תמונות בעמוד

things, and of course belonged to the Father, even with respect to Christ; and therefore Cyril of Alexandria, after observing that the Father is “an eternal principle to the Son," says, that “by agxn in the introduction to the Gospel of John, the blessed evangelist seems to signify the l'a


That there was some kind of superiority in the Father in consequence of his being the original (asxn) or canse (OLT105), was always acknowledged by the most orthodox. This is expressly asserted by Gregory Nazianzen, at the same time that he says, the Son is equal to the Father as to his nature. On this principle, he supposes that Christ meant to say that the Father was greater than he. " That God," he says, “should be greater than man, is true indeed, but no great matter: for what is there extraordinary in God being greater than a man?”+

I now proceed to recite other arguments in support of the Trinitarian doctrine, in the order of the books of scripture from which they are derived. Theophilus says, that the three days which preceded the “ light,” (meaning the creation of the sun,) &c., “ are types of the Trinity; of God, his logos, and his wisdom. The fourth,” he says, “is the type of man, who wanted light, that there might be God, logos, wisdom, man; wherefore on the fourth day lights were produced.”

The plural number, in which God is represented as speaking, was soon laid hold of as a proof of the plurality of persons in the Trinity. Tertullian says, “Does this number of Trinity scandalize you, as if they were not connected in simple unity? I ask, how could one person only speak in the plural number, and say, Let us make man in our likeness?”S To this argument Austin adds, “ Had not the three persons been one, it would have been said, Let us make man in our

. “ Ita æternum ei principinın Pater est.--Videtur igitur principii hic nomine, beatus evangelista Patrem significare." In Johan. i. Opera, I. p. 600. (P.)

ή Δηλον ότι το μειζον μεν εςι της αιτιας, το δε ισον της φυσεως, και τελο υπο πολλης ευγνωμοσυνης ομολογεμεν ημεις.-Το γαρ δε λεγειν, ότι το κατα τον ανθρωπον νουμενα μειζων, αληθες μεν, ου μεγα δε τι γαρ θαυμαςον, ει μειζων ανθρωπο Θεος ; Οr. xxxvi. p. 582. (P.)

1 Ωσανlως και αι τρεις ημεραι των φωςηρων γεγονυιαι, τυποι εισιν της τριαδος, τα Θεου, και το λογα αυλα, και της σοφιας αυτα τελαρίη δε τυπος εςιν ανθρωπο και προσδεης τα φωλος, ένα η Θεος, λογος, σοφια, ανθρωπος» δια τελο και τη τελαρτη ημερα εγεννηθησαν φωςηρες. L. ji. p. 106. (P.)

$ “Si te adbuc numerus scandalizat Trinitatis, quasi non connexæ in unitate simplici, interrogo quomodo unicus et siogularis pluraliter loquitur? Faciamus hominem ad imaginem et similitudinem nostram." Ad Praxeam, Sect. xii. p. 506. (P.)


[ocr errors]


images, not in our image." Basil of Seleucia has the same thought. †

Michael Glycas, with great ingenuity, discovers that all the three persons were employed in the creation of man. “Who,” says he, “said, Let us make man? The Father. Who took the dust of the ground for that purpose? The Son. And who breathed into him the breath of life? The Holy Spirit.” I

'Austin's veneration for the number six was mentioned before. He considered the creation of the world in six days as a proof of the Trinity ; for si.r, says he, is twice three. § This will be thought sufficiently far-fetched; but what then shall we say to Cyril of Alexandria, who found a representation of the Trinity in the dimensions of the ark of Noah? ||

That it was Christ who spake to the patriarchs, was agreed by all the fathers from the time of Justin Marlyr; and the proof of it lay in this circumstance, that the person who appeared is called God; but since the supreme God is invisible, there must have been another person entitled to that appellation ; as we have seen in the extracts from Justin himself. I I shall in this place add some passages to this purpose from other writers.

Tertullian, having observed that God the Father is invisible, and yet that God was in some sense visible to the patriarchs, infers that it must have been the Son who appeared to them. “He must, therefore,” he says, “ be another person who was seen ; for he who was seen cannot be invisible. It therefore follows, that we suppose the Father to be invisible on account of the plenitude of his majesty, but the Son to be visible, as being derived from him. As, though we cannot see the sun himself, we can bear his beams, as a tempered portion of him, extending to the earth.”*

“ Si vero in illis tribius personis tres essent intelligendæ vel credendæ substantiæ, non diceretur ad imaginem vostram, sed ad imagives nostras." De Fide, Adv. Pel. C. i. Opera, III. p. 211. (P.)

+ Τριαδα μεν εμφανει την πλατίεσαν, μιαν δε εικονα της τριαδος υπαρχεσαν ει δε μια της τριαδος η εικων, μια των τριων υποτασεων ή φυσις: το γαρ ταυλον της 8σιας ή της εικονος évolens xngurles. Or. i. Opera, p. 5. (P.)

t Και είπεν ο Θεος" Ποιησωμεν ανθρωπον και λαβων ο Θεος χαν απο της γης επλασε τον ανθρωπον τις


ειπων και ο παληρο και τις και λαβων; ο υιος: ένα γεν μη το πνεύμα το άγιον αλλοτριον φαινηται της το ανθρωπο δημιεργιας, την, ενεφισησε, λεξιν και πανυ θαυμασιας wapaianpe. Annales, pars i. p. 69.(P.)

s Quest. Ixv. Opera, IV. p. 684. (P.)

i “ Aspice ergo quæso, quemadmodum in trecentis cubitis, quod arcæ longitudinem esse assignavimus, perfectio sanctæ Trinitatis consecratur. Quod autem, ut formula dixerim, deitas, quæ iu unitate perspicitur, perfectio sit perfectionum ex latitudine arcæ, quæ ad quinquaginta se cubitos extendit, latissime patet. Quinquagenarius etenim numerus, septem septies diebus, unitate quoque conjuncta, conficitur. Quia unam quidem deitatis naturam esse adserimus. Altitudo etiam ipsius arcæ nil aliud profecto, quam mentem ipsam mirifice nobis suggerit. In decimum enim tertium cubitorum numerum perficitur. Triginta enim cubitorum, inquit, altitudinem ejus facies: et in cubitum unum consummabis eum. Sancta enim Trinitas in tres hypostases triumque personarum differentias quum extendatur, in unam deitatis naturam quodammodo contrahitur." In Gen, iji. Opera, 1. p. 17. (P.)

Supra, p. 250.

“ Moses,” says Novatian, every where introduces God the Father as immense, and without end ; not confined to place, but including all space; not one who is in place, but rather in whom all place is, comprehending and embracing all things ; so that he can neither ascend nor descend. For he contains and fills all things; and yet he introduces a God descending to the tower which the sons of men built.” +

Austin supposed, that the three men who appeared to Abraham either were, or represented the Trinity. “The two who went to Sodom must,” he says, “ have been the Son and the Spirit, because they are said to have been sent, which the Father is never said to be.”+ As it might be objected that the Father could not become visible, he says, “ Why may not the Father be understood to have appeared to Abraham and Moses, and to whom he pleased, and as he pleased, by means of a changeable and visible creature, when he in himself remained invisible and unchangeable?”S He says,

with respect to all these appearances, “ They may either be those of the whole Trinity, which is God, or of each of the persons, according to the circumstances." ||

“Jam ergo alius erit qui videbatur, quia non potest idem invisibilis definiri, qui videbatur, et consequens erit, ut invisibilem Patrem intelligamus, pro plenitudine majestatis ; visibilem vero Filium agnoscamus, pro modulo derivationis : sicut nec solem nobis contemplari licet, quantum ad ipsam substantiæ summam quæ est in cælis; radium autem ejus toleramus oculis pro temperatura portionis quæ in terram inde porrigitur." Ad Praxeam, Sect. xiv. p. 508. (P.)

« Quid si idem Moyses ubique introducit Deum Patrem immensum atque sine fine, non qui loco cludatur, sed qui ompem locum cludat : nec eum qui in loco sit, sed potius in quo omnis locus sit: omnia continentem et cuncta complexum, ut merito nec descendat nec ascendat, quoniam ipse omnia et continet et implet; et tamen nihilominus introducit Deum descendentem ad turrim, quam ædificabant filii bominum." Cap. xvii. p. 62. (P.)

“ Sed quas duas personas hic intelligimus, an Patris et Filii, an Patris et Spiritus Sancti, an Filii et Spiritus Sancti ? Hoc forte congruentius quod ultimum dixi; missos enim se dixerunt, quod de Filio et Spiritu Sancto dicimus. Nam Patrem niissum nusquam scripturæ nobis notitia occurrit. De Trinitate, L. ii. C. x. Opera, III. p. 272. (P.)

§ " Si ergo Deus Pater locutus est ad primum hominem; cur non jam ipse intelligatur apparuisse Abrahamæ et Moysi et quibus voluit, et quemadmodum voluit per subjectam sibi commutabilem atque visibilem creaturam, cum ipse in seipso atque in substantia sua qua est, incommutabilis atque invisibilis maneat?" Ibid. p. 269. (P.)

11. Jam enim quæsitum alque tractatum est, in illis antiquis corporalibus formis et visis non tantummodo Patrem, nec tautummodo Filium, nec tantummodo Spiri

Glycas says, that the Trinity was received by Abraham, and cheerfully partook of the entertainment provided for them. * He adds, that, according to the opinion of Cyril, it was the Father that remained with Abraham, because he judges no man; and, that they were the Son and Spirit that were sent to Sodom, was the opinion of the great Athanasius, because no others could have been assessors with him.

Justin Martyr imagined that Christ was signified by the serpent in the Wilderness; and even thought that Plato had got a bint of the same thing from the Scriptures, but did not rightly understand it. t

Chrysostom finds a proof of the Trinity in the blessing pronounced by Moses : [Numb. vi. 24–26:] “ The Lord bless thee and keep thee: the Lord make his face shine upon thee, and be gracious unto thee: the Lord lift up his countenance upon thee, and give thee peace.”

“ Here, says he, “ is the Holy Trinity clearly celebrated.”: The foundation of this argument could only be, that God is mentioned three times in this form of benediction.

Eusebius says, that “when Jacob is called the Lord's portion, Christ is intended."

If any one text be decisive in proof of there being only one God, it is that of Moses, [Deut. vi. 4,]“ Hear, Ο Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord;" and yet because the word Lord or God occurs three times in it, this also has been pressed into the service of the Trinity. Austin, after repeating the text, says,

“ In this we are not to understand the Father only, but the Father, Son, and Spirit.” || tum Sanctum apparuisse, sed autem indifferenter Dominum Deum qui Trinitas ipsa intelligitur, aut quamlibet ex Trinitate personam, quam lectionis textus indiciis circumstantibus significaret." De Trinitate, L. iii. C. i. III. p. 281. (P.)

Και τοσε7ον απλως φιλοξενος ην, ως και αυτην την αγια τριαδα καλελθειν επι της σκηνης αυλα, και των παραλιθενίων αυτη περιχαρως εμφορηθηναι. Δυο δε τοις Σοδομοις επεφοίλησαν" εδε γαρ ο πατηρ κρινει αδενα: αασαν δε την κρισιν δεδωκε το υιω, κατα την φωνην αυτο το κυρια συνονθος φυσικως, και το άγιο πνευματος. Οτι δε ο υιος και το πνευμα επι Σόδομα επορευον7ο, και η τε Αβρααμ ξενια σαφως παριςα, καθαπερό μεγας φησιν Αθανασιος" ει μη γαρ ο υιος και το πνευμα ήσαν, ουκ αν το Θεό και πατρι συνεκαθηνίο ότι δε συνεκαθην7ο, δηλον εκ τε περι τελων, έτω λεγειν. Annales, pars ii. p. 132. (Ρ.)

* Ουτως παρεδωκεν αναγνες Πλατων, και μη ακριβως επιςαμενον, μηδε νοησας τυπον ειναι σαυρε, αλλα χιασμα νοησας, την μετα τον πρωθον Θεον δυναμιν κεχιασθαι εν τω σαντι ειπε. Αpol. i. p. 87. (Ρ.)

I Ευλογησει σε κυριος, και φυλαξει σε, επιφανει κυριος το προσωπον αυτο επι σε και ευλογησει σε επαρει κυριος το προσωπον αυτα επι σε, και δωη σοι ειρηνην. “Ορα την αγιαν τριαδα διαρρηδην ανυμνεμενην. Ser. v. Opera, VΙ. p. 78. (Ρ.)

$ Τουλο μυςηριον το μεγισον, πρωτος θεολογων Μωσης εν απορρητους Εβραιες της παλαι εμυςαγωγει λεγων,-οτε διεμεριζεν ο υψιςος εθνη»- -και εγεννηθη μερις κυρια λαος αυ78 Ιακωβ. -δια τελων γεν υψιςον μεν τον ανωλαίω, και επι πασι, Θεων των όλων ονομαζει. Κυριον δε τον ταλα λογον, τον δε και δευτερως ήμιν μετα των ολων τον Θεον κυριαλογομενον. Demonst. L. iv. C. vii. p. 156. (P.)

U “ Toto corde retine Patrem Deum, Filium Deuin, et Spiritum Sanctum Deum,

I find no more arguments or illustrations of the doctrine of the Trinity from the Old Testament, till we come to the Book of Psalms; but here I find a great number. Jerome says, that “the tree planted by the river of water in the first Psalın, is wisdom, and that wisdom is Christ.” * Am. brose says, that “ Christ is the giant to run a race.”+

Some of these interpretations may be supposed to be nothing more than an allegorizing of scripture, and a play of imagination ; but when the fathers argue from those texts in which the logos is' mentioned, they were certainly very serious. The logos must be Christ. Thus Eusebius makes Christ to be the maker of the world, in Psalm xxxiii. 6: “ By the word of the Lord were the heavens made.”

On the same principle, Psalm xlv. 1, My heart is throwing out a good word, (logos,) was, by almost all the fathers, interpreted of the eternal Father generating the Son from himself. But there is an exception in Basil, who says, that “ jt refers to the prophet.”

Eusebius also was of opinion, that it was not the Father, in Psalm xlv. 1, who was speaking of his heart throwing out the logos, but that it was the prophetic person who was speaking, because what follows does not seem to agree to the Father.

l In Psalm li. 10, 11, we read, “ Create in me a clean heart, O God, and renew a right spirit within me. Cast me not away from thy presence, and take not thy holy spirit from

“ In this,” say Origen, “ we have the Father, Son, and Spirit; the Father being the principal spirit,” (as the


id est sanctam atque ineffabilem Trinitatem unum esse naturaliter Deum, de quo in Deuteronomio dicit: Audi Israel; Deus, Deus tuus, Deus unus est. Et, Deum, Deum tuum, adorabis, et illi soli servies.De Fide uil Pat. Opera, 111. p. 210. (P.)

* “ Lignum autem, cui vir beatus comparatur, sapientiam puto: de qua et Salomon loquitur: Lignum vitæ est bis qui sequuntur eam. Sapientia autem per apostolum Christus Dei Filius declaratur.” lu Ps. i. Opera, VII. p. 1. (P.)

7 “ Christus est Dei Filius, et sempiternus ex Patre, et natus ex virgine. Quem quasi gigantem sanctus David propheta describit, eo quod biformis geminæque naturæ unus sit consors divinitatis et corporis, qui tanquam sponsus procedens de thalamo suo, exultavit tanquam gigas ad currendum viam." In Ps. xix. De Incarnatione, C. v. Opera, IV. p. 290. (P.)

1 Και ο Δαβιδ δε σου εν ψαλμωδιαις έτερα προσειπων την σοφιαν ονομαλι, φησι Τα λογω κυριε δι ερανοι εξερεωθησαν, τον των απανίων δημιουργικον λογον Θεου, το7ον ενευφηMypas TOY TPOTON. Preparatio, p. 320. (P.)

5 Εξηρευξατο η καρδια μου λογον αγαθον' ηδη μεν τινες ηθησαν εκ προσωπο το πατρος λεγεσθαι ταυλα, περι το εν αρχη οντος προς αυλον λογου, ον εκ της διoνει καρδιας και αυλων των σπλαγχνων, φασι, προηγαγε, και απο αγασης καρδιας αγαθος λογος προηλθεν εμοι δε δοκει ταυλα επι το προφηλικoν αναφερεσθαι προσωπον. In Ps. xliv. Opera, I. p. 216. (P.)

| Εμοι δε δοκει ταυλα επι το προφητικoν αναφερεσθαι προσωπον τα γαρ εφεξης το ρηγα εκείι ομοιως εξομαλιζει ημιν την περι τα πατρος εξηγησιν. Montfaucou's Collectio Patrum, 1. p. 186. (P.)

« הקודםהמשך »