A treatise of novatian concerning the trinity.

 A treatise of novatian concerning the trinity.

 Chapter i. argument. —novatian, with the view of treating of the trinity, sets forth from the rule of faith that we should first of all believe in god

 Chapter ii.  argument. —god is above all things, himself containing all things, immense, eternal, transcending the mind of man inexplicable in discou

 Chapter iii. argument. —that god is the founder of all things, their lord and parent, is proved from the holy scriptures.

 Chapter iv. argument. —moreover, he is good, always the same, immutable, one and only, infinite and his own name can never be declared, and he is inc

 Chapter v. argument. —if we regard the anger, and indignation, and hatred of god described in the sacred pages, we must remember that they are not to

 Chapter vi.  argument. —and that, although scripture often changes the divine appearance into a human form, yet the measure of the divine majesty is n

 Chapter vii.  argument. —moreover, that when god is called a spirit, brightness, and light, god is not sufficiently expressed by those appellations.

 Chapter viii.  argument. —it is this god, therefore, that the church has known and adores and to him the testimony of things as well visible as invis

 Chapter ix.  argument. —further, that the same rule of truth teaches us to believe, after the father, also in the son of god, jesus christ our lord go

 Chapter x.  argument. —that jesus christ is the son of god and truly man, as opposed to the fancies of heretics, who deny that he took upon him true f

 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.

 Chapter xii.  argument. —that christ is god, is proved by the authority of the old testament scriptures.

 Chapter xiii.  argument. —that the same truth is proved from the sacred writings of the new covenant.

 Chapter xiv. argument. —the author prosecutes the same argument.

 Chapter xv. argument. —again he proves from the gospel that christ is god.

 Chapter xvi. argument. —again from the gospel he proves christ to be god.

 Chapter xvii.   argument. —it is, moreover, proved by moses in the beginning of the holy scriptures.

 Chapter xviii.   argument. —moreover also, from the fact that he who was seen of abraham is called god which cannot be understood of the father, whom

 Chapter xix. argument. —that god also appeared to jacob as an angel namely, the son of god.

 Chapter xx. 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 h

 Chapter xxi.   argument. —that the same divine majesty is again confirmed in christ by other scriptures.

 Chapter xxii.   argument —that the same divine majesty is in christ, he once more asserts by other scriptures.

 Chapter xxiii.   argument. —and this is so manifest, that some heretics have thought him to be god the father, others that he was only god without the

 Chapter xxiv.   argument. —that these have therefore erred, by thinking that there was no difference between the son of god and the son of man becaus

 Chapter xxv.   argument. —and that it does not follow thence, that because christ died it must also be received that god died for scripture sets fort

 Chapter xxvi.   argument. —moreover, against the sabellians he proves that the father is one, the son another.

 Chapter xxvii.   argument. —he skilfully replies to a passage which the heretics employed in defence of their own opinion.

 Chapter xxviii.  argument. —he proves also that the words spoken to philip make nothing for the sabellians.

 Chapter xxix. argument. —he next teaches us that the authority of the faith enjoins, after the father and the son, to believe also on the holy spirit,

 Chapter xxx.  argument. —in fine, notwithstanding the said heretics have gathered the origin of their error from consideration of what is written:   a

 Chapter xxxi. argument. —but that god, the son of god, born of god the father from everlasting, who was always in the father, is the second person to

Chapter XXV.192    According to Pamelius, ch. xx.  Argument.—And that It Does Not Follow Thence, that Because Christ Died It Must Also Be Received that God Died; For Scripture Sets Forth that Not Only Was Christ God, But Man Also.

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 us to believe that God died; or if God does not die, and Christ is said to have died, then Christ will not be God, because God cannot be admitted to have died. If they ever could understand or had understood what they read, they would never speak after such a perilous fashion. But the folly of error is always hasty in its descent, and it is no new thing if those who have forsaken the lawful faith descend even to perilous results. For if Scripture were to set forth that Christ is God only, and that there was no association of human weakness mingled in His nature, this intricate argument of theirs might reasonably avail something. If Christ is God, and Christ died, then God died. But when Scripture determines, as we have frequently shown, that He is not only God, but man also, it follows that what is immortal may be held to have remained uncorrupted. For who cannot understand that the divinity is impassible, although the human weakness is liable to suffering?  When, therefore, Christ is understood to be mingled and associated as well of that which God is, as of that which man is—for “the Word was made flesh, and dwelt in us”—who cannot easily apprehend of himself, without any teacher and interpreter, that it was not that in Christ that died which is God, but that in Him died which is man? For what if the divinity in Christ does not die, but the substance of the flesh only is destroyed, when in other men also, who are not flesh only, but flesh and soul, the flesh indeed alone suffers the inroads of wasting and death, while the soul is seen to be uncorrupted, and beyond the laws of destruction and death? For this also our Lord Himself said, exhorting us to martyrdom and to contempt of all human power: “Fear not those who slay the body, but cannot kill the soul.”193    Matt. x. 28. But if the immortal soul cannot be killed or slain in any other, although the body and flesh by itself can be slain, how much rather assuredly could not the Word of God and God in Christ be put to death at all, although the flesh alone and the body was slain! For if in any man whatever, the soul has this excellence of immortality that it cannot be slain, much more has the nobility of the Word of God this power of not being slain. For if the power of men fails to slay the sacred power of God, and if the cruelty of man fails to destroy the soul, much more ought it to fail to slay the Word of God. For as the soul itself, which was made by the Word of God, is not killed by men, certainly much rather will it be believed that the Word of God cannot be destroyed. And if the sanguinary cruelty of men cannot do more against men than only to slay the body, how much more certainly it will not have power against Christ beyond in the same way slaying the body! So that, while from these considerations it is gathered that nothing but the human nature in Christ was put to death, it appears that the Word in Him was not drawn down into mortality. For if Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, who, it is admitted, were only men, are manifested to be alive—for all they,194    [Luke xx. 38. A solemn admonition is found in the parallel Scripture, Matt. xxii. 29, which teaches us how much we ought to find beneath the surface of Holy Writ.] says He, “live unto God;” and death in them does not destroy the soul, although it dissolves the bodies themselves: for it could exercise its power on the bodies, it did not avail to exercise it on the souls: for the one in them was mortal, and therefore died; the other in them was immortal, and therefore is understood not to have been extinguished: for which reason they are affirmed and said to live unto God,—much rather death in Christ could have power against the material of His body alone, while against the divinity of the Word it could not bring itself to bear. For the power of death is broken when the authority of immortality intervenes.

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

Ergo, inquiunt, si Christus non homo est tantum, sed et Deus, Christum autem refert Scriptura mortuum pro nobis et ressuscitatum; jam docet nos Scriptura credere Deum mortuum: aut si Deus non 0935A moritur, Christus autem mortuus refertur; non erit Christus Deus, quoniam Deus non potest accipi mortuus. Si umquam intelligerint, aut intellexissent quod legunt, numquam tam periculose omnino loquerentur. Sed erroris semper est abrupta dementia; et non est novum si usque ad periculosa descendunt, qui fidem legitimam reliquerunt. Si enim Scriptura proponeret Christum tantummodo Deum, et nulla in illo fragilitatis humanae sociatio esset permixta, merito illorum heic aliquid valuisset sermo contortus. Si Christus Deus, Christus autem mortuus, ergo mortuus est Deus. Sed cum non tantummodo illum, ut ostendimus jam frequenter, Deum, sed et hominem Scriptura constituat; consequens est, quod immortale est, incorruptum mansisse teneatur. Quis enim 0935B non intelligat, quod impassibilis sit divinitas, passibilis vero sit humana fragilitas? Cum ergo tam ex eo quod Deus est, quam etiam ex illo quod homo est, Christus intelligatur esse permixtus et esse sociatus: Verbum enim caro factum est, et habitavit in nobis (Joan. I, 14), quis non sine ullo magistro atque interprete ex sese facile cognoscat, non illud in Christo mortuum esse quod Deus est, sed illud in illo mortuum esse quod homo est? Quid enim si divinitas in Christo non moritur, sed carnis solius substantia extinguitur; quando et in caeteris hominibus, qui non sunt caro tantummodo, sed caro et anima, caro quidem sola incursum interitus mortisque patitur, extra leges autem interitus et mortis anima incorrupta cernatur? Hoc enim et ipse Dominus hortans 0935C nos ad martyrium et ad contemptum omnis humanae potestatis aiebat: Ne timueritis eos qui corpus occidunt, animam autem occidere non possunt (Matth. X, 28). Quod si anima immortalis occidi aut interfici non potest in quovis alio, licet corpus et caro sola possit interfici, quanto magis utique Verbum Dei et Deus in Christo interfici omnino non potuit, cum caro sola et corpus occisum sit? Si enim hanc habet generositatem immortalitatis anima in quovis homine, ut non possit interfici, multo magis hanc habet potestatem generositas Verbi Dei, ut non possit occidi. Nam si potestas hominum ad interficiendam sacram Dei potestatem, et si crudelitas humana ad interficiendam animam deficit; multo magis ad Dei Verbum interficiendum deficere debebit. Nam cum ipsa anima, 0935D quae per Dei Verbum facta est, ab hominibus non occiditur; multo magis utique Verbum Dei perimi non posse credetur. Et si plus non potest hominum 0936A cruenta saevitia adversus homines, quam ut tantummodo corpus occidat; quanto magis utique in Christo non valebit, quam ut idem tantummodo corpus occidat: ut dum per haec colligitur non nisi hominem in Christo interfectum, appareat ad mortalitatem Sermonem in loco non esse deductum. Nam si Abraham, et Isaac, et Jacob quos homines tantummodo constat fuisse, manifestum est vivere (omnes enim, inquit, illi vivunt Deo (Luc. XX, 38), nec mors in illis animam perimit, quae corpora ipsa dissolvit; jus enim suum exercere potuit in corpora, in animas exercere non valuit: aliud enim in illis mortale, et ideo mortuum; aliud in illis immortale, et ideo intelligitur non extinctum! ob quam causam vivere Deo pronuntiati, et dicti sunt); multo magis utique 0936B mors in Christo adversum solam materiam corporis potuit valere, adversus divinitatem sermonis non potuit se exercere . Frangitur enim potestas mortis, ubi intercedit auctoritas immortalitatis.