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 XXVIII.—Christ Not the Father, as Praxeas Said. The Inconsistency of This Opinion, No Less Than Its Absurdity, Exposed. The True Doctrine of Jesus Christ According to St. Paul, Who Agrees with Other Sacred Writers.

And so, most foolish heretic, you make Christ to be the Father, without once considering the actual force of this name, if indeed Christ is a name, and not rather a surname, or designation; for it signifies “Anointed.” But Anointed is no more a proper name than Clothed or Shod; it is only an accessory to a name. Suppose now that by some means Jesus were also called Vestitus (Clothed), as He is actually called Christ from the mystery of His anointing, would you in like manner say that Jesus was the Son of God, and at the same time suppose that Vestitus was the Father? Now then, concerning Christ, if Christ is the Father, the Father is an Anointed One, and receives the unction of course from another. Else if it is from Himself that He receives it, then you must prove it to us. But we learn no such fact from the Acts of the Apostles in that ejaculation of the Church to God, “Of a truth, Lord, against Thy Holy Child Jesus, whom Thou hast anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate with the Gentiles and the people of Israel were gathered together.”395    Acts iv. 27. These then testified both that Jesus was the Son of God, and that being the Son, He was anointed by the Father. Christ therefore must be the same as Jesus who was anointed by the Father, and not the Father, who anointed the Son. To the same effect are the words of Peter: “Let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ,” that is, Anointed.396    Acts ii. 36. John, moreover, brands that man as “a liar” who “denieth that Jesus is the Christ;” whilst on the other hand he declares that “every one is born of God who believeth that Jesus is the Christ.”397    See 1 John ii. 22, iv. 2, 3, and v. 1. Wherefore he also exhorts us to believe in the name of His (the Father’s,) Son Jesus Christ, that “our fellowship may be with the Father, and with His Son Jesus Christ.”398    1 John i. 3. Paul, in like manner, everywhere speaks of “God the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ.”  When writing to the Romans, he gives thanks to God through our Lord Jesus Christ.399    Rom. i. 8. To the Galatians he declares himself to be “an apostle not of men, neither by man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father.”400    Gal. i. 1. You possess indeed all his writings, which testify plainly to the same effect, and set forth Two—God the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of the Father.  (They also testify) that Jesus is Himself the Christ, and under one or the other designation the Son of God.  For precisely by the same right as both names belong to the same Person, even the Son of God, does either name alone without the other belong to the same Person. Consequently, whether it be the name Jesus which occurs alone, Christ is also understood, because Jesus is the Anointed One; or if the name Christ is the only one given, then Jesus is identified with Him, because the Anointed One is Jesus. Now, of these two names Jesus Christ, the former is the proper one, which was given to Him by the angel; and the latter is only an adjunct, predicable of Him from His anointing,—thus suggesting the proviso that Christ must be the Son, not the Father. How blind, to be sure, is the man who fails to perceive that by the name of Christ some other God is implied, if he ascribes to the Father this name of Christ! For if Christ is God the Father, when He says, “I ascend unto my Father and your Father, and to my God and your God,”401    John xx. 17. He of course shows plainly enough that there is above Himself another Father and another God. If, again, the Father is Christ, He must be some other Being who “strengtheneth the thunder, and createth the wind, and declareth unto men His Christ.”402    Amos iv. 13, Sept. And if “the kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together against the Lord and against His Christ,”403    Ps. ii. 2. that Lord must be another Being, against whose Christ were gathered together the kings and the rulers. And if, to quote another passage, “Thus saith the Lord to my Lord Christ,”404    Here Tertullian reads τῷ Χριστῷ μου Κυρίῳ, instead of Κύρῳ, “to Cyrus,” in Isa. xlv. 1. the Lord who speaks to the Father of Christ must be a distinct Being. Moreover, when the apostle in his epistle prays, “That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and of knowledge,”405    Eph. i. 17. He must be other (than Christ), who is the God of Jesus Christ, the bestower of spiritual gifts. And once for all, that we may not wander through every passage, He “who raised up Christ from the dead, and is also to raise up our mortal bodies,”406    Rom. viii. 11. must certainly be, as the quickener, different from the dead Father,407    From this deduction of the doctrine of Praxeas, that the Father must have suffered on the cross, his opponents called him and his followers Patripassians. or even from the quickened Father, if Christ who died is the Father.

CAPUT XXVIII.

Itaque Christum facis Patrem, stultissime, qui nec ipsam vim inspicias nominis hujus, si tamen nomen est Christus, et non appellatio potius; unctus enim significatur. Unctus autem non magis nomen est, quam vestitus, quam calceatus, accidens nomini res. An tu , si ex aliquo argumento vestitus quoque vocaretur Jesus, quomodo Christus ab unctionis sacramento, aeque Jesum Filium Dei diceres, 0192Cvestitum vero Patrem crederes? Nunc de Christo. Si Pater Christus est, Pater unctus est, et utique ab alio. Aut si a semetipso, proba. Sed non ita docent Acta Apostolorum, in illa exclamatione Ecclesiae ad Deum: Convenerunt enim (Act. IV, 27) universi in ista civitate adversus sanctum Filium tuum Jesum , quem unxisti, Herodes et Pilatus cum Nationibus; ita et Filium Dei Jesum contestati sunt, et Filium a Patre unctum. Ergo Jesus idem erit Christus, qui a Patre unctus est, non Pater, qui Filium unxit. Sic et Petrus (Act. II, 36): Firmissime itaque cognoscat omnis domus Israel, quod et Dominum et Christum, id est unctum, fecerit eum Deus hunc Jesum, quem vos crucifixistis. Joannes autem (I Joan., II, 22) etiam 0193Amendacem notat eum, qui negaverit Jesum esse Christum: contra, de Deo natum, omnem qui crediderit Jesum esse Christum. Propter quod et hortatur ut credamus nomini Filii ejus Jesu Christi, ut scilicet communio sit nobis cum Patre, et Filio ejus Jesu Christo. Sic et Paulus ubique Deum Patrem ponit, et Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum. Cum ad Romanos (I, 8) scribit, gratias agit Deo per Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum. Cum ad Galatas (I, 1), non ab hominibus se apostolum praefert, nec per hominem, sed per Jesum Christum, et Deum Patrem. Et habes tota instrumenta ejus, quae in hunc modum pronuntiant, et duos proponunt, Deum Patrem, et Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum Filium Patris, et Jesum ipsum esse Christum, in altero quoque nomine Dei Filium. 0193B Nam exinde eo jure quo utrumque nomen unius est, id est Dei Filii , etiam alterum sine altero ejusdem est. Et sive Jesus tantummodo positum est, intelligitur et Christus; quia Jesus unctus est. Sive solummodo Christus idem est Jesus, quia unctus est Jesus. Quorum nominum alterum est proprium, quod ab angelo impositum est; alterum accidens, quod ab unctione convenit; dum tamen Christus Filius sit, non Pater. Postremo, quam caecus est, qui nec in Christi nomine intelligit alium Deum portendi, si Christo nomen Patris adscribat? Si enim Christus Pater Deus est, qui dicit (Joan., XX, 17): Ascendo ad Patrem meum et Patrem vestrum, et Deum meum et Deum vestrum; utique alium Patrem super se et Deum ostendit. Si item Pater Christus est, alius est 0193C qui solidat tonitruum, et condit spiritum, et annuntiat in homines Christum suum (Amos, IV, 13); et si adstiterunt reges terrae, et archontes congregati sunt in unum adversus Christum ipsius (Ps. II, 2); alius erit Dominus, contra cujus Christum congregati sunt reges et archontes. Et si: Haec dicit Dominus Domino meo Christo (Is., XLV, 1); alius erit Dominus qui loquitur ad Patrem Christi. Et cum Apostolus scribit (Eph., I, 17): Uti Deus Domini nostri Jesu Christi det vobis spiritum sapientiae et agnitionis; alius erit Deus Christi Jesu charismatum spiritualium largitor (Rom., VIII, 11). Certe, ne per omnia evagemur; qui suscitavit Christum, suscitaturus est et mortalia corpora nostra; jamque alius erit suscitator quam Pater mortuus, et Pater suscitatus, si Christus qui est mortuus, Pater est.