son as God, saying: “Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever.”60 Ps. xlv. 6. And further on: “God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.”61 Ps. xlv. 7. This God Who anoints, and God Who in the flesh is anointed, is the Son of God. For what fellows in His anointing hath Christ, except such as are in the flesh? You see, then, that God is by God anointed, but being anointed in taking upon Him the nature of mankind, He is proclaimed the Son of God; yet is the principle of the Law not broken.
25. So again, when you read, “The Lord rained from the Lord,” acknowledge the unity of Godhead, for unity in operation doth not allow of more than one individual God, even as the Lord Himself has shown, saying: “Believe Me, that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me: or believe Me for the very works’ sake.”62 S. John x. 38; xiv. 11. Here, too, we see that unity of Godhead is signified by unity in operation.
26. The Apostle, careful to prove that there is one Godhead of both Father and Son, and one Lordship, lest we should run into any error, whether of heathen or of Jewish ungodliness, showed us the rule we ought to follow, saying: “One God, the Father, from Whom are all things, and we in Him, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by Whom are all things, and we by Him.”63 1 Cor. viii. 6. The Greek runs: “εἷε θε ὁ ςὁπατήρ, ἐξ οὗ τὰ πὰντα καὶ ἡμεῖς ςἰς αὐτόν.” Vulg.—Nobis tamen unus Deus Pater, ex quo omnia et nos in illum. For just as, in calling Jesus Christ “Lord,” he did not deny that the Father was Lord, even so, in saying, “One God, the Father,” he did not deny true Godhead to the Son, and thus he taught, not that there was more than one God, but that the source of power was one, forasmuch as Godhead consists in Lordship, and Lordship in Godhead, as it is written: “Be ye sure that the Lord, He is God. It is He that hath made us, and not we ourselves.”64 Ps. c. 3.
27. “In thee,” therefore, “is God,” by unity of nature, and “there is no God beside Thee,” by reason of personal possession of the Substance, without any reserve or difference.65 The original is “non est Deus præter te—per proprietatem substantiæ.” It must be remembered St. Ambrose was a civil magistrate before he was made bishop. His mind would be disposed therefore to regard things under a legal aspect.
28. Again, Scripture speaks, in the Book of Jeremiah, of One God, and yet acknowledges both Father and Son. Thus we read: “He is our God, and in comparison with Him none other shall be accounted of. He hath discovered all the way of teaching, and given it to Jacob, His servant, and to Israel, His beloved. After these things He appeared upon earth, and conversed with men.”
29. The prophet speaks of the Son, for it was the Son Himself Who conversed with men, and this is what he says: “He is our God, and in comparison with Him none other shall be accounted of.” Why do we call Him in question, of Whom so great a prophet saith that no other can be compared with Him? What comparison of another can be made, when the Godhead is One? This was the confession of a people set in the midst of dangers; reverencing religion, and therefore unskilled in strife of argument.
30. Come, Holy Spirit, and help Thy prophets, in whom Thou art wont to dwell, in whom we believe. Shall we believe the wise of this world, if we believe not the prophets? But where is the wise man, where is the scribe? When our peasant planted figs, he found that whereof the philosopher knew nothing, for God hath chosen the foolish things of this world to confound the strong.66 1 Cor. i. 27. The “peasant” is Jeremiah. See Jer. xxiv., but the prophet is not there spoken of as planting figs. The quotation in § 28 is Baruch iii. 36–38. Are we to believe the Jews? for God was once known in Jewry. Nay, but they deny that very thing, which is the foundation of our belief, seeing that they know not the Father, who have denied the Son.67 “In Jewry is God known.”—Ps. lxxvi. 1. Yet they deny the Son, and therefore know not the Father.—Matt. xi. 27. Cf. S. John i. 18.
CAPUT III.
Patris ac Filii unitatem Scripturae testimoniis probat, et primo Esaiae locum aliorum comparatione ita illustrat, ut nullam a Patris natura in Filio inesse differentiam astruat, nisi quantum ad carnem, ac proinde unam utriusque deitatem esse. Quod ubi auctoritate Baruch confirmatum est, fidem prophetis hac in re habendam tradit.
20. Quantam vero Scriptura divina Patris et Filii secundum divinitatem expresserit unitatem, prophetica testantur oracula. Sic enim dicit Dominus sabaoth: Laboravit 448 Aegyptus, et mercatus Aethiopum 0533Cet Sebaim: viri excelsi ad te transibunt, et tui erunt servi, et post te sequentur alligati vinculis, et adorabunt te, et in te deprecabuntur; quoniam in te est Deus, et non est Deus praeter te. Tu enim es Deus, et nesciebamus, Deus Israel (Esa. XLV, 14).
21. Audi propheticam vocem: In te, inquit, est Deus, et non est Deus praeter te. Quomodo hoc secundum Arianos convenit? Necesse est negent aut Patris aut Filii divinitatem, nisi ejusdem divinitatis crediderint unitatem.
22. In te, inquit, est Deus; quoniam in Filio Pater. Scriptum est enim: Pater qui in me manet, ipse loquitur; et: Opera quae ego facio, et ipse facit (Joan. V, 5). Sed et alibi in Patre Filius est, qui dicit: Ego in Patre, et Pater in me est (Joan. XIV, 10). Dissolvant, 0533D si possunt, hanc naturae proprietatem, et operis unitatem.
23. Deus igitur in Deo est, sed non duo dii; scriptum est enim, quia unus Deus (Deut. VI, 4): et Dominus in Domino, sed non duo Domini; quia aeque scriptum est: Nolite duobus dominis servire (Matth. VI, 24). Et lex dicit: Audi, Israel, Dominus Deus tuus Deus unus est (Deut. VI, 4). Et utique in eodem est Testamento: Pluit Dominus a Domino (Gen. XIX, 24). Dominus, inquit, a Domino pluit. Sic et in Genesi habes: Et dixit Deus, et fecit Deus; et infra: Et fecit Deus hominem ad imaginem Dei (Gen. I, 3, 26); sed 0534A tamen non duo Dii, sed unus Deus lecit. Utromque igitur unitas operationis servatur et nominis. Nam utique cum legimus, Deus ex Deo, non duos deos dicimus.
24. Denique habes in Psalmo quadragesimo quarto, quod et Deum Patrem dixit Propheta, et Deum Filium declaravit, dicens: Sedes tua, Deus, in saeculum saeculi; et infra: Unxit te Deus Deus tuus oleo laetitiae prae consortibus tuis (Psal XLIV, 7, 8). Deus est qui ungit, et Deus qui secundum carnem ungitur Dei Filius. Denique quos habet unctionis suae Christus nisi in carne consortes? Vides igitur quia Deus a Deo unctus: sed in assumptione naturae unctus humanae Dei Filius designatur, nec Legis forma violatur.
0534B 25. Et hic ergo cum dicitur: Pluit Dominus a Domino, unitatem divinitatis agnosce. Operationis enim unitas non facit pluralem divinitatem, sicut ipse Dominus ostendit, dicens: Credite mihi, quia ego in Patre, et Pater in me: alioquin vel propter opera ipsa credite (Joan. X, 38). Et hic advertimus quod unitatem divinitatis per unitatem operum designaverit.
26. Ut autem una deitas et Patris et Filii, et una dominatio probaretur; ne gentilis aut Judaicae impietatis incurreremus errorem, providens Apostolus, quid sequi deberemus ostendit dicens: Unus Deus Pater, ex quo omnia, et nos in ipso: et unus Dominus Jesus Christus, per quem omnia, et nos per ipsum (I Cor. VIII, 6). Sicut enim unum dicendo Dominum 0534C Jesum Christum, Patrem Dominum non negavit; ita unum dicendo Deum Patrem, aeque a deitatis veritate nec Filium separavit. Unde nec pluralitatem divinitatis, sed unitatem potestatis ostendit; quia et in dominatione divinitas, et in divinitate dominatus est; sicut scriptum est: Scitote quoniam 449 Dominus ipse est Deus; ipse fecit nos, et non ipsi nos (Psal. XCIX, 3).
27. In te igitur est Deus, per unitatem naturae: et non est Deus praeter te, per proprietatem substantiae, repulsa differentia.
28. In Hieremiae quoque libro unum Deum Scriptura dicit, et tamen et Patrem et Filium confitetur. Itaque sic habes: Hic Deus noster, et non reputabitur alius ad eum. Hic adinvenit omnem viam disciplinae, 0534Det dedit eam Jacob puero suo, et Israel dilecto suo. Post haec in terris visus est, et cum hominibus conversatus est (Baruc. III, 36, 37).
29. De Filio dicit: Ipse enim est cum hominibus conversatus; et dicit: Hic Deus noster, et non aestimabitur alius ad eum. Quid discutimus eum, de quo tantus dicit propheta, quod ad eum non possit alius aestimari? Quae enim potest esse alia aestimatio, ubi deitatis unitas est? Confitebatur hoc populus in periculis constitutus: nesciebat serere quaestiones qui religionem timebat.
30. Adesto, sancte Spiritus, prophetis tuis, quibus 0535A inesse consuesti, quibus credimus. Si prophetis non credimus, sapientibus credam hujus mundi? Sed ubi sapiens, ubi scriba? Rusticus noster cum ficus insereret, invenit quod philosophus ignoravit. Quae stulta sunt enim hujus mundi, elegit Deus, ut confundat quae sunt fortia (I Cor. I, 27). Credimus Judaeis, quia notus aliquando in Judaea Deus (Psal. LXXV, 2)? Sed hoc ipsum negant propter quod credimus, quia non norunt Patrem, qui Filium negaverunt.