Against Praxeas.

 Chapter I.—Satan’s Wiles Against the Truth. How They Take the Form of the Praxean Heresy. Account of the Publication of This Heresy.

 Chapter II.—The Catholic Doctrine of the Trinity and Unity, Sometimes Called the Divine Economy, or Dispensation of the Personal Relations of the Godh

 Chapter III.—Sundry Popular Fears and Prejudices. The Doctrine of the Trinity in Unity Rescued from These Misapprehensions.

 Chapter IV.—The Unity of the Godhead and the Supremacy and Sole Government of the Divine Being. The Monarchy Not at All Impaired by the Catholic Doctr

 Chapter V.—The Evolution of the Son or Word of God from the Father by a Divine Procession. Illustrated by the Operation of the Human Thought and Consc

 Chapter VI.—The Word of God is Also the Wisdom of God. The Going Forth of Wisdom to Create the Universe, According to the Divine Plan.

 Chapter VII.—The Son by Being Designated Word and Wisdom, (According to the Imperfection of Human Thought and Language) Liable to Be Deemed a Mere Att

 Chapter VIII.—Though the Son or Word of God Emanates from the Father, He is Not, Like the Emanations of Valentinus, Separable from the Father.  Nor is

 Chapter IX.—The Catholic Rule of Faith Expounded in Some of Its Points.  Especially in the Unconfused Distinction of the Several Persons of the Blesse

 Chapter X.—The Very Names of Father and Son Prove the Personal Distinction of the Two. They Cannot Possibly Be Identical, Nor is Their Identity Necess

 Chapter XI.—The Identity of the Father and the Son, as Praxeas Held It, Shown to Be Full of Perplexity and Absurdity. Many Scriptures Quoted in Proof

 Chapter XII.—Other Quotations from Holy Scripture Adduced in Proof of the Plurality of Persons in the Godhead.

 Chapter XIII.—The Force of Sundry Passages of Scripture Illustrated in Relation to the Plurality of Persons and Unity of Substance. There is No Polyth

 Chapter XIV.—The Natural Invisibility of the Father, and the Visibility of the Son Witnessed in Many Passages of the Old Testament. Arguments of Their

 Chapter XV.—New Testament Passages Quoted. They Attest the Same Truth of the Son’s Visibility Contrasted with the Father’s Invisibility.

 Chapter XVI.—Early Manifestations of the Son of God, as Recorded in the Old Testament Rehearsals of His Subsequent Incarnation.

 Chapter XVII.—Sundry August Titles, Descriptive of Deity, Applied to the Son, Not, as Praxeas Would Have It, Only to the Father.

 Chapter XVIII.—The Designation of the One God in the Prophetic Scriptures. Intended as a Protest Against Heathen Idolatry, It Does Not Preclude the Co

 Chapter XIX.—The Son in Union with the Father in the Creation of All Things. This Union of the Two in Co-Operation is Not Opposed to the True Unity of

 Chapter XX.—The Scriptures Relied on by Praxeas to Support His Heresy But Few. They are Mentioned by Tertullian.

 Chapter XXI.—In This and the Four Following Chapters It is Shewn, by a Minute Analysis of St. John’s Gospel, that the Father and Son are Constantly Sp

 Chapter XXII.—Sundry Passages of St. John Quoted, to Show the Distinction Between the Father and the Son. Even Praxeas’ Classic Text—I and My Father a

 Chapter XXIII.—More Passages from the Same Gospel in Proof of the Same Portion of the Catholic Faith. Praxeas’ Taunt of Worshipping Two Gods Repudiate

 Chapter XXIV.—On St. Philip’s Conversation with Christ. He that Hath Seen Me, Hath Seen the Father. This Text Explained in an Anti-Praxean Sense.

 Chapter XXV.—The Paraclete, or Holy Ghost. He is Distinct from the Father and the Son as to Their Personal Existence. One and Inseparable from Them as

 Chapter XXVI.—A Brief Reference to the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Luke. Their Agreement with St. John, in Respect to the Distinct Personality of t

 Chapter XXVII.—The Distinction of the Father and the Son, Thus Established, He Now Proves the Distinction of the Two Natures, Which Were, Without Conf

 Chapter XXVIII.—Christ Not the Father, as Praxeas Said. The Inconsistency of This Opinion, No Less Than Its Absurdity, Exposed. The True Doctrine of J

 Chapter XXIX.—It Was Christ that Died.  The Father is Incapable of Suffering Either Solely or with Another. Blasphemous Conclusions Spring from Praxea

 Chapter XXX.—How the Son Was Forsaken by the Father Upon the Cross. The True Meaning Thereof Fatal to Praxeas. So Too, the Resurrection of Christ, His

 Chapter XXXI.—Retrograde Character of the Heresy of Praxeas. The Doctrine of the Blessed Trinity Constitutes the Great Difference Between Judaism and

Chapter XI.—The Identity of the Father and the Son, as Praxeas Held It, Shown to Be Full of Perplexity and Absurdity. Many Scriptures Quoted in Proof of the Distinction of the Divine Persons of the Trinity.

It will be your duty, however, to adduce your proofs out of the Scriptures as plainly as we do, when we prove that He made His Word a Son to Himself. For if He calls Him Son, and if the Son is none other than He who has proceeded from the Father Himself, and if the Word has proceeded from the Father Himself, He will then be the Son, and not Himself from whom He proceeded. For the Father Himself did not proceed from Himself. Now, you who say that the Father is the same as the Son, do really make the same Person both to have sent forth from Himself (and at the same time to have gone out from Himself as) that Being which is God. If it was possible for Him to have done this, He at all events did not do it. You must bring forth the proof which I require of you—one like my own; that is, (you must prove to me) that the Scriptures show the Son and the Father to be the same, just as on our side the Father and the Son are demonstrated to be distinct; I say distinct, but not separate:108    Distincte, non divise. for as on my part I produce the words of God Himself, “My heart hath emitted my most excellent Word,”109    For this version of Ps. xlv. 1, see our Anti-Marcion, p. 66, note 5, Edin. so you in like manner ought to adduce in opposition to me some text where God has said, “My heart hath emitted Myself as my own most excellent Word,” in such a sense that He is Himself both the Emitter and the Emitted, both He who sent forth and He who was sent forth, since He is both the Word and God. I bid you also observe,110    Ecce. that on my side I advance the passage where the Father said to the Son, “Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten Thee.”111    Ps. ii. 7. If you want me to believe Him to be both the Father and the Son, show me some other passage where it is declared, “The Lord said unto Himself, I am my own Son, to-day have I begotten myself;” or again, “Before the morning did I beget myself;”112    In allusion to Ps. cx. 3 (Sept.) and likewise, “I the Lord possessed Myself the beginning of my ways for my own works; before all the hills, too, did I beget myself;”113    In allusion to Prov. viii. 22. and whatever other passages are to the same effect. Why, moreover, could God the Lord of all things, have hesitated to speak thus of Himself, if the fact had been so? Was He afraid of not being believed, if He had in so many words declared Himself to be both the Father and the Son? Of one thing He was at any rate afraid—of lying. Of Himself, too, and of His own truth, was He afraid. Believing Him, therefore, to be the true God, I am sure that He declared nothing to exist in any other way than according to His own dispensation and arrangement, and that He had arranged nothing in any other way than according to His own declaration. On your side, however, you must make Him out to be a liar, and an impostor, and a tamperer with His word, if, when He was Himself a Son to Himself, He assigned the part of His Son to be played by another, when all the Scriptures attest the clear existence of, and distinction in (the Persons of) the Trinity, and indeed furnish us with our Rule of faith, that He who speaks, and He of whom He speaks, and to whom He speaks, cannot possibly seem to be One and the Same. So absurd and misleading a statement would be unworthy of God, that, when it was Himself to whom He was speaking, He speaks rather to another, and not to His very self. Hear, then, other utterances also of the Father concerning the Son by the mouth of Isaiah: “Behold my Son, whom I have chosen; my beloved, in whom I am well pleased: I will put my Spirit upon Him, and He shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles.”114    Isa. xlii. 1. Hear also what He says to the Son: “Is it a great thing for Thee, that Thou shouldest be called my Son to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the dispersed of Israel? I have given Thee for a light to the Gentiles, that Thou mayest be their salvation to the end of the earth.”115    Isa. xlix. 6. Hear now also the Son’s utterances respecting the Father: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because He hath anointed me to preach the gospel unto men.”116    Isa. lxi. 1 and Luke iv. 18. He speaks of Himself likewise to the Father in the Psalm: “Forsake me not until I have declared the might of Thine arm to all the generation that is to come.”117    Ps. lxxi. 18. Also to the same purport in another Psalm: “O Lord, how are they increased that trouble me!”118    Ps. iii. 1. But almost all the Psalms which prophesy of119    Sustinent. the person of Christ, represent the Son as conversing with the Father—that is, represent Christ (as speaking) to God. Observe also the Spirit speaking of the Father and the Son, in the character of120    Ex. a third Person: “The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit Thou on my right hand, until I make Thine enemies Thy footstool.”121    Ps. cx. 1. Likewise in the words of Isaiah: “Thus saith the Lord to the Lord122    Tertullian reads Κυρίῳ instead of Κύρῳ, “Cyrus.” mine Anointed.”123    Isa. xlv. 1. Likewise, in the same prophet, He says to the Father respecting the Son: “Lord, who hath believed our report, and to whom is the arm of the Lord revealed? We brought a report concerning Him, as if He were a little child, as if He were a root in a dry ground, who had no form nor comeliness.”124    Isa. liii. 1, 2. These are a few testimonies out of many; for we do not pretend to bring up all the passages of Scripture, because we have a tolerably large accumulation of them in the various heads of our subject, as we in our several chapters call them in as our witnesses in the fulness of their dignity and authority.125    [See Elucidation III., and also cap. xxv. infra.] Still, in these few quotations the distinction of Persons in the Trinity is clearly set forth. For there is the Spirit Himself who speaks, and the Father to whom He speaks, and the Son of whom He speaks.126    [See De Baptismo, cap. v. p. 344, Ed. Oehler, and note how often our author cites an important text, by half quotation, leaving the residue to the reader’s memory, owing to the impetuosity of his genius and his style:  “Monte decurrens velut amnis, imbres quem super notas aluere ripas fervet, etc.”] In the same manner, the other passages also establish each one of several Persons in His special character—addressed as they in some cases are to the Father or to the Son respecting the Son, in other cases to the Son or to the Father concerning the Father, and again in other instances to the (Holy) Spirit.

CAPUT XI.

Probare autem tam aperte debebis ex Scripturis, quam nos probamus illum sibi Filium fecisse Sermonem suum. Si enim Filium nominat, Filius autem non alius erit quam qui ex ipso prodiit; Sermo autem prodiit ex ipso, hic erit Filius, non ipse de quo prodiit. Non enim ipse prodiit ex semetipso. Porro, qui eumdem Patrem dicis et Filium, eumdem et protulisse ex semetipso facis, et prodisse quod Deus est. 0166B Si potuit fecisse, non tamen fecit. Aut exhibe probationem quam expostulo meae similem; id est, sic Scripturas eumdem Filium et Patrem ostendere, quemadmodum apud nos distincte Pater et Filius demonstrantur; distincte, inquam, non divise, sicut ego profero dictum a Deo: Eructavit cor meum Sermonem optimum (Ps. XLIV, 1). Sic tu contra opponas, alicubi dixisse Deum, Eructavit cor meum sermonem optimum, ut ipse sit qui et eructavit, et quod eructavit; et ipse sui protulerit, et qui prolatus sit, si ipse est et Sermo et Deus. Ecce ego propono Patrem Filio dixisse: Filius meus es tu, ego hodie generavi te (Ps. II, 7). Si velis ut credam ipsum esse Patrem et Filium, ostende sic pronuntiatum alibi, «Dominus dixit ad se, Filius meus sum ego, ego 0166C hodie generavi me», proinde et: «Ante luciferum generavi me (Ps. CIX, 3), et «Dominus condidit me initium viarum in opera mea; ante omnes autem colles generavi me (Sap. VIII, 22);» et si qua alia in hunc modum sunt. Quem autem verebatur Deus Dominus universitatis ita pronuntiare, si ita res erat; an verebatur ne non crederetur, si simpliciter se et Patrem et Filium pronuntiasset? Unum tamen veritus est, mentiri. Veritus autem semetipsum et suam veritatem. Et ideo veracem Deum credens, scio illum non aliter quam disposuit pronuntiasse, nec aliter disposuisse quam pronuntiavit. Tu porro eum mendacem efficias et fallacem et deceptorem fidei hujus, si cum ipse esset sibi Filius, alii dabat Filii personam, quando Scripturae omnes et demonstrationem et distinctionem trinitatis ostendant. A quibus et praescriptio 0166D nostra deducitur, non posse unum atque eumdem videri qui loquitur, et de quo loquitur, et ad quem loquitur: quia neque perversitas, neque fallacia Deo congruat: ut cum ipse esset ad quem loquebatur, ad alium potius, et non ad semetipsum loquatur . Accipe igitur et alias voces Patris de 0167A Filio per Isaiam (Is. XLII, 1): Ecce filius meus quem elegi, dilectus meus in quem bene sensi. Ponam spiritum meum super ipsum, et judicium nationibus annuntiabit. Accipe et ad ipsum (Is. XLIX, 16): Magnum tibi est ut voceris filius meus ad statuendas tribus Jacob, et ad convertendam dispersionem Israelis. Posui te in lucem nationum, ut sis salus in extremum terrae. Accipe nunc et Filii voces de Patre (Is., LXI, 1): Spiritus Domini super me, quapropter unxit me, ad evangelizandum hominibus. Item ad Patrem in Psalmo, de eodem: Ne dereliqueris me, donec annuntiem brachium tuum nativitati universae venturae (Ps. LXXI, 8). Item in alio (Ps. III): Domine, quid multiplicati sunt qui comprimunt me? Sed et omnes pene Psalmi Christi personam sustinent; Filium ad Patrem, id est, Christum ad Deum verba facientem repraesentant. Animadverte etiam Spiritum 0167B loquentem ex tertia persona de Patre et Filio: Dixit Dominus Domino meo, sede ad dexteram meam, donec ponam inimicos tuos scabellum pedum tuorum. (Ps. CX, 1). Item per Isaiam: Haec dicit Dominus Domino meo Christo (XLV, 1). Item per eumdem ad Patrem de Filio: Domine, quis credidit auditui nostro? Et brachium Domini cui revelatum est? Annuntiavimus de illo, sicut puerulus, sicut radix in terra sitienti, et non erat forma ejus, nec gloria (Is. LIII, 1, 2). Haec pauca de multis. Nec enim affectamus universas Scripturas evolvere, cum et in singulis capitulis plenam majestatem et auctoritatem contestantes, majorem congressum in retractatibus habeamus . His itaque paucis, tamen manifeste distinctio Trinitatis exponitur. Est enim ipse qui pronuntiat, 0167C Spiritus, et Pater ad quem pronuntiat, et Filius de quo pronuntiat. Sic et caetera quae nunc ad Patrem de Filio, vel ad Filium, nunc ad Filium de Patre, vel ad Patrem, nunc ad Spiritum pronuntiantur; unamquamque personam in sua proprietate constituunt.