Author: Mourad Takla

When people seek to know God and apply their minds—within the limits of human weakness—to understanding the Trinity, they learn through experience how difficult and exhausting this task is. This difficulty comes either from the mind itself trying to look upon unapproachable light, or from the many different ways of speaking found in the sacred writings. In these writings, it seems to me, the mind is put through rigorous exercise so that it may find sweetness when glorified by the grace of Christ. Such people, once they have cleared up every confusion and reached something certain, ought to be the most willing to show patience toward those who make mistakes in investigating so profound a mystery. But there are two things that are very hard to tolerate in those who are in error: jumping to conclusions before the truth is clear, and then defending the falsehood they hastily assumed once the truth has been made clear. I pray and hope that God will defend and protect me from these two faults—which work against discovering truth and properly handling the divine and sacred books—with the shield of His goodwill and the grace of His mercy. If He does, I will not hesitate to search out the ousia of God, whether through His Scripture or through creation. Both of these are set before us for contemplation so that we may seek Him and love Him—the one who inspired Scripture and created the world. I will not be afraid to give my opinion, and I would rather have upright people examine it than fear criticism from those who twist things. Love, which is most excellent and humble, gladly welcomes the gentle eye of the dove, but against the dog's tooth nothing is left except to avoid it through careful humility or to dull it with solid truth. I would much rather be criticized by anyone at all than be praised by someone who is mistaken or by a flatterer. For the lover of truth need not fear anyone's criticism. Anyone who criticizes must be either an enemy or a friend. If an enemy attacks, he must be endured. But if a friend makes a mistake, he must be taught; if he teaches, he must be listened to. However, if someone who is wrong praises you, he confirms your error; if a flatterer praises you, he lures you into error. Therefore, let the righteous strike me—it will be a kindness—and let him correct me; but the oil of the sinner shall not anoint my head.

When men seek to know God, and bend their minds according to the capacity of human weakness to the understanding of the Trinity; learning, as they must, by experience, the wearisome difficulties of the task, whether from the sight itself of the mind striving to gaze upon light unapproachable, or, indeed, from the manifold and various modes of speech employed in the sacred writings (wherein, as it seems to me, the mind is nothing else but roughly exercised, in order that it may find sweetness when glorified by the grace of Christ);– such men, I say, when they have dispelled every ambiguity, and arrived at something certain, ought of all others most easily to make allowance for those who err in the investigation of so deep a secret. But there are two things most hard to bear with, in the case of those who are in error: hasty assumption before the truth is made plain; and, when it has been made plain, defense of the falsehood thus hastily assumed. From which two faults, inimical as they are to the finding out of the truth, and to the handling of the divine and sacred books, should God, as I pray and hope, defend and protect me with the shield of His good will, and with the grace of His mercy, I will not be slow to search out the substance of God, whether through His Scripture or through the creature. For both of these are set forth for our contemplation to this end, that He may Himself be sought, and Himself be loved, who inspired the one, and created the other. Nor shall I be afraid of giving my opinion, in which I shall more desire to be examined by the upright, than fear to be carped at by the perverse. For charity, most excellent and unassuming, gratefully accepts the dovelike eye; but for the dog's tooth nothing remains, save either to shun it by the most cautious humility, or to blunt it by the most solid truth; and far rather would I be censured by any one whatsoever, than be praised by either the erring or the flatterer. For the lover of truth need fear no one's censure. For he that censures, must needs be either enemy or friend. And if an enemy reviles, he must be borne with: but a friend, if he errs, must be taught; if he teaches, listened to. But if one who errs praises you, he confirms your error; if one who flatters, he seduces you into error. Let the righteous, therefore, smite me, it shall be a kindness; and let him reprove me; but the oil of the sinner shall not anoint my head.

We hold firmly to what may be called the canonical rule concerning our Lord Jesus Christ, as it is spread throughout the Scriptures and has been demonstrated by learned and Catholic interpreters of those same Scriptures. This rule is that the Son of God is understood to be equal to the Father according to the form of God in which He exists, and less than the Father according to the form of a servant which He took. In this form, He was found to be not only less than the Father but also less than the Holy Spirit, and not only so, but less even than Himself—not than Himself who was, but than Himself who is. By taking the form of a servant, He did not lose the form of God, as the testimonies of the Scriptures teach us, which we referred to in the earlier book. However, some things in the sacred text are expressed in such a way that it is unclear which rule they should be understood by: whether by the rule that makes us understand the Son as less because He has taken upon Himself the creature, or by the rule that makes us understand that the Son is not less than but equal to the Father, yet He is from Him, God of God, Light of light. We call the Son God of God, but the Father, God only, not of God. From this it is clear that the Son has another from whom He is and to whom He is Son, but the Father does not have a Son from whom He is, but only to whom He is Father. Every son is what he is from his father and is son to his father, but no father is what he is from his son, but is father to his son.

2. Wherefore, although we hold most firmly, concerning our Lord Jesus Christ, what may be called the canonical rule, as it is both disseminated through the Scriptures, and has been demonstrated by learned and Catholic handlers of the same Scriptures, namely, that the Son of God is both understood to be equal to the Father according to the form of God in which He is, and less than the Father according to the form of a servant which He took; in which form He was found to be not only less than the Father, but also less than the Holy Spirit; and not only so, but less even than Himself — not than Himself who was, but than Himself who is; because, by taking the form of a servant, He did not lose the form of God, as the testimonies of the Scriptures taught us, to which we have referred in the former book: yet there are some things in the sacred text so put as to leave it ambiguous to which rule they are rather to be referred; whether to that by which we understand the Son as less, in that He has taken upon Him the creature, or to that by which we understand that the Son is not indeed less than, but equal to the Father, but yet that He is from Him, God of God, Light of light. For we call the Son God of God; but the Father, God only; not of God. Whence it is plain that the Son has another of whom He is, and to whom He is Son; but that the Father has not a Son of whom He is, but only to whom He is father. For every son is what he is, of his father, and is son to his father; but no father is what he is, of his son, but is father to his son.

Some things in the Scriptures concerning the Father and the Son are expressed in ways that point to the unity and equality of their substance. For instance, "I and the Father are one," and "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God," along with other similar texts. Other passages present the Son as less on account of the form of a servant, that is, because He took upon Himself a changeable human substance. Examples include "For my Father is greater than I" and "The Father judges no man, but has committed all judgment unto the Son." A little later it continues, "And has given Him authority to execute judgment also, because He is the Son of man." Still other passages present Him neither as less nor as equal, but simply indicate that He is from the Father. For instance, "For as the Father has life in Himself, so has He given to the Son to have life in Himself," and "The Son can do nothing of Himself, but what He sees the Father do." If we interpret this last statement to mean the Son is less because of the nature He took from creation, it would follow that the Father must have walked on water, or opened the eyes of some other blind person with clay and spittle, and done all the other things which the Son did among people when appearing in the flesh, before the Son did them. This would be necessary so that the Son could do these things, since He said He could do nothing of Himself except what He has seen the Father do. But who, even if insane, would think this? Therefore, these texts are expressed this way because the Son's life is as unchangeable as the Father's life is, and yet He is from the Father. The Father and Son's working is undivided, yet the ability to work is given to the Son by the one from whom He Himself exists, that is, from the Father. The Son sees the Father in such a way that He is the Son in the very act of seeing Him. For the Son, to be from the Father—that is, to be born of the Father—is nothing other than to see the Father, and to see Him working is nothing other than to work with Him. But He does not work from Himself because He is not from Himself. Therefore, the things which He sees the Father do, these the Son also does in the same way, because He is from the Father. He does not do different things in a similar manner, as a painter paints different pictures in the same way he has seen pictures painted by another. Nor does He do the same things in a different manner, as the body expresses the same letters that the mind has thought. Rather, He says, "Whatsoever things the Father does, these same things also does the Son likewise." He said both "these same things" and "likewise," which shows that the working of both Father and Son is undivided and equal, but it comes from the Father to the Son. Therefore the Son cannot do anything of Himself, except what He sees the Father do. From this rule, by which the Scriptures speak not to present one as less than another but only to show which is from which, some have mistakenly concluded that the Son is being called less. Some among us who are less educated and least instructed in these matters try to interpret these texts according to the form of a servant, and by misinterpreting them this way, become confused. To prevent this, the rule in question must be observed: the Son is not less, but it is simply indicated that He is from the Father, and in these words not His inequality but His birth is being declared.

3. Some things, then, are so put in the Scriptures concerning the Father and the Son, as to intimate the unity and equality of their substance; as, for instance, I and the Father are one; and, Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God; and whatever other texts there are of the kind. And some, again, are so put that they show the Son as less on account of the form of a servant, that is, of His having taken upon Him the creature of a changeable and human substance; as, for instance, that which says, For my Father is greater than I; and, The Father judges no man, but has committed all judgment unto the Son. For a little after he goes on to say, And has given Him authority to execute judgment also, because He is the Son of man. And further, some are so put, as to show Him at that time neither as less nor as equal, but only to intimate that He is of the Father; as, for instance, that which says, For as the Father has life in Himself, so has He given to the Son to have life in Himself; and that other: The Son can do nothing of Himself, but what He sees the Father do. For if we shall take this to be therefore so said, because the Son is less in the form taken from the creature, it will follow that the Father must have walked on the water, or opened the eyes with clay and spittle of some other one born blind, and have done the other things which the Son appearing in the flesh did among men, before the Son did them; in order that He might be able to do those things, who said that the Son was not able to do anything of Himself, except what He has seen the Father do. Yet who, even though he were mad, would think this? It remains, therefore, that these texts are so expressed, because the life of the Son is unchangeable as that of the Father is, and yet He is of the Father; and the working of the Father and of the Son is indivisible, and yet so to work is given to the Son from Him of whom He Himself is, that is, from the Father; and the Son so sees the Father, as that He is the Son in the very seeing Him. For to be of the Father, that is, to be born of the Father, is to Him nothing else than to see the Father; and to see Him working, is nothing else than to work with Him: but therefore not from Himself, because He is not from Himself. And, therefore, those things which He sees the Father do, these also does the Son likewise, because He is of the Father. For He neither does other things in like manner, as a painter paints other pictures, in the same way as he sees others to have been painted by another man; nor the same things in a different manner, as the body expresses the same letters, which the mind has thought; but whatsoever things, says He, the Father does, these same things also does the Son likewise. He has said both these same things, and likewise; and hence the working of both the Father and the Son is indivisible and equal, but it is from the Father to the Son. Therefore the Son cannot do anything of Himself, except what He sees the Father do. From this rule, then, whereby the Scriptures so speak as to mean, not to set forth one as less than another, but only to show which is of which, some have drawn this meaning, as if the Son were said to be less. And some among ourselves who are more unlearned and least instructed in these things, endeavoring to take these texts according to the form of a servant, and so misinterpreting them, are troubled. And to prevent this, the rule in question is to be observed whereby the Son is not less, but it is simply intimated that He is of the Father, in which words not His inequality but His birth is declared.

There are some things in the sacred books, as I said at the beginning, that are stated in such a way that it's unclear which rule they should be referred to: whether to the rule that the Son is less because He took on created nature, or to the rule that indicates He is equal to the Father yet still from the Father. In my opinion, if something is so unclear that what it really means cannot be explained or determined, then such passages can safely be understood according to either rule. For example, take the statement "My doctrine is not mine, but His that sent me." This can be understood according to the form of a servant, as we already discussed in the previous book, or according to the form of God, in which He is equal to the Father while still being from the Father. For according to the form of God, just as the Son is not one thing and His life another thing, but the life itself is the Son, so too the Son is not one thing and His doctrine another thing, but the doctrine itself is the Son. Therefore, just as the text "He has given life to the Son" should be understood to mean "He has begotten the Son, who is life," so also when it says "He has given doctrine to the Son," it can rightly be understood to mean "He has begotten the Son, who is doctrine." Thus, when it says "My doctrine is not mine, but His who sent me," it should be understood as if it were saying "I am not from myself, but from Him who sent me."

4. There are, then, some things in the sacred books, as I began by saying, so put, that it is doubtful to which they are to be referred: whether to that rule whereby the Son is less on account of His having taken the creature; or whether to that whereby it is intimated that although equal, yet He is of the Father. And in my opinion, if this is in such way doubtful, that which it really is can neither be explained nor discerned, then such passages may without danger be understood according to either rule, as that, for instance, My doctrine is not mine, but His that sent me. For this may both be taken according to the form of a servant, as we have already treated it in the former book; or according to the form of God, in which He is in such way equal to the Father, that He is yet of the Father. For according to the form of God, as the Son is not one and His life another, but the life itself is the Son; so the Son is not one and His doctrine another, but the doctrine itself is the Son. And hence, as the text, He has given life to the Son, is no otherwise to be understood than, He has begotten the Son, who is life; so also when it is said, He has given doctrine to the Son, it may be rightly understood to mean, He has begotten the Son, who is doctrine so that, when it is said, My doctrine is not mine, but His who sent me, it is so to be understood as if it were, I am not from myself, but from Him who sent me.

Even concerning the Holy Spirit, of whom it is not said that He emptied Himself and took upon Him the form of a servant, the Lord Himself says, "When He the Spirit of Truth has come, He will guide you into all truth. For He shall not speak of Himself, but whatsoever He shall hear that shall He speak; and He will show you things to come. He shall glorify me; for He shall receive of mine, and shall show it unto you." If He had not immediately added after this, "All things that the Father has are mine; therefore said I, that He shall take of mine, and shall show it unto you," it might perhaps have been believed that the Holy Spirit was born of Christ in the same way that Christ is of the Father. Since He had said of Himself, "My doctrine is not mine, but His that sent me," but of the Holy Spirit, "For He shall not speak of Himself, but whatsoever He shall hear, that shall He speak," and "For He shall receive of mine, and shall show it unto you." But because He has given the reason why He said, "He shall receive of mine"—for He says, "All things that the Father has are mine; therefore said I, that He shall take of mine"—it remains that the Holy Spirit be understood to have of that which is the Father's, just as the Son also has. How can this be, unless according to what we said above: "But when the Comforter has come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth which proceeds from the Father, He shall testify of me"? He is said, therefore, not to speak of Himself in that He proceeds from the Father. Just as it does not follow that the Son is less because He said, "The Son can do nothing of Himself, but what He sees the Father do"—for He did not say this according to the form of a servant, but according to the form of God, as we have already shown, and these words do not set Him forth as less than, but as of the Father—so it does not follow that the Holy Spirit is less because it is said of Him, "For He shall not speak of Himself, but whatsoever He shall hear, that shall He speak," for the words refer to Him as proceeding from the Father. But whereas both the Son is of the Father and the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father, why both are not called sons and both not said to be begotten, but the former is called the one only-begotten Son and the latter, namely the Holy Spirit, is neither son nor begotten—because if begotten, then certainly a son—we will discuss in another place, if God grants, and as far as He grants.

5. For even of the Holy Spirit, of whom it is not said, He emptied Himself, and took upon Him the form of a servant; yet the Lord Himself says, Howbeit, when He the Spirit of Truth has come, He will guide you into all truth. For He shall not speak of Himself, but whatsoever He shall hear that shall He speak; and He will show you things to come. He shall glorify me; for He shall receive of mine, and shall show it unto you. And except He had immediately gone on to say after this, All things that the Father has are mine; therefore said I, that He shall take of mine, and shall show it unto you; it might, perhaps, have been believed that the Holy Spirit was so born of Christ, as Christ is of the Father. Since He had said of Himself, My doctrine is not mine, but His that sent me; but of the Holy Spirit, For He shall not speak of Himself, but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall He speak; and, For He shall receive of mine, and shall show it unto you. But because He has rendered the reason why He said, He shall receive of mine (for He says, All things that the Father has are mine; therefore said I, that He shall take of mine); it remains that the Holy Spirit be understood to have of that which is the Father's, as the Son also has. And how can this be, unless according to that which we have said above, But when the Comforter has come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth which proceeds from the Father, He shall testify of me? He is said, therefore, not to speak of Himself, in that He proceeds from the Father; and as it does not follow that the Son is less because He said, The Son can do nothing of Himself, but what He sees the Father do (for He has not said this according to the form of a servant, but according to the form of God, as we have already shown, and these words do not set Him forth as less than, but as of the Father), so it is not brought to pass that the Holy Spirit is less, because it is said of Him, For He shall not speak of Himself, but whatsoever He shall hear, that shall He speak; for the words belong to Him as proceeding from the Father. But whereas both the Son is of the Father, and the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father, why both are not called sons, and both not said to be begotten, but the former is called the one only-begotten Son, and the latter, viz. the Holy Spirit, neither son nor begotten, because if begotten, then certainly a son, we will discuss in another place, if God shall grant, and so far as He shall grant.

Those who think this passage shows that the Father is greater than the Son because the Son said "Father, glorify me" need to wake up. After all, the Holy Spirit also glorifies Him. Does that mean the Spirit is greater than He is? Furthermore, if the Holy Spirit glorifies the Son because He receives from what belongs to the Son, and He receives from what belongs to the Son because all things that the Father has also belong to the Son, then it's clear that when the Holy Spirit glorifies the Son, the Father glorifies the Son. From this we can understand that all things the Father has belong not only to the Son but also to the Holy Spirit, since the Holy Spirit is able to glorify the Son whom the Father glorifies. But if the one who glorifies is greater than the one being glorified, then they should admit that those who mutually glorify each other are equal. Scripture also says that the Son glorifies the Father, for He says, "I have glorified You on the earth." They had better be careful not to conclude that the Holy Spirit is greater than both, since He glorifies the Son whom the Father glorifies, yet Scripture never says that He Himself is glorified by either the Father or the Son.

6. But here also let them wake up if they can, who have thought this, too, to be a testimony on their side, to show that the Father is greater than the Son, because the Son has said, Father, glorify me. Why, the Holy Spirit also glorifies Him. Pray, is the Spirit, too, greater than He? Moreover, if on that account the Holy Spirit glorifies the Son, because He shall receive of that which is the Son's, and shall therefore receive of that which is the Son's because all things that the Father has are the Son's also; it is evident that when the Holy Spirit glorifies the Son, the Father glorifies the Son. Whence it may be perceived that all things that the Father has are not only of the Son, but also of the Holy Spirit, because the Holy Spirit is able to glorify the Son, whom the Father glorifies. But if he who glorifies is greater than he whom he glorifies, let them allow that those are equal who mutually glorify each other. But it is written, also, that the Son glorifies the Father; for He says, I have glorified You on the earth. Truly let them beware lest the Holy Spirit be thought greater than both, because He glorifies the Son whom the Father glorifies, while it is not written that He Himself is glorified either by the Father or by the Son.

Having been proved wrong on those points, people then resort to saying that the one who sends is greater than the one who is sent. Therefore, they argue, the Father is greater than the Son because the Son continually speaks of himself as being sent by the Father. They also claim the Father is greater than the Holy Spirit because Jesus said of the Spirit, "Whom the Father will send in my name." And they say the Holy Spirit is less than both, because both the Father sends him, as we have noted, and the Son does too, when he says, "But if I depart, I will send him to you." So I first ask in this investigation: from where and to where was the Son sent? He says, "I came forth from the Father and have come into the world." Therefore, to be sent means to come forth from the Father and to come into the world. But then what about what the same evangelist says concerning him: "He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not"? And then he adds, "He came to his own." Certainly he was sent to the place where he came. But if he was sent into the world because he came forth from the Father, then he both came into the world and was already in the world. He was sent, therefore, to the place where he already was. Consider also what is written in the prophet, where God said, "Do not I fill heaven and earth?" If this is said of the Son—for some interpret it to mean that the Son himself spoke either by the prophets or in the prophets—where was he sent except to the place where he already was? For he who says "I fill heaven and earth" was everywhere. But if this is said of the Father, where could he be without his own Word and without his own Wisdom, which "reaches from one end to another mightily and sweetly orders all things"? Yet he cannot be anywhere without his own Spirit. Therefore, if God is everywhere, his Spirit also is everywhere. So the Holy Spirit too was sent to the place where he already was. For the psalmist who finds no place where he might go from God's presence, who says, "If I ascend up into heaven, you are there; if I go down into hell, behold, you are there"—wanting it to be understood that God is present everywhere—named his Spirit in the previous verse. For he says, "Where shall I go from your Spirit? Or where shall I flee from your presence?"

7. But being proved wrong so far, men betake themselves to saying, that he who sends is greater than he who is sent: therefore the Father is greater than the Son, because the Son continually speaks of Himself as being sent by the Father; and the Father is also greater than the Holy Spirit, because Jesus has said of the Spirit, Whom the Father will send in my name; and the Holy Spirit is less than both, because both the Father sends Him, as we have said, and the Son, when He says, But if I depart, I will send Him unto you. I first ask, then, in this inquiry, whence and whither the Son was sent. I, He says, came forth from the Father, and have come into the world. Therefore, to be sent, is to come forth forth from the Father, and to come into the world. What, then, is that which the same evangelist says concerning Him, He was in the world, and the world was made by Him, and the world knew Him not; and then he adds, He came unto His own? Certainly He was sent there, whither He came; but if He was sent into the world, because He came forth from the Father, then He both came into the world and was in the world. He was sent therefore there, where He already was. For consider that, too, which is written in the prophet, that God said, Do not I fill heaven and earth? If this is said of the Son (for some will have it understood that the Son Himself spoke either by the prophets or in the prophets), whither was He sent except to the place where He already was? For He who says, I fill heaven and earth, was everywhere. But if it is said of the Father, where could He be without His own word and without His own wisdom, which reaches from one end to another mightily, and sweetly orders all things? But He cannot be anywhere without His own Spirit. Therefore, if God is everywhere, His Spirit also is everywhere. Therefore, the Holy Spirit, too, was sent there, where He already was. For he, too, who finds no place to which he might go from the presence of God, and who says, If I ascend up into heaven, You are there; if I shall go down into hell, behold, You are there; wishing it to be understood that God is present everywhere, named in the previous verse His Spirit; for He says, Whither shall I go from Your Spirit? Or whither shall I flee from Your presence?

If both the Son and the Holy Spirit are sent to where they already were, we must ask how this sending—whether of the Son or of the Holy Spirit—is to be understood, since we nowhere read that the Father is sent. Now, concerning the Son, the apostle writes: "But when the fullness of the time had come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law." He says God sent His Son, made of a woman. What Catholic does not know that by the term "woman" he did not mean to deny virginity, but rather, following Hebrew usage, to indicate the female sex? Therefore, when he says "God sent His Son, made of a woman," he clearly shows that the Son was sent precisely in being made of a woman. So while He was in the world by being born of God, He was sent and came into the world by being born of Mary. Furthermore, the Son could not be sent by the Father without the Holy Spirit, not only because when the Father sent Him—that is, when He made Him of a woman—the Father certainly must be understood as not having done so without His own Spirit, but also because it is stated most plainly and explicitly in the Gospel, when the Virgin Mary asked the angel, "How shall this be?" The answer was: "The Holy Ghost shall come upon you, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow you." And Matthew says, "She was found with child of the Holy Ghost." Even in the prophet Isaiah, Christ Himself is understood to speak of His own future coming: "And now the Lord God and His Spirit has sent me."

8. For this reason, then, if both the Son and the Holy Spirit are sent there where they were, we must inquire, how that sending, whether of the Son or of the Holy Spirit, is to be understood; for of the Father alone, we nowhere read that He is sent. Now, of the Son, the apostle writes thus: But when the fullness of the time had come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law. He sent, he says, His Son, made of a woman. And by this term, woman, what Catholic does not know that he did not wish to signify the privation of virginity; but, according to a Hebraism, the difference of sex? When, therefore, he says, God sent His Son, made of a woman, he sufficiently shows that the Son was sent in this very way, in that He was made of a woman. Therefore, in that He was born of God, He was in the world; but in that He was born of Mary, He was sent and came into the world. Moreover, He could not be sent by the Father without the Holy Spirit, not only because the Father, when He sent Him, that is, when He made Him of a woman, is certainly understood not to have so made Him without His own Spirit; but also because it is most plainly and expressly said in the Gospel in answer to the Virgin Mary, when she asked of the angel, How shall this be? The Holy Ghost shall come upon you, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow you. And Matthew says, She was found with child of the Holy Ghost. Although, too, in the prophet Isaiah, Christ Himself is understood to say of His own future advent, And now the Lord God and His Spirit has sent me.

Someone might want to push us to say that the Son is also sent by Himself, since the conception and birth from Mary is the work of the Trinity, through whose creative act all things are created. "How," he might continue, "has the Father sent Him if He sent Himself?" My first response is to ask him to tell me, if he can, how the Father has sanctified Him if He has sanctified Himself. For the same Lord says both things: "Say of Him," He says, "whom the Father has sanctified and sent into the world, 'You blaspheme,' because I said, 'I am the Son of God,'" while in another place He says, "And for their sake I sanctify myself." I also ask how the Father delivered Him if He delivered Himself. For the Apostle Paul says both: "Who," he says, "spared not His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all," while elsewhere he says of the Savior Himself, "Who loved me, and delivered Himself for me." If he has a right understanding of these things, he will reply, I suppose, "Because the will of the Father and the Son is one, and their working indivisible." In the same way, then, let him understand that the incarnation and birth from the Virgin, in which the Son is understood as sent, was accomplished by one and the same operation of the Father and of the Son indivisibly—with the Holy Spirit certainly not excluded, since it is expressly said, "She was found with child by the Holy Spirit." Perhaps our meaning will be more clearly explained if we ask how God sent His Son. Did He command that He should come, and did He comply with the command and come? Did He request, or did He only suggest? But whichever of these it was, it was certainly done by a word, and the Word of God is the Son of God Himself. Therefore, since the Father sent Him by a word, His being sent was the work of both the Father and His Word. Therefore the same Son was sent by the Father and the Son, because the Son Himself is the Word of the Father. For who would embrace such an impious opinion as to think that the Father uttered a word in time so that the eternal Son might thereby be sent and appear in the flesh in the fullness of time? But surely it was in that Word of God itself which was in the beginning with God and was God—namely, in the wisdom itself of God—apart from time, that it was determined at what time that wisdom should appear in the flesh. Therefore, since the Word was in the beginning without any beginning of time, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God, it was in the Word itself without any time that it was determined when the Word was to be made flesh and dwell among us. And when this fullness of time came, God sent His Son, made of a woman—that is, made in time—so that the Incarnate Word might appear to men, while it was in that Word Himself, apart from time, when this was to be done. For the order of times exists in the eternal wisdom of God without time. Since, then, the Son's appearing in the flesh was accomplished by both the Father and the Son, it is appropriate to say that He who appeared in that flesh was sent, and that He who did not appear in it sent Him, because those things which happen outwardly before bodily eyes have their existence from the inward structure (apparatu) of the spiritual nature, and for that reason are appropriately said to be sent. Furthermore, that form of man which He took is the person of the Son, not also of the Father. For this reason the invisible Father, together with the Son who with the Father is invisible, is said to have sent the same Son by making Him visible. But if He became visible in such a way that He ceased to be invisible with the Father—that is, if the substance of the invisible Word were turned by a change and transition into a visible creature—then the Son would be understood to be sent by the Father in such a way that He would be found to be only sent, not also sending with the Father. But since He took the form of a servant in such a way that the unchangeable form of God remained, it is clear that what became apparent in the Son was done by the Father and the Son not being apparent—that is, by the invisible Father with the invisible Son, the same Son Himself was sent so as to be visible. Why, therefore, does He say, "Neither came I of myself"? We may now say that this is said according to the form of a servant, in the same way as "I judge no man" is said.

9. Perhaps some one may wish to drive us to say, that the Son is sent also by Himself, because the conception and childbirth of Mary is the working of the Trinity, by whose act of creating all things are created. And how, he will go on to say, has the Father sent Him, if He sent Himself? To whom I answer first, by asking him to tell me, if he can, in what manner the Father has sanctified Him, if He has sanctified Himself? For the same Lord says both; Say of Him, He says, whom the Father has sanctified and sent into the world, You blaspheme, because I said, I am the Son of God; while in another place He says, And for their sake I sanctify myself. I ask, also, in what manner the Father delivered Him, if He delivered Himself? For the Apostle Paul says both: Who, he says, spared not His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all; while elsewhere he says of the Saviour Himself, Who loved me, and delivered Himself for me. He will reply, I suppose, if he has a right sense in these things, Because the will of the Father and the Son is one, and their working indivisible. In like manner, then, let him understand the incarnation and nativity of the Virgin, wherein the Son is understood as sent, to have been wrought by one and the same operation of the Father and of the Son indivisibly; the Holy Spirit certainly not being thence excluded, of whom it is expressly said, She was found with child by the Holy Ghost. For perhaps our meaning will be more plainly unfolded, if we ask in what manner God sent His Son. He commanded that He should come, and He, complying with the commandment, came. Did He then request, or did He only suggest? But whichever of these it was, certainly it was done by a word, and the Word of God is the Son of God Himself. Wherefore, since the Father sent Him by a word, His being sent was the work of both the Father and His Word; therefore the same Son was sent by the Father and the Son, because the Son Himself is the Word of the Father. For who would embrace so impious an opinion as to think the Father to have uttered a word in time, in order that the eternal Son might thereby be sent and might appear in the flesh in the fullness of time? But assuredly it was in that Word of God itself which was in the beginning with God and was God, namely, in the wisdom itself of God, apart from time, at what time that wisdom must needs appear in the flesh. Therefore, since without any commencement of time, the Word was in the beginning, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God, it was in the Word itself without any time, at what time the Word was to be made flesh and dwell among us. And when this fullness of time had come, God sent His Son, made of a woman, that is, made in time, that the Incarnate Word might appear to men; while it was in that Word Himself, apart from time, at what time this was to be done; for the order of times is in the eternal wisdom of God without time. Since, then, that the Son should appear in the flesh was wrought by both the Father and the Son, it is fitly said that He who appeared in that flesh was sent, and that He who did not appear in it, sent Him; because those things which are transacted outwardly before the bodily eyes have their existence from the inward structure ( apparatu) of the spiritual nature, and on that account are fitly said to be sent. Further, that form of man which He took is the person of the Son, not also of the Father; on which account the invisible Father, together with the Son, who with the Father is invisible, is said to have sent the same Son by making Him visible. But if He became visible in such way as to cease to be invisible with the Father, that is, if the substance of the invisible Word were turned by a change and transition into a visible creature, then the Son would be so understood to be sent by the Father, that He would be found to be only sent; not also, with the Father, sending. But since He so took the form of a servant, as that the unchangeable form of God remained, it is clear that that which became apparent in the Son was done by the Father and the Son not being apparent; that is, that by the invisible Father, with the invisible Son, the same Son Himself was sent so as to be visible. Why, therefore, does He say, Neither came I of myself? This, we may now say, is said according to the form of a servant, in the same way as it is said, I judge no man.

If, therefore, the Son is said to be sent insofar as He appeared outwardly in bodily form, while inwardly in His spiritual nature He is always hidden from mortal eyes, it is now easy to understand why the Holy Spirit is also said to be sent. For at the proper time a certain outward appearance through created means was produced, in which the Holy Spirit might be visibly shown—whether when He descended upon the Lord Himself in bodily form as a dove, or when, ten days after His ascension, on the day of Pentecost a sound came suddenly from heaven like a rushing mighty wind, and divided tongues as of fire appeared and rested upon each of them. This work, visibly displayed and presented to mortal eyes, is called the sending of the Holy Spirit. This does not mean that His very substance appeared, in which He Himself is also invisible and unchangeable like the Father and the Son, but rather that human hearts, moved by things seen outwardly, might be turned from the temporal manifestation of Him as coming to His hidden eternity as always present.

10. If, therefore, He is said to be sent, in so far as He appeared outwardly in the bodily creature, who inwardly in His spiritual nature is always hidden from the eyes of mortals, it is now easy to understand also of the Holy Spirit why He too is said to be sent. For in due time a certain outward appearance of the creature was wrought, wherein the Holy Spirit might be visibly shown; whether when He descended upon the Lord Himself in a bodily shape as a dove, or when, ten days having past since His ascension, on the day of Pentecost a sound came suddenly from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and cloven tongues like as of fire were seen upon them, and it sat upon each of them. This operation, visibly exhibited, and presented to mortal eyes, is called the sending of the Holy Spirit; not that His very substance appeared, in which He himself also is invisible and unchangeable, like the Father and the Son, but that the hearts of men, touched by things seen outwardly, might be turned from the manifestation in time of Him as coming to His hidden eternity as ever present.

This is why Scripture nowhere says that the Father is greater than the Holy Spirit, or that the Holy Spirit is less than God the Father. The creature through which the Holy Spirit was to appear was not taken in the same way that the Son of man was taken as the form in which the person of the Word of God Himself would be revealed. This was not so that He might possess the word of God as other holy and wise people have possessed it, but above His fellows. It was not that He possessed the word more than they did, making Him wiser than the rest, but that He was the very Word Himself. For the word in the flesh is one thing, and the Word made flesh is another—that is, the word in man is one thing, but the Word that is man is another. Here "flesh" stands for man, as when it says "the Word was made flesh," and again, "And all flesh shall see the salvation of God." This does not mean flesh without soul and without mind, but "all flesh" is the same as saying "every man." Therefore, the creature through which the Holy Spirit appeared was not taken in the same way that the flesh and human form were taken from the Virgin Mary. For the Spirit did not make the dove, the wind, or the fire blessed and join them forever to Himself and to His person in unity and form. Nor is the nature of the Holy Spirit changeable and mutable, so that these things were made from the creature by Him changing and transforming Himself first into one thing and then into another, as water changes into ice. Rather, these things appeared at the appropriate times, with the creature serving the Creator and being changed and transformed at the command of the One who remains unchangeably in Himself, in order to signify and reveal Him in the way that was fitting for mortal people. Therefore, although that dove is called the Spirit, and speaking of that fire it says, "There appeared unto them cloven tongues, like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them, and they began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance"—showing that the Spirit was manifested by that fire just as by the dove—we still cannot call the Holy Spirit both God and a dove, or both God and fire, in the same way we call the Son both God and man, or as we call the Son the Lamb of God. Not only does John the Baptist say "Behold the Lamb of God," but John the Evangelist also sees the Lamb slain in the Apocalypse. That prophetic vision was not shown to bodily eyes through bodily forms, but in the spirit through spiritual images of bodily things. But whoever saw that dove and that fire saw them with their eyes. Though there may be a question about the fire, whether it was seen with the eyes or in the spirit, because of how the sentence is constructed. The text does not say "They saw cloven tongues like fire," but "There appeared to them." We do not usually say "It appeared to me" with the same meaning as "I saw." In those spiritual visions of bodily images, the usual expressions are both "It appeared to me" and "I saw," but for things shown to the eyes through actual bodily forms, the common expression is not "It appeared to me" but "I saw." Therefore, there may be a question about that fire—how it was seen, whether inwardly in the spirit as if outwardly, or actually outwardly before the eyes of the flesh. But regarding that dove, which is said to have descended in bodily form, no one has ever doubted that it was seen with the eyes. Nor can we call the Spirit a dove or fire in the same way we call the Son a Rock, for it is written, "And that Rock was Christ." That rock was something already created that was called by the name of Christ, whom it signified, according to how it functioned—like the stone placed under Jacob's head and also anointed, which he used to signify the Lord, or as Isaac was Christ when he carried the wood for his own sacrifice. A particular symbolic action was added to these already existing things; they did not, like that dove and fire, suddenly come into being simply in order to signify. The dove and the fire seem to me more like that flame which appeared to Moses in the bush, or that pillar which the people followed in the wilderness, or the thunders and lightnings that came when the Law was given on the mount. For the bodily form of these things came into being for the very purpose of signifying something, and then passing away.

11. It is, then, for this reason nowhere written, that the Father is greater than the Holy Spirit, or that the Holy Spirit is less than God the Father, because the creature in which the Holy Spirit was to appear was not taken in the same way as the Son of man was taken, as the form in which the person of the Word of God Himself should be set forth not that He might possess the word of God, as other holy and wise men have possessed it, but above His fellows; not certainly that He possessed the word more than they, so as to be of more surpassing wisdom than the rest were, but that He was the very Word Himself. For the word in the flesh is one thing, and the Word made flesh is another; i.e. the word in man is one thing, the Word that is man is another. For flesh is put for man, where it is said, The Word was made flesh; and again, And all flesh shall see the salvation of God. For it does not mean flesh without soul and without mind; but all flesh, is the same as if it were said, every man. The creature, then, in which the Holy Spirit should appear, was not so taken, as that flesh and human form were taken, of the Virgin Mary. For the Spirit did not beatify the dove, or the wind, or the fire, and join them for ever to Himself and to His person in unity and fashion. Nor, again, is the nature of the Holy Spirit mutable and changeable; so that these things were not made of the creature, but He himself was turned and changed first into one and then into another, as water is changed into ice. But these things appeared at the seasons at which they ought to have appeared, the creature serving the Creator, and being changed and converted at the command of Him who remains immutably in Himself, in order to signify and manifest Him in such way as it was fit He should be signified and manifested to mortal men. Accordingly, although that dove is called the Spirit; and in speaking of that fire, There appeared unto them, he says, cloven tongues, like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them; and they began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance; in order to show that the Spirit was manifested by that fire, as by the dove; yet we cannot call the Holy Spirit both God and a dove, or both God and fire, in the same way as we call the Son both God and man; nor as we call the Son the Lamb of God; which not only John the Baptist says, Behold the Lamb of God, but also John the Evangelist sees the Lamb slain in the Apocalypse. For that prophetic vision was not shown to bodily eyes through bodily forms, but in the spirit through spiritual images of bodily things. But whosoever saw that dove and that fire, saw them with their eyes. Although it may perhaps be disputed concerning the fire, whether it was seen by the eyes or in the spirit, on account of the form of the sentence. For the text does not say, They saw cloven tongues like fire, but, There appeared to them. But we are not wont to say with the same meaning, It appeared to me; as we say, I saw. And in those spiritual visions of corporeal images the usual expressions are, both, It appeared to me; and, I saw: but in those things which are shown to the eyes through express corporeal forms, the common expression is not, It appeared to me; but, I saw. There may, therefore, be a question raised respecting that fire, how it was seen; whether within in the spirit as it were outwardly, or really outwardly before the eyes of the flesh. But of that dove, which is said to have descended in a bodily form, no one ever doubted that it was seen by the eyes. Nor, again, as we call the Son a Rock (for it is written, And that Rock was Christ), can we so call the Spirit a dove or fire. For that rock was a thing already created, and after the mode of its action was called by the name of Christ, whom it signified; like the stone placed under Jacob's head, and also anointed, which he took in order to signify the Lord; or as Isaac was Christ, when he carried the wood for the sacrifice of himself. A particular significative action was added to those already existing things; they did not, as that dove and fire, suddenly come into being in order simply so to signify. The dove and the fire, indeed, seem to me more like that flame which appeared to Moses in the bush, or that pillar which the people followed in the wilderness, or the thunders and lightnings which came when the Law was given in the mount. For the corporeal form of these things came into being for the very purpose, that it might signify something, and then pass away.

The Holy Spirit, then, is also said to be sent, on account of these bodily forms that came into existence in time, in order to signify and reveal Him as He must be revealed to human senses. Yet He is not said to be less than the Father, as the Son is said to be because He was in the form of a servant. This is because that form of a servant was united to the one person of the Son, but those bodily forms appeared temporarily to show what needed to be shown and then ceased to exist. Why, then, is the Father not also said to be sent through those bodily forms—the fire of the bush, the pillar of cloud or fire, the lightning on the mountain, and whatever other similar things appeared at that time when, as we have learned from Scripture, He spoke face to face with the fathers—if He Himself was revealed through those modes and forms of created things, presented bodily to human sight? But if the Son was revealed through them, why is He said to be sent only much later, when He was made of a woman, as the apostle says: "But when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman," since He was also sent before when He appeared to the fathers through those changeable forms of created things? Or if He cannot rightly be said to be sent unless when the Word was made flesh, why is the Holy Spirit said to be sent, when no such incarnation ever happened with Him? But if through those visible things presented to us in the Law and the prophets, neither the Father nor the Son but the Holy Spirit was revealed, why is He also said to be sent now, when He was sent before in these same ways?

12. The Holy Spirit, then, is also said to be sent, on account of these corporeal forms which came into existence in time, in order to signify and manifest Him, as He must needs be manifested, to human senses; yet He is not said to be less than the Father, as the Son, because He was in the form of a servant, is said to be; because that form of a servant inhered in the unity of the person of the Son, but those corporeal forms appeared for a time, in order to show what was necessary to be shown, and then ceased to be. Why, then, is not the Father also said to be sent, through those corporeal forms, the fire of the bush, and the pillar of cloud or of fire, and the lightnings in the mount, and whatever other things of the kind appeared at that time, when (as we have learned from Scripture testimony) He spoke face to face with the fathers, if He Himself was manifested by those modes and forms of the creature, as exhibited and presented corporeally to human sight? But if the Son was manifested by them, why is He said to be sent so long after, when He was made of a woman, as the apostle says, But when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman, seeing that He was sent also before, when He appeared to the fathers by those changeable forms of the creature? Or if He cannot rightly be said to be sent, unless when the Word was made flesh, why is the Holy Spirit said to be sent, of whom no such incarnation was ever wrought? But if by those visible things, which are put before us in the Law and in the prophets, neither the Father nor the Son but the Holy Spirit was manifested, why also is He said to be sent now, when He was sent also before after these modes?

In the confusion this investigation brings, and with the Lord's help, we must first ask whether the Father, or the Son, or the Holy Spirit—or whether sometimes the Father, sometimes the Son, sometimes the Holy Spirit—or whether it was without any distinction of persons, in the same way that the one and only God is spoken of (that is, the Trinity itself)—appeared to the Fathers through those created forms. Next, whichever of these options turns out to be true or seems true, we must ask whether the creature was fashioned only for this purpose, so that God might be shown to human sight in whatever way He judged suitable at that time, or whether angels who already existed were sent in such a way as to speak in the person of God, taking on a bodily form from the bodily creation for their ministry, as each situation required. Or perhaps, according to the power the Creator has given them, they changed and transformed their own body itself—which is not in authority over them, but which they govern as subject to themselves—into whatever appearances they wished that were suitable and appropriate for their various tasks. Finally, we shall determine what we set out to ask, namely whether the Son and the Holy Spirit were also sent before, and if they were sent, what difference there is between that sending and the one we read about in the Gospel. Or whether in truth neither of them was sent except when the Son was made of the Virgin Mary, or when the Holy Spirit appeared in a visible form, whether as the dove or as tongues of fire.

13. In the perplexity of this inquiry, the Lord helping us, we must ask, first, whether the Father, or the Son, or the Holy Spirit; or whether, sometimes the Father, sometimes the Son, sometimes the Holy Spirit; or whether it was without any distinction of persons, in such way as the one and only God is spoken of, that is, that the Trinity itself appeared to the Fathers by those forms of the creature. Next, whichever of these alternatives shall have been found or thought true, whether for this purpose only the creature was fashioned, wherein God, as He judged it suitable at that time, should be shown to human sight; or whether angels, who already existed, were so sent, as to speak in the person of God, taking a corporeal form from the corporeal creature, for the purpose of their ministry, as each had need; or else, according to the power the Creator has given them, changing and converting their own body itself, to which they are not subject, but govern it as subject to themselves, into whatever appearances they would that were suited and apt to their several actions. Lastly, we shall discern that which it was our purpose to ask, viz. whether the Son and the Holy Spirit were also sent before; and, if they were so sent, what difference there is between that sending, and the one which we read of in the Gospel; or whether in truth neither of them were sent, except when either the Son was made of the Virgin Mary, or the Holy Spirit appeared in a visible form, whether in the dove or in tongues of fire.

Let us therefore say nothing of those who, with an overly carnal mind, have thought that the nature of the Word of God and the Wisdom—which, remaining in herself, makes all things new, and whom we call the only Son of God—is not only changeable but also visible. These people approach the investigation of divine things with more audacity than genuine religion, bringing a very dull heart to the task. The soul is a spiritual substance, and it was made—and could only have been made by Him through whom all things were made and without whom nothing is made. Although the soul is changeable, it is not visible. Yet these people have believed that the Word Himself and the Wisdom of God itself, by which the soul was made, shares this same character. But this Wisdom is not only invisible, as the soul also is, but also unchangeable, which the soul is not. This unchangeableness is precisely what is referred to when it was said, Remaining in herself she makes all things new. Nevertheless, these people try to support their collapsing error with testimonies from the divine Scriptures by citing the words of the Apostle Paul. They take what is said of the one only God—in whom the Trinity itself is understood—to be said only of the Father, and not of the Son or the Holy Spirit: Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honor and glory for ever and ever; and that other passage, The blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; who only has immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man has seen, nor can see. How these passages are to be understood, I think we have already discussed sufficiently.

14. Let us therefore say nothing of those who, with an over carnal mind, have thought the nature of the Word of God, and the Wisdom, which, remaining in herself, makes all things new, whom we call the only Son of God, not only to be changeable, but also to be visible. For these, with more audacity than religion, bring a very dull heart to the inquiry into divine things. For whereas the soul is a spiritual substance, and whereas itself also was made, yet could not be made by any other than by Him by whom all things were made, and without whom nothing is made, it, although changeable, is yet not visible; and this they have believed to be the case with the Word Himself and with the Wisdom of God itself, by which the soul was made; whereas this Wisdom is not only invisible, as the soul also is, but likewise unchangeable, which the soul is not. It is in truth the same unchangeableness in it, which is referred to when it was said, Remaining in herself she makes all things new. Yet these people, endeavoring, as it were, to prop up their error in its fall by testimonies of the divine Scriptures, adduce the words of the Apostle Paul; and take that, which is said of the one only God, in whom the Trinity itself is understood, to be said only of the Father, and neither of the Son nor of the Holy Spirit: Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honor and glory for ever and ever; and that other passage, The blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; who only has immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man has seen, nor can see. How these passages are to be understood, I think we have already discoursed sufficiently.

Those who insist these texts apply only to the Father and not to the Son or the Holy Spirit claim that the Son is visible not merely by taking flesh from the Virgin, but was visible beforehand in Himself. They say He appeared to the eyes of the Fathers. If you tell them that whatever makes the Son visible in Himself would also make Him mortal in Himself, so that the statement "Who only has immortality" would also apply only to the Father, and if the Son is mortal because He took on our flesh, then they should admit He is also visible because of this flesh, they respond that they do not say the Son is mortal because of the flesh. Rather, just as He was visible before, so He was also mortal before. If they said the Son is mortal from taking our flesh, then the Father alone would not have immortality without the Son, because His Word, by which all things were made, would also have immortality. He did not lose His immortality by taking mortal flesh, just as the human soul cannot die with the body, since the Lord Himself says, "Fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul." Surely the Holy Spirit did not take flesh. They will certainly have difficulty explaining, if the Son is mortal because He took our flesh, how they understand that the Father alone has immortality without the Son and the Holy Spirit, since the Holy Spirit did not take our flesh. If the Holy Spirit does not have immortality, then the Son is not mortal because of taking our flesh. But if the Holy Spirit has immortality, then "Who only has immortality" is not said only of the Father. Therefore they think they can prove that the Son in Himself was mortal even before the incarnation, because changeableness itself can properly be called mortality, according to which the soul is also said to die. This is not because it is changed and turned into body or some other substance, but because whatever in its own substance exists in a different mode than it once was is found to be mortal, insofar as it has ceased to be what it was. Because the Son of God, they say, before He was born of the Virgin Mary, appeared to our fathers not in one and the same form only, but in many forms, first in one form, then in another, He is both visible in Himself, because His substance was visible to mortal eyes when He had not yet taken our flesh, and mortal, inasmuch as He is changeable. The same applies to the Holy Spirit, who appeared at one time as a dove and another time as fire. Therefore, they say, the following texts do not belong to the Trinity but belong singularly and properly to the Father only: "Now unto the King eternal, immortal, and invisible, the only wise God," and "Who only has immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man has seen, nor can see."

15. But they who will have these texts understood only of the Father, and not of the Son or the Holy Spirit, declare the Son to be visible, not by having taken flesh of the Virgin, but aforetime also in Himself. For He Himself, they say, appeared to the eyes of the Fathers. And if you say to them, In whatever manner, then, the Son is visible in Himself, in that manner also He is mortal in Himself; so that it plainly follows that you would have this saying also understood only of the Father, viz., Who only has immortality; for if the Son is mortal from having taken upon Him our flesh, then allow that it is on account of this flesh that He is also visible: they reply, that it is not on account of this flesh that they say that the Son is mortal; but that, just as He was also before visible, so He was also before mortal. For if they say the Son is mortal from having taken our flesh, then it is not the Father alone without the Son who has immortality; because His Word also has immortality, by which all things were made. For He did not therefore lose His immortality, because He took mortal flesh; seeing that it could not happen even to the human soul, that it should die with the body, when the Lord Himself says, Fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul. Or, forsooth, also the Holy Spirit took flesh: concerning whom certainly they will, without doubt, be troubled to say — if the Son is mortal on account of taking our flesh — in what manner they understand that the Father only has immortality without the Son and the Holy Spirit, since, indeed, the Holy Spirit did not take our flesh; and if He has not immortality, then the Son is not mortal on account of taking our flesh; but if the Holy Spirit has immortality, then it is not said only of the Father, Who only has immortality. And therefore they think they are able to prove that the Son in Himself was mortal also before the incarnation, because changeableness itself is not unfitly called mortality, according to which the soul also is said to die; not because it is changed and turned into body, or into some substance other than itself, but because, whatever in its own selfsame substance is now after another mode than it once was, is discovered to be mortal, in so far as it has ceased to be what it was. Because then, say they, before the Son of God was born of the Virgin Mary, He Himself appeared to our fathers, not in one and the same form only, but in many forms; first in one form, then in another; He is both visible in Himself, because His substance was visible to mortal eyes, when He had not yet taken our flesh, and mortal, inasmuch as He is changeable. And so also the Holy Spirit, who appeared at one time as a dove, and another time as fire. Whence, they say, the following texts do not belong to the Trinity, but singularly and properly to the Father only: Now unto the King eternal, immortal, and invisible, the only wise God; and, Who only has immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man has seen, nor can see.

Setting aside those thinkers who are unable to understand even the nature of the soul, which is invisible, and therefore are extremely far from understanding that the ousia of the one and only God—that is, the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit—remains always not only invisible but also unchangeable, and therefore possesses true and real immortality; let us, who deny that God, whether the Father, or the Son, or the Holy Spirit, ever appeared to bodily eyes except through the corporeal creation made subject to His own power; let us—ready to be corrected if we are reproved in a brotherly and honest spirit, ready to be so even if criticized by an enemy, as long as he speaks the truth—in catholic peace and with peaceful study inquire whether God appeared without distinction to our fathers before Christ came in the flesh, or whether it was any one person of the Trinity, or whether they appeared individually, as if taking turns.

16. Passing by, then, these reasoners, who are unable to know the substance even of the soul, which is invisible, and therefore are very far indeed from knowing that the substance of the one and only God, that is, the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, remains ever not only invisible, but also unchangeable, and that hence it possesses true and real immortality; let us, who deny that God, whether the Father, or the Son, or the Holy Spirit, ever appeared to bodily eyes, unless through the corporeal creature made subject to His own power; let us, I say — ready to be corrected, if we are reproved in a fraternal and upright spirit, ready to be so, even if carped at by an enemy, so that he speak the truth — in catholic peace and with peaceful study inquire, whether God indiscriminately appeared to our fathers before Christ came in the flesh, or whether it was any one person of the Trinity, or whether severally, as it were by turns.

And first, concerning what is written in Genesis—that God spoke with the man He had formed from dust—if we set aside the figurative meaning and treat the narrative as trustworthy even in its literal sense, it appears that God spoke with man in the appearance of a man. This is not explicitly stated in the book, but the general flow of the reading suggests this sense, especially in the passage where Adam heard the voice of the Lord God walking in the garden in the cool of the evening and hid himself among the trees of the garden. When God said, "Adam, where are you?" Adam replied, "I heard Your voice, and I was afraid because I was naked, and I hid myself from Your face." I do not see how such walking and conversation of God can be understood literally unless He appeared as a man. We cannot say that only a voice of God was produced when God is said to have walked, nor that He who was walking in a place was invisible, since Adam says he hid himself from the face of God. Who then was He? The Father, the Son, or the Holy Spirit? Did God the Trinity Himself speak to man in human form without distinction? The flow of Scripture itself nowhere seems to indicate a change from person to person. Rather, it seems that the same one who said "Let there be light" and "Let there be a firmament," and so on through each of those days, continues speaking to the first man. We usually understand this to be God the Father, creating by a word whatever He willed to create. For He made all things by His Word, which Word we know, according to the correct rule of faith, to be His only Son. If, therefore, God the Father spoke to the first man, and He Himself was walking in the garden in the cool of the evening, and if it was from His face that the sinner hid himself among the trees of the garden, why should we not continue to understand that it was He also who appeared to Abraham and to Moses, and to whomever He chose, and in whatever manner He chose, through the changeable and visible creation subjected to Himself, while He Himself remains in Himself and in His own substance, in which He is unchangeable and invisible? But perhaps Scripture passed over from person to person in a hidden way, and while it had related that the Father said "Let there be light" and the rest which it mentioned Him doing by the Word, it went on to indicate the Son as speaking to the first man—not revealing this openly, but suggesting it for understanding by those who could grasp it.

17. And first, in that which is written in Genesis, viz., that God spoke with man whom He had formed out of the dust; if we set apart the figurative meaning, and treat it so as to place faith in the narrative even in the letter, it should appear that God then spoke with man in the appearance of a man. This is not indeed expressly laid down in the book, but the general tenor of its reading sounds in this sense, especially in that which is written, that Adam heard the voice of the Lord God, walking in the garden in the cool of the evening, and hid himself among the trees of the garden; and when God said, Adam, where are you? replied, I heard Your voice, and I was afraid because I was naked, and I hid myself from Your face. For I do not see how such a walking and conversation of God can be understood literally, except He appeared as a man. For it can neither be said that a voice only of God was framed, when God is said to have walked, or that He who was walking in a place was not visible; while Adam, too, says that he hid himself from the face of God. Who then was He? Whether the Father, or the Son, or the Holy Spirit? Whether altogether indiscriminately did God the Trinity Himself speak to man in the form of man? The context, indeed, itself of the Scripture nowhere, it should seem, indicates a change from person to person; but He seems still to speak to the first man, who said, Let there be light, and, Let there be a firmament, and so on through each of those days; whom we usually take to be God the Father, making by a word whatever He willed to make. For He made all things by His word, which Word we know, by the right rule of faith, to be His only Son. If, therefore, God the Father spoke to the first man, and Himself was walking in the garden in the cool of the evening, and if it was from His face that the sinner hid himself among the trees of the garden, why are we not to go on to understand that it was He also who appeared to Abraham and to Moses, and to whom He would, and how He would, through the changeable and visible creature, subjected to Himself, while He Himself remains in Himself and in His own substance, in which He is unchangeable and invisible? But, possibly, it might be that the Scripture passed over in a hidden way from person to person, and while it had related that the Father said Let there be light, and the rest which it mentioned Him to have done by the Word, went on to indicate the Son as speaking to the first man; not unfolding this openly, but intimating it to be understood by those who could understand it.

Let the person who has the ability to penetrate this mystery with his mind's eye—so that it becomes clear to him whether the Father is also able, or whether only the Son and Holy Spirit are able, to appear to human eyes through a visible creature—let him, I say, go ahead and examine these things if he can, or even express and discuss them in words. But as far as this particular Scripture passage is concerned, where God spoke with man, I do not think we can determine the answer, because it does not clearly show whether Adam normally saw God with his bodily eyes. This is especially true since there is a major question about what kind of eyes were opened when they ate the forbidden fruit, since before they ate, these eyes were closed. However, even if Scripture indicates that Paradise was a physical place, I would not rashly claim that God could only have walked there in some bodily form. For it could be argued that only words were created for the man to hear, without his seeing any form. And just because it is written that Adam hid himself from the face of God, it does not automatically follow that he normally saw His face. For what if Adam himself could not see, but was afraid of being seen by God, whose voice he had heard and whose presence he had sensed as God walked? For Cain also said to God, "From Your face I will hide myself," yet we are not therefore forced to admit that he was accustomed to seeing the face of God with his bodily eyes in any visible form, although he had heard the voice of God questioning and speaking with him about his sin. But what kind of speech it was that God then uttered to the outward ears of men, especially in speaking to the first man, is both difficult to discover, and we have not set out to explain it in this discussion. But if only words and sounds were produced to create some sensible presence of God to those first men, I do not know why I should not understand this as the person of God the Father, since His person is also manifested in that voice when Jesus appeared in glory on the mountain before the three disciples, and in that voice when the dove descended upon Him at His baptism, and in that voice where He cried to the Father concerning His own glorification and was answered, "I have both glorified, and will glorify again." This does not mean that the voice could be produced without the work of the Son and of the Holy Spirit (since the Trinity works indivisibly), but rather that such a voice was produced so as to manifest the person of the Father only—just as the Trinity produced that human form from the Virgin Mary, yet it is the person of the Son alone, for the invisible Trinity produced the visible person of the Son alone. Nor does anything prevent us from understanding those words spoken to Adam not only as spoken by the Trinity, but also as manifesting the person of that Trinity. For we are compelled to understand as referring to the Father only what is said: "This is my beloved Son." For Jesus can neither be believed nor understood to be the Son of the Holy Spirit, or even His own Son. And where the voice said, "I have both glorified, and will glorify again," we acknowledge it was only the person of the Father, since it is the answer to the Lord's words when He had said, "Father, glorify your Son," which He could only say to God the Father alone, and not also to the Holy Spirit, whose Son He was not. But here, where it is written, "And the Lord God said to Adam," no reason can be given why the Trinity itself should not be understood.

18. Let him, then, who has the strength whereby he can penetrate this secret with his mind's eye, so that to him it appears clearly, either that the Father also is able, or that only the Son and Holy Spirit are able, to appear to human eyes through a visible creature; let him, I say, proceed to examine these things if he can, or even to express and handle them in words; but the thing itself, so far as concerns this testimony of Scripture, where God spoke with man, is, in my judgment, not discoverable, because it does not evidently appear even whether Adam usually saw God with the eyes of his body; especially as it is a great question what manner of eyes it was that were opened when they tasted the forbidden fruit; for before they had tasted, these eyes were closed. Yet I would not rashly assert, even if that scripture implies Paradise to have been a material place, that God could not have walked there in any way except in some bodily form. For it might be said, that only words were framed for the man to hear, without seeing any form. Neither, because it is written, Adam hid himself from the face of God, does it follow immediately that he usually saw His face. For what if he himself indeed could not see, but feared to be himself seen by Him whose voice he had heard, and had felt His presence as he walked? For Cain, too, said to God, From Your face I will hide myself; yet we are not therefore compelled to admit that he was wont to behold the face of God with his bodily eyes in any visible form, although he had heard the voice of God questioning and speaking with him of his sin. But what manner of speech it was that God then uttered to the outward ears of men, especially in speaking to the first man, it is both difficult to discover, and we have not undertaken to say in this discourse. But if words alone and sounds were wrought, by which to bring about some sensible presence of God to those first men, I do not know why I should not there understand the person of God the Father, seeing that His person is manifested also in that voice, when Jesus appeared in glory on the mount before the three disciples; and in that when the dove descended upon Him at His baptism; and in that where He cried to the Father concerning His own glorification and it was answered Him, I have both glorified, and will glorify again. Not that the voice could be wrought without the work of the Son and of the Holy Spirit (since the Trinity works indivisibly), but that such a voice was wrought as to manifest the person of the Father only; just as the Trinity wrought that human form from the Virgin Mary, yet it is the person of the Son alone; for the invisible Trinity wrought the visible person of the Son alone. Neither does anything forbid us, not only to understand those words spoken to Adam as spoken by the Trinity, but also to take them as manifesting the person of that Trinity. For we are compelled to understand of the Father only, that which is said, This is my beloved Son. For Jesus can neither be believed nor understood to be the Son of the Holy Spirit, or even His own Son. And where the voice uttered, I have both glorified, and will glorify again, we confess it was only the person of the Father; since it is the answer to that word of the Lord, in which He had said, Father, glorify your Son, which He could not say except to God the Father only, and not also to the Holy Spirit, whose Son He was not. But here, where it is written, And the Lord God said to Adam, no reason can be given why the Trinity itself should not be understood.

Similarly, in the passage that says "Now the Lord had said to Abraham, Get you out of your country, and from your kindred, and your father's house," it is not clear whether only a voice came to Abraham's ears or whether something also appeared to his eyes. But shortly afterward, it is stated somewhat more clearly, "And the Lord appeared unto Abraham, and said, Unto your seed will I give this land." Yet even there it is not explicitly stated in what form God appeared to him, or whether the Father, or the Son, or the Holy Spirit appeared to him. Perhaps some think it was the Son who appeared to Abraham because it is not written "God appeared to him" but "the Lord appeared to him." For the Son seems to be called the Lord as if that name belonged especially to Him, as for example the apostle says, "For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many and lords many,) but to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by Him." But since we find that God the Father is also called Lord in many places—for instance, "The Lord has said to me, You are my Son; this day have I begotten You"; and again, "The Lord said to my Lord, Sit at my right hand"; since also the Holy Spirit is found to be called Lord, as where the apostle says, "Now the Lord is that Spirit"; and then, lest anyone should think the Son is meant and is called the Spirit because of His incorporeal substance, he continues by saying, "And where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty"; and no one ever doubted that the Spirit of the Lord is the Holy Spirit—therefore, even here it does not appear plainly whether it was any person of the Trinity that appeared to Abraham, or God Himself the Trinity, of which one God it is said, "You shall fear the Lord your God, and Him only shall you serve." But under the oak at Mamre he saw three men, whom he invited, hospitably received, and served as they ate. Yet Scripture at the beginning of that account does not say "three men appeared to him" but "The Lord appeared to him." And then, explaining in proper order how the Lord appeared to him, it adds the account of the three men, whom Abraham invites to his hospitality using the plural, and afterwards speaks to them in the singular as one person; and as one He promises him a son by Sarah, namely the one whom Scripture calls Lord, as at the beginning of the same account, "The Lord," it says, "appeared to Abraham." So he invites them, washes their feet, and escorts them at their departure as though they were men; but he speaks as with the Lord God, both when a son is promised to him and when the destruction about to come upon Sodom is shown to him.

19. Likewise, also, in that which is written, Now the Lord had said to Abraham, Get you out of your country, and from your kindred, and your father's house, it is not clear whether a voice alone came to the ears of Abraham, or whether anything also appeared to his eyes. But a little while after, it is somewhat more clearly said, And the Lord appeared unto Abraham, and said, Unto your seed will I give this land. But neither there is it expressly said in what form God appeared to him, or whether the Father, or the Son, or the Holy Spirit appeared to him. Unless, perhaps, they think that it was the Son who appeared to Abraham, because it is not written, God appeared to him, but the Lord appeared to him. For the Son seems to be called the Lord as though the name was appropriated to Him; as e.g. the apostle says, For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many and lords many,) but to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by Him. But since it is found that God the Father also is called Lord in many places — for instance, The Lord has said to me, You are my Son; this day have I begotten You; and again, The Lord said to my Lord, Sit at my right hand; since also the Holy Spirit is found to be called Lord, as where the apostle says, Now the Lord is that Spirit; and then, lest any one should think the Son to be signified, and to be called the Spirit on account of His incorporeal substance, has gone on to say, And where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty; and no one ever doubted the Spirit of the Lord to be the Holy Spirit: therefore, neither here does it appear plainly whether it was any person of the Trinity that appeared to Abraham, or God Himself the Trinity, of which one God it is said, You shall fear the Lord your God, and Him only shall you serve. But under the oak at Mamre he saw three men, whom he invited, and hospitably received, and ministered to them as they feasted. Yet Scripture at the beginning of that narrative does not say, three men appeared to him, but, The Lord appeared to him. And then, setting forth in due order after what manner the Lord appeared to him, it has added the account of the three men, whom Abraham invites to his hospitality in the plural number, and afterwards speaks to them in the singular number as one; and as one He promises him a son by Sara, viz. the one whom the Scripture calls Lord, as in the beginning of the same narrative, The Lord, it says, appeared to Abraham. He invites them then, and washes their feet, and leads them forth at their departure, as though they were men; but he speaks as with the Lord God, whether when a son is promised to him, or when the destruction is shown to him that was impending over Sodom.

That passage of Scripture requires neither a slight nor a passing consideration. For if one man had appeared, what else would those who say that the Son was visible also in His own substance before He was born of the Virgin immediately cry out, except that it was Himself? Since it is said, they argue, of the Father, "To the only invisible God." And yet I could still go on to ask, in what manner was He found in fashion as a man before He had taken our flesh, seeing that His feet were washed and that He fed upon earthly food? How could that be, when He was still in the form of God and thought it not robbery to be equal with God? For had He already emptied Himself, taking upon Him the form of a servant, and made in the likeness of men, and found in fashion as a man? We know when it was that He did this through His birth of the Virgin. How, then, before He had done this, did He appear as one man to Abraham? Or was that form not a reality? I could pose these questions if it had been one man who appeared to Abraham, and if that one were believed to be the Son of God. But since three men appeared, and no one of them is said to be greater than the rest either in form, or age, or power, why should we not understand here, as visibly indicated by the visible creature, the equality of the Trinity and one and the same substance in three persons?

20. That place of Scripture demands neither a slight nor a passing consideration. For if one man had appeared, what else would those at once cry out, who say that the Son was visible also in His own substance before He was born of the Virgin, but that it was Himself? Since it is said, they say, of the Father, To the only invisible God. And yet, I could still go on to demand, in what manner He was found in fashion as a man, before He had taken our flesh, seeing that his feet were washed, and that He fed upon earthly food? How could that be, when He was still in the form of God, and thought it not robbery to be equal with God? For, pray, had He already emptied Himself, taking upon Him the form of a servant, and made in the likeness of men, and found in fashion as a man? when we know when it was that He did this through His birth of the Virgin. How, then, before He had done this, did He appear as one man to Abraham? Or, was not that form a reality? I could put these questions, if it had been one man that appeared to Abraham, and if that one were believed to be the Son of God. But since three men appeared, and no one of them is said to be greater than the rest either in form, or age, or power, why should we not here understand, as visibly intimated by the visible creature, the equality of the Trinity, and one and the same substance in three persons?

For, in case anyone should think that one among the three was indicated to be the greater, and that this one should be understood to have been the Lord, the Son of God, while the other two were His angels (because, although three appeared, Abraham speaks to one as the Lord), Holy Scripture has not forgotten to anticipate such future thoughts and opinions by contradicting them. A little while after, Scripture says that two angels came to Lot, among whom that righteous man, who deserved to be freed from the burning of Sodom, also speaks to one as to the Lord. For Scripture continues to say, "And the Lord went His way, as soon as He left communing with Abraham; and Abraham returned to his place."

21. For, lest any one should think that one among the three is in this way intimated to have been the greater, and that this one is to be understood to have been the Lord, the Son of God, while the other two were His angels; because, whereas three appeared, Abraham there speaks to one as the Lord: Holy Scripture has not forgotten to anticipate, by a contradiction, such future cogitations and opinions, when a little while after it says that two angels came to Lot, among whom that just man also, who deserved to be freed from the burning of Sodom, speaks to one as to the Lord. For so Scripture goes on to say, And the Lord went His way, as soon as He left communing with Abraham; and Abraham returned to his place.

But there came two angels to Sodom at even. Here, what I have begun to set forth must be considered more carefully. Certainly Abraham was speaking with three and called that one, in the singular, the Lord. Perhaps someone may say he recognized one of the three to be the Lord, but the other two His angels. What, then, does it mean when Scripture goes on to say, And the Lord went His way, as soon as He had left communing with Abraham; and Abraham returned to his place: and there came two angels to Sodom at even? Are we to suppose that the one who, among the three, was recognized as the Lord, had departed and had sent the two angels who were with Him to destroy Sodom? Let us see, then, what follows. There came, it is said, two angels to Sodom at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom: and Lot seeing them, rose up to meet them; and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground; and he said, Behold now, my lords, turn in, I pray you, into your servant's house. Here it is clear both that there were two angels and that in the plural they were invited to receive hospitality, and that they were respectfully called lords, when they were perhaps thought to be men.

But there came two angels to Sodom at even. Here, what I have begun to set forth must be considered more attentively. Certainly Abraham was speaking with three, and called that one, in the singular number, the Lord. Perhaps, some one may say, he recognized one of the three to be the Lord, but the other two His angels. What, then, does that mean which Scripture goes on to say, And the Lord went His way, as soon as He had left communing with Abraham; and Abraham returned to his place: and there came two angels to Sodom at even? Are we to suppose that the one who, among the three, was recognized as the Lord, had departed, and had sent the two angels that were with Him to destroy Sodom? Let us see, then, what follows. There came, it is said, two angels to Sodom at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom: and Lot seeing them, rose up to meet them; and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground; and he said, Behold now, my lords, turn in, I pray you, into your servant's house. Here it is clear, both that there were two angels, and that in the plural number they were invited to partake of hospitality, and that they were honorably designated lords, when they perchance were thought to be men.

Yet again, it is objected that unless they were known to be angels of God, Lot would not have bowed himself with his face to the ground. Why, then, is hospitality and food offered to them, as if they needed such human help? But whatever may be hidden here, let us now continue with what we have set out to do. Two appear; both are called angels; they are invited in the plural; he speaks with the two in the plural, until the departure from Sodom. And then Scripture goes on to say, And it came to pass, when they had brought them forth abroad, that they said, Escape for your life; look not behind you, neither stay in all the plain; escape to the mountain, and there you shall be saved, lest you be consumed. And Lot said to them, Oh! not so, my lord: behold now, your servant has found grace in your sight, etc. What does it mean that he says to them, Oh! not so, my lord, if He who was the Lord had already departed and had sent the angels? Why is it said, Oh! not so, my lord, and not, Oh! not so, my lords? Or if he wanted to speak to one of them, why does Scripture say, But Lot said to them, Oh! not so, my lord: behold now, your servant has found grace in your sight, etc.? Are we here also to understand two persons in the plural number, but when the two are addressed as one, then the one Lord God of one substance? But which two persons do we understand here—of the Father and of the Son, or of the Father and of the Holy Spirit, or of the Son and of the Holy Spirit? The last is perhaps more suitable, for they said of themselves that they were sent, which is what we say of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. For we find nowhere in the Scriptures that the Father was sent.

22. Yet, again, it is objected that except they were known to be angels of God, Lot would not have bowed himself with his face to the ground. Why, then, is both hospitality and food offered to them, as though they wanted such human succor? But whatever may here lie hidden, let us now pursue that which we have undertaken. Two appear; both are called angels; they are invited plurally; he speaks as with two plurally, until the departure from Sodom. And then Scripture goes on to say, And it came to pass, when they had brought them forth abroad, that they said, Escape for your life; look not behind you, neither stay in all the plain; escape to the mountain, and there you shall be saved, lest you be consumed. And Lot said to them, Oh! not so, my lord: behold now, your servant has found grace in your sight, etc. What is meant by his saying to them, Oh! not so, my lord, if He who was the Lord had already departed, and had sent the angels? Why is it said, Oh! not so, my lord, and not, Oh! not so, my lords? Or if he wished to speak to one of them, why does Scripture say, But Lot said to them, Oh! not so, my lord: behold now, your servant has found grace in your sight, etc.? Are we here, too, to understand two persons in the plural number, but when the two are addressed as one, then the one Lord God of one substance? But which two persons do we here understand?– of the Father and of the Son, or of the Father and of the Holy Spirit, or of the Son and of the Holy Spirit? The last, perhaps, is the more suitable; for they said of themselves that they were sent, which is that which we say of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. For we find nowhere in the Scriptures that the Father was sent.

When Moses was sent to lead the children of Israel out of Egypt, it is written that the Lord appeared to him this way: Moses was keeping the flock of his father-in-law Jethro, the priest of Midian, and he led the flock to the far side of the desert and came to the mountain of God, to Horeb. And the Angel of the Lord appeared to him in a flame of fire from the middle of a bush. He looked and saw that the bush was burning with fire, but the bush was not consumed. Moses said, "I will turn aside and see this great sight, why the bush is not burned." When the Lord saw that he turned aside to see, God called to him from the middle of the bush and said, "I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob." Here also He is first called the Angel of the Lord, and then God. Was an angel, then, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob? Therefore He may rightly be understood to be the Savior Himself, about whom the apostle says, "Whose are the fathers, and from whom according to the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed forever." He, therefore, who is over all, God blessed forever, is reasonably understood here also to be Himself the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. But why is He previously called the Angel of the Lord when He appeared in a flame of fire from the bush? Was it because it was one of many angels who by an economy (a dispensation or arrangement) carried the prosopon of his Lord? Or was something from creation assumed by Him in order to bring about a visible appearance for the task at hand, and so that words might be audibly spoken from there, whereby the presence of the Lord might be shown in a fitting way to the bodily senses of man by means of the created order made subject? For if he was one of the angels, who could easily say whether it was the prosopon of the Son that was imposed upon him to announce, or that of the Holy Spirit, or that of God the Father, or altogether of the Trinity itself, who is the one and only God, so that he might say, "I am the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob"? For we cannot say that the Son of God is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, but the Father is not; nor will anyone dare to deny that either the Holy Spirit or the Trinity itself, whom we believe and understand to be the one God, is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. For whoever is not God is not the God of those fathers. Furthermore, if not only the Father is God, as everyone, even heretics, admit, but also the Son—which, whether they want to or not, they are compelled to acknowledge, since the apostle says, "who is over all, God blessed forever"—and the Holy Spirit—since the same apostle says, "Therefore glorify God in your body," after having said earlier, "Do you not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit, which is in you, which you have from God?"—and these three are one God, as Catholic soundness believes, then it is not sufficiently clear which prosopon of the Trinity that angel carried, if he was one of the other angels, and whether any prosopon at all, rather than that of the Trinity itself. But if the creature was assumed for the purpose of the task at hand, in order both to appear to human eyes and to sound in human ears, and to be called the Angel of the Lord, and the Lord, and God, then God cannot here be understood to be the Father, but either the Son or the Holy Spirit. Although I cannot recall that the Holy Spirit is anywhere else called an angel, yet this may be understood from His work; for it is said of Him, "And He will show you things to come," and "angel" in Greek is certainly equivalent to "messenger" in Latin. But we read most clearly in the prophet that the Lord Jesus Christ is called the Angel of Great Counsel, while both the Holy Spirit and the Son of God is God and Lord of the angels.

23. But when Moses was sent to lead the children of Israel out of Egypt, it is written that the Lord appeared to him thus: Now Moses kept the flock of Jethro his father-in-law, the priest of Midian: and he led the flock to the back side of the desert, and came to the mountain of God, even to Horeb. And the Angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a flame of fire, out of the midst of a bush; and he looked, and, behold, the bush burned with fire, and the bush was not consumed. And Moses said, I will now turn aside, and see this great sight, why the bush is not burnt. And when the Lord saw that he turned aside to see, God called unto him out of the midst of the bush, and said, I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. He is here also first called the Angel of the Lord, and then God. Was an angel, then, the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? Therefore He may be rightly understood to be the Saviour Himself, of whom the apostle says, Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed forever. He, therefore, who is over all, God blessed for ever, is not unreasonably here understood also to be Himself the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. But why is He previously called the Angel of the Lord, when He appeared in a flame of fire out of the bush? Was it because it was one of many angels, who by an economy [or arrangement] bare the person of his Lord? Or was something of the creature assumed by Him in order to bring about a visible appearance for the business in hand, and that words might thence be audibly uttered, whereby the presence of the Lord might be shown, in such way as was fitting, to the corporeal senses of man, by means of the creature made subject? For if he was one of the angels, who could easily affirm whether it was the person of the Son which was imposed upon him to announce, or that of the Holy Spirit, or that of God the Father, or altogether of the Trinity itself, who is the one and only God, in order that he might say, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? For we cannot say that the Son of God is the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, and that the Father is not; nor will any one dare to deny that either the Holy Spirit, or the Trinity itself, whom we believe and understand to be the one God, is the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. For he who is not God, is not the God of those fathers. Furthermore, if not only the Father is God, as all, even heretics, admit; but also the Son, which, whether they will or not, they are compelled to acknowledge, since the apostle says, Who is over all, God blessed for ever; and the Holy Spirit, since the same apostle says, Therefore glorify God in your body; when he had said above, Do you not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost, which is in you, which you have of God? and these three are one God, as Catholic soundness believes: it is not sufficiently apparent which person of the Trinity that angel bare, if he was one of the rest of the angels, and whether any person, and not rather that of the Trinity itself. But if the creature was assumed for the purpose of the business in hand, whereby both to appear to human eyes, and to sound in human ears, and to be called the Angel of the Lord, and the Lord, and God; then cannot God here be understood to be the Father, but either the Son or the Holy Spirit. Although I cannot call to mind that the Holy Spirit is anywhere else called an angel, which yet may be understood from His work; for it is said of Him, And He will show you things to come; and angel in Greek is certainly equivalent to messenger in Latin: but we read most evidently of the Lord Jesus Christ in the prophet, that He is called the Angel of Great Counsel, while both the Holy Spirit and the Son of God is God and Lord of the angels.

Also, regarding the departure of the children of Israel from Egypt, it is written, "And the Lord went before them, by day in a pillar of cloud to lead them the way, and by night in a pillar of fire. He took not away the pillar of cloud by day, nor the pillar of fire by night, from before the people." Here too, who would doubt that God appeared to the eyes of mortal human beings through the bodily creature made subject to Him, and not through His own substance? But it is not equally clear whether it was the Father, or the Son, or the Holy Spirit, or the Trinity itself, the one God. Nor is this distinguished in that passage either, in my judgment, where it is written, "The glory of the Lord appeared in the cloud," and "the Lord spoke unto Moses, saying, I have heard the murmurings of the children of Israel," and so forth.

24. Also in the going forth of the children of Israel from Egypt it is written, And the Lord went before them, by day in a pillar of cloud to lead them the way, and by night in a pillar of fire. He took not away the pillar of the cloud by day, nor the pillar of fire by night, from before the people. Who here, too, would doubt that God appeared to the eyes of mortal men by the corporeal creature made subject to Him, and not by His own substance? But it is not similarly apparent whether the Father, or the Son, or the Holy Spirit, or the Trinity itself, the one God. Nor is this distinguished there either, in my judgment, where it is written, The glory of the Lord appeared in the cloud, and the Lord spoke unto Moses, saying, I have heard the murmurings of the children of Israel, etc.

But now concerning the clouds, voices, lightning, trumpet, and smoke on Mount Sinai, when it was said, "And Mount Sinai was completely covered in smoke, because the Lord descended upon it in fire, and its smoke rose up like the smoke of a furnace; and all the people who were in the camp trembled; and when the sound of the trumpet grew long and louder and louder, Moses spoke, and God answered him with a voice." And a little later, after the Law had been given in the ten commandments, the text continues, "And all the people saw the thunder and the lightning and the noise of the trumpet and the mountain smoking." And a little after that, "And when the people saw it, they moved back and stood at a distance, and Moses drew near to the thick darkness where God was, and the Lord said to Moses," etc. What should I say about this, except that no one can be so foolish as to believe that the smoke, fire, cloud, darkness, and whatever else of this kind, were the ousia of the Word and Wisdom of God, which is Christ, or of the Holy Spirit? For not even the Arians ever dared to say that these were the ousia of God the Father. All these things, then, were produced through the created order serving the Creator, and were presented through a fitting dispensatio to human senses—unless perhaps, because it says, "And Moses drew near to the cloud where God was," fleshly thinking must insist that the cloud was indeed seen by the people, but that within the cloud Moses saw the Son of God with his physical eyes, whom foolish heretics insist can be seen in His own ousia. As if Moses could have seen Him with physical eyes, just as not only the wisdom of God which is Christ, but even the wisdom of any man, however wise, can be seen with physical eyes! Or as if, because it is written of the elders of Israel that they saw the place where the God of Israel had stood, and that under His feet there was something like a pavement of sapphire stone, and like the very appearance of heaven in its clearness, we must therefore believe that the Word and Wisdom of God in His own ousia stood within the boundaries of an earthly location—He who indeed reaches powerfully from end to end and orders all things graciously—and that the Word of God, through whom all things were made, is so changeable that He now contracts, now expands Himself (may the Lord cleanse the hearts of His faithful ones from such thoughts!). Rather, all these visible and perceptible things are, as we have often said, manifested through the created order made subject to God, in order to signify the invisible and intelligible God—not only the Father, but also the Son and the Holy Spirit, from whom are all things, and through whom are all things, and in whom are all things—even though the invisible things of God, from the creation of the world, are clearly seen, being understood through the things that are made, even His eternal power and divinity.

25. But now of the clouds, and voices, and lightnings, and the trumpet, and the smoke on Mount Sinai, when it was said, And Mount Sinai was altogether on a smoke, because the Lord descended upon it in fire, and the smoke thereof ascended as the smoke of a furnace; and all the people that was in the camp trembled; and when the voice of the trumpet sounded long and waxed louder and louder, Moses spoke, and God answered him by a voice. And a little after, when the Law had been given in the ten commandments, it follows in the text, And all the people saw the thunderings, and the lightnings, and the noise of the trumpet, and the mountain smoking. And a little after, And [when the people saw it,] they removed and stood afar off, and Moses drew near unto the thick darkness where God was, and the Lord said to Moses, etc. What shall I say about this, save that no one can be so insane as to believe the smoke, and the fire, and the cloud, and the darkness, and whatever there was of the kind, to be the substance of the word and wisdom of God which is Christ, or of the Holy Spirit? For not even the Arians ever dared to say that they were the substance of God the Father. All these things, then, were wrought through the creature serving the Creator, and were presented in a suitable economy ( dispensatio) to human senses; unless, perhaps, because it is said, And Moses drew near to the cloud where God was, carnal thoughts must needs suppose that the cloud was indeed seen by the people, but that within the cloud Moses with the eyes of the flesh saw the Son of God, whom doting heretics will have to be seen in His own substance. Forsooth, Moses may have seen Him with the eyes of the flesh, if not only the wisdom of God which is Christ, but even that of any man you please and howsoever wise, can be seen with the eyes of the flesh; or if, because it is written of the elders of Israel, that they saw the place where the God of Israel had stood, and that there was under His feet as it were a paved work of a sapphire stone, and as it were the body of heaven in his clearness, therefore we are to believe that the word and wisdom of God in His own substance stood within the space of an earthly place, who indeed reaches firmly from end to end, and sweetly orders all things; and that the Word of God, by whom all things were made, is in such wise changeable, as now to contract, now to expand Himself; (may the Lord cleanse the hearts of His faithful ones from such thoughts!) But indeed all these visible and sensible things are, as we have often said, exhibited through the creature made subject in order to signify the invisible and intelligible God, not only the Father, but also the Son and the Holy Spirit, of whom are all things, and through whom are all things, and in whom are all things; although the invisible things of God, from the creation of the world, are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead.

Regarding our present purpose, I don't see how all those things fearfully displayed to the senses of mortal people on Mount Sinai make it clear whether God the Trinity spoke, or the Father, or the Son, or the Holy Spirit individually. But if it's permissible to venture a modest and tentative guess about this passage without being rash, and if it's possible to understand it as referring to one person of the Trinity, why shouldn't we understand it to refer to the Holy Spirit? After all, the Law itself, which was given there, is said to have been written on stone tablets with the finger of God, and we know from the Gospel that this name signifies the Holy Spirit. Also, fifty days are counted from the slaying of the lamb and the celebration of Passover until the day when these things began to happen on Mount Sinai, just as fifty days are counted from our Lord's resurrection after his passion before the Holy Spirit came, whom the Son of God had promised. In that very coming of the Spirit, which we read about in the Acts of the Apostles, there appeared divided tongues like fire, and it sat upon each of them. This agrees with Exodus, where it says, "And Mount Sinai was altogether covered in smoke, because the Lord descended upon it in fire," and a little later it says, "And the sight of the glory of the Lord was like devouring fire on the top of the mountain in the eyes of the children of Israel." Or if these things happened because neither the Father nor the Son could be presented there in that manner without the Holy Spirit, by whom the Law itself had to be written, then we certainly know that God appeared there not by his own substance, which remains invisible and unchangeable, but through the previously mentioned appearance of the creature. But as far as I can understand, we don't see that some specific person of the Trinity appeared, distinguished by a particular identifying mark.

26. But as far as concerns our present undertaking, neither on Mount Sinai do I see how it appears, by all those things which were fearfully displayed to the senses of mortal men, whether God the Trinity spoke, or the Father, or the Son, or the Holy Spirit severally. But if it is allowable, without rash assertion, to venture upon a modest and hesitating conjecture from this passage, if it is possible to understand it of one person of the Trinity, why do we not rather understand the Holy Spirit to be spoken of, since the Law itself also, which was given there, is said to have been written upon tables of stone with the finger of God, by which name we know the Holy Spirit to be signified in the Gospel. And fifty days are numbered from the slaying of the lamb and the celebration of the Passover until the day in which these things began to be done in Mount Sinai; just as after the passion of our Lord fifty days are numbered from His resurrection, and then came the Holy Spirit which the Son of God had promised. And in that very coming of His, which we read of in the Acts of the Apostles, there appeared cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them: which agrees with Exodus, where it is written, And Mount Sinai was altogether on a smoke, because the Lord descended upon it in fire; and a little after, And the sight of the glory of the Lord, he says, was like devouring fire on the top of the mount in the eyes of the children of Israel. Or if these things were therefore wrought because neither the Father nor the Son could be there presented in that mode without the Holy Spirit, by whom the Law itself must needs be written; then we know doubtless that God appeared there, not by His own substance, which remains invisible and unchangeable, but by the appearance above mentioned of the creature; but that some special person of the Trinity appeared, distinguished by a proper mark, as far as my capacity of understanding reaches, we do not see.

There is another difficulty that troubles most people: it is written, "And the Lord spoke unto Moses face to face, as a man speaks unto his friend." Yet a little later, this same Moses says, "Now therefore, I pray You, if I have found grace in Your sight, show me now Yourself plainly, that I may see You, that I may find grace in Your sight, and that I may consider that this nation is Your people." And a little after that, Moses again said to the Lord, "Show me Your glory." What does this mean? In everything that was done, as mentioned above, God was thought to have appeared by His own substance (ousia). From this, these miserable people have believed that the Son of God is visible not through the creature, but by Himself. They think that when Moses entered into the cloud, he did so precisely so that a cloudy darkness would be shown to the people's eyes, but that Moses within would hear God's words as though he beheld His face. And as it says, "And the Lord spoke unto Moses face to face, as a man speaks unto his friend." Yet behold, this same Moses says, "If I have found grace in Your sight, show me Yourself plainly." Clearly he knew that he saw bodily, and he sought the true sight of God spiritually. That manner of speech which was conveyed in words was so arranged as if it were a friend speaking to a friend. Yet who sees God the Father with bodily eyes? And that Word which was in the beginning, the Word which was with God, the Word which was God, by which all things were made—who sees Him with bodily eyes? And who sees the spirit of wisdom with bodily eyes? Yet what does "Show me now Yourself plainly, that I may see You" mean, except "Show me Your substance (ousia)"? If Moses had not said this, we would indeed have to tolerate as best we could those foolish people who think that God's substance (ousia) was made visible to his eyes through those things which, as mentioned above, were said or done. But when it is demonstrated here most clearly that this was not granted to him, even though he desired it, who will dare to say that through the visible forms that appeared to him, not the creature serving God, but God Himself appeared to the eyes of a mortal man?

26. There is yet another difficulty which troubles most people, viz. that it is written, And the Lord spoke unto Moses face to face, as a man speaks unto his friend; whereas a little after, the same Moses says, Now therefore, I pray You, if I have found grace in Your sight, show me now Yourself plainly, that I may see You, that I may find grace in Your sight, and that I may consider that this nation is Your people; and a little after Moses again said to the Lord, Show me Your glory. What means this then, that in everything which was done, as above said, God was thought to have appeared by His own substance; whence the Son of God has been believed by these miserable people to be visible not by the creature, but by Himself; and that Moses, entering into the cloud, appeared to have had this very object in entering, that a cloudy darkness indeed might be shown to the eyes of the people, but that Moses within might hear the words of God, as though he beheld His face; and, as it is said, And the Lord spoke unto Moses face to face, as a man speaks unto his friend; and yet, behold, the same Moses says, If I have found grace in Your sight, show me Yourself plainly? Assuredly he knew that he saw corporeally, and he sought the true sight of God spiritually. And that mode of speech accordingly which was wrought in words, was so modified, as if it were of a friend speaking to a friend. Yet who sees God the Father with the eyes of the body? And that Word, which was in the beginning, the Word which was with God, the Word which was God, by which all things were made, — who sees Him with the eyes of the body? And the spirit of wisdom, again, who sees with the eyes of the body? Yet what is, Show me now Yourself plainly, that I may see You, unless, Show me Your substance? But if Moses had not said this, we must indeed have borne with those foolish people as we could, who think that the substance of God was made visible to his eyes through those things which, as above mentioned, were said or done. But when it is here demonstrated most evidently that this was not granted to him, even though he desired it; who will dare to say, that by the like forms which had appeared visibly to him also, not the creature serving God, but that itself which is God, appeared to the eyes of a mortal man?

Consider also what the Lord later said to Moses: "You cannot see my face, for no man shall see my face and live." And the Lord said, "Look, there is a place near me, and you will stand on a rock. When my glory passes by, I will put you in a cleft of the rock and cover you with my hand while I pass by. Then I will take away my hand, and you will see my back, but my face will not be seen."

28. Add, too, that which the Lord afterward said to Moses, You can not see my face: for there shall no man see my face, and live. And the Lord said, Behold, there is a place by me, and you shall stand upon a rock: and it shall come to pass, while my glory passes by, that I will put you into a watchtower of the rock, and will cover you with my hand while I pass by: and I will take away my hand, and you shall see my back parts; but my face shall not be seen.

It's commonly understood that this prefigures our Lord Jesus Christ: His back parts are taken to mean His flesh, in which He was born of the Virgin, died, and rose again. They are called back parts either because mortality came later, or because He chose to take on flesh near the end of the world, at a late period. But His face was that form of God, in which He thought it not robbery to be equal with God, which no one can certainly see and live. This is either because after this life, in which we are absent from the Lord and where the corruptible body weighs down the soul, we shall see face to face, as the apostle says—for it is said in the Psalms about this life, "Verily every man living is altogether vanity," and again, "For in Your sight shall no man living be justified," and also in this life, according to John, "It does not yet appear what we shall be, but we know that when He shall appear, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is," which he certainly meant to be understood as after this life, when we have paid the debt of death and received the promise of the resurrection. Or it may be that even now, to whatever degree we spiritually understand the wisdom of God, by which all things were made, to that same degree we die to carnal affections, so that considering this world dead to us, we also die to this world, and say what the apostle says: "The world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world." For it was of this death that he also says, "Wherefore, if you be dead with Christ, why as though living in the world are you subject to ordinances?" Not without cause, then, will no one be able to see the face, that is, the manifestation itself of the wisdom of God, and live. For it is this very appearance that everyone sighs for who strives to love God with all his heart, soul, and mind, and for whose contemplation he who loves his neighbor as himself also builds up his neighbor as much as he can. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets. This is also signified in Moses himself. For when he said, because of the love of God with which he was specially inflamed, "If I have found grace in your sight, show me now Yourself plainly, that I may find grace in Your sight," he immediately added, because of the love also of his neighbor, "And that I may know that this nation is Your people." It is therefore that appearance which draws every rational soul with desire for it, and more ardently the purer that soul is. It is more pure the more it rises to spiritual things, and it rises more to spiritual things the more it dies to carnal things. But while we are absent from the Lord and walk by faith, not by sight, we ought to see the back parts of Christ, that is His flesh, by that very faith, standing on the solid foundation of faith, which the rock signifies, and beholding it from such a safe watchtower, namely in the Catholic Church, of which it is said, "And upon this rock I will build my Church." For the more certainly we love that face of Christ, which we earnestly desire to see, the more we recognize in His back parts how much Christ first loved us.

Not unfitly is it commonly understood to be prefigured from the person of our Lord Jesus Christ, that His back parts are to be taken to be His flesh, in which He was born of the Virgin, and died, and rose again; whether they are called back parts on account of the posteriority of mortality, or because it was almost in the end of the world, that is, at a late period, that He deigned to take it: but that His face was that form of God, in which He thought it not robbery to be equal with God, which no one certainly can see and live; whether because after this life, in which we are absent from the Lord, and where the corruptible body presses down the soul, we shall see face to face, as the apostle says — (for it is said in the Psalms, of this life, Verily every man living is altogether vanity; and again, For in Your sight shall no man living be justified; and in this life also, according to John, It does not yet appear what we shall be, but we know, he says, that when He shall appear, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is, which he certainly intended to be understood as after this life, when we shall have paid the debt of death, and shall have received the promise of the resurrection);– or whether that even now, in whatever degree we spiritually understand the wisdom of God, by which all things were made, in that same degree we die to carnal affections, so that, considering this world dead to us, we also ourselves die to this world, and say what the apostle says, The world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world. For it was of this death that he also says, Wherefore, if you be dead with Christ, why as though living in the world are you subject to ordinances? Not therefore without cause will no one be able to see the face, that is, the manifestation itself of the wisdom of God, and live. For it is this very appearance, for the contemplation of which every one sighs who strives to love God with all his heart, and with all his soul, and with all his mind; to the contemplation of which, he who loves his neighbor, too, as himself builds up his neighbor also as far as he may; on which two commandments hang all the law and the prophets. And this is signified also in Moses himself. For when he had said, on account of the love of God with which he was specially inflamed, If I have found grace in your sight, show me now Yourself plainly, that I may find grace in Your sight; he immediately subjoined, on account of the love also of his neighbor, And that I may know that this nation is Your people. It is therefore that appearance which hurries away every rational soul with the desire of it, and the more ardently the more pure that soul is; and it is the more pure the more it rises to spiritual things; and it rises the more to spiritual things the more it dies to carnal things. But while we are absent from the Lord, and walk by faith, not by sight, we ought to see the back parts of Christ, that is His flesh, by that very faith, that is, standing on the solid foundation of faith, which the rock signifies, and beholding it from such a safe watchtower, namely in the Catholic Church, of which it is said, And upon this rock I will build my Church. For so much the more certainly we love that face of Christ, which we earnestly desire to see, as we recognize in His back parts how much first Christ loved us.

But in the flesh itself, faith in His resurrection saves and justifies us. For scripture says, "If you believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you shall be saved," and again, "He was delivered for our offenses and was raised again for our justification." So the reward of our faith is the resurrection of the body of our Lord. For even His enemies believe that His flesh died on the cross of His passion, but they do not believe it rose again. We believe this most firmly and gaze upon it as if from the solid footing of a rock. From this position we wait with certain hope for the adoption, that is, the redemption of our body, because we hope for in the members of Christ—that is, in ourselves—what we acknowledge by sound faith to be already perfect in Him as in our Head. This is why He would not allow His back parts to be seen except as He passed by, so that His resurrection may be believed. For what is Pascha in Hebrew is translated Passover. This is also why the Evangelist John says, "Before the feast of the Passover, when Jesus knew that His hour had come that He should pass out of this world unto the Father."

29. But in the flesh itself, the faith in His resurrection saves and justifies us. For, If you shall believe, he says, in your heart, that God has raised Him from the dead, you shall be saved; and again, Who was delivered, he says, for our offenses, and was raised again for our justification. So that the reward of our faith is the resurrection of the body of our Lord. For even His enemies believe that that flesh died on the cross of His passion, but they do not believe it to have risen again. Which we believing most firmly, gaze upon it as from the solidity of a rock: whence we wait with certain hope for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body; because we hope for that in the members of Christ, that is, in ourselves, which by a sound faith we acknowledge to be perfect in Him as in our Head. Thence it is that He would not have His back parts seen, unless as He passed by, that His resurrection may be believed. For that which is Pascha in Hebrew, is translated Passover. Whence John the Evangelist also says, Before the feast of the Passover, when Jesus knew that His hour had come, that He should pass out of this world unto the Father.

However, those who believe this but do not believe it within the Catholic Church—instead believing it in some schism or heresy—do not see the back parts of the Lord from the place that is by Him. For what does the Lord mean when He says, "Behold, there is a place by me, and you shall stand upon a rock"? What earthly place is by the Lord, unless it is that which touches Him spiritually? For what place is not by the Lord, who reaches from one end to another mightily and sweetly orders all things, and of whom it is said, "Heaven is His throne, and earth is His footstool," and who said, "Where is the house that you build unto me, and where is the place of my rest? For has not my hand made all those things?" But clearly the Catholic Church itself is understood to be the place by Him, in which one stands upon a rock, where he healthfully sees the Pascha Domini, that is, the Passing by of the Lord, and His back parts, that is, His body, who believes in His resurrection. And He says, "You shall stand upon a rock while my glory passes by." For in reality, immediately after the majesty of the Lord had passed by in the glorification of the Lord—in which He rose again and ascended to the Father—we stood firm upon the rock. And Peter himself then stood firm, so that he preached Him with confidence, whom before he stood firm he had three times denied out of fear. Yet indeed he was already placed beforehand in predestination upon the watchtower of the rock, but with the hand of the Lord still held over him so that he might not yet see. For he was to see His back parts, and the Lord had not yet passed by—namely, from death to life—He had not yet been glorified by the resurrection.

30. But they who believe this, but believe it not in the Catholic Church, but in some schism or in heresy, do not see the back parts of the Lord from the place that is by Him. For what does that mean which the Lord says, Behold, there is a place by me, and you shall stand upon a rock? What earthly place is by the Lord, unless that is by Him which touches Him spiritually? For what place is not by the Lord, who reaches from one end to another mightily, and sweetly does order all things, and of whom it is said, Heaven is His throne, and earth is His footstool; and who said, Where is the house that you build unto me, and where is the place of my rest? For has not my hand made all those things? But manifestly the Catholic Church itself is understood to be the place by Him, wherein one stands upon a rock, where he healthfully sees the Pascha Domini, that is, the Passing by of the Lord, and His back parts, that is, His body, who believes in His resurrection. And you shall stand, He says, upon a rock while my glory passes by. For in reality, immediately after the majesty of the Lord had passed by in the glorification of the Lord, in which He rose again and ascended to the Father, we stood firm upon the rock. And Peter himself then stood firm, so that he preached Him with confidence, whom, before he stood firm, he had thrice from fear denied; although, indeed, already before placed in predestination upon the watchtower of the rock, but with the hand of the Lord still held over him that he might not see. For he was to see His back parts, and the Lord had not yet passed by, namely, from death to life; He had not yet been glorified by the resurrection.

For as to what follows in Exodus, "I will cover you with my hand while I pass by, and I will take away my hand and you shall see my back parts," many Israelites, of whom Moses was then a symbolic figure, believed in the Lord after His resurrection, as if His hand had been removed from their eyes and they now saw His back parts. This is why the evangelist also mentions that prophecy of Isaiah: "Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes." Finally, in the Psalm, what is said can reasonably be understood as spoken in their person: "For day and night Your hand was heavy upon me." By day, perhaps, when He performed obvious miracles yet was not recognized by them; but by night, when He died in suffering, when they thought even more certainly that, like any ordinary man, He was cut off and brought to an end. But since, when He had already passed by so that His back parts were seen, upon the Apostle Peter's preaching to them that it was necessary for Christ to suffer and rise again, they were pierced in their hearts with the grief of repentance, so that what is said at the beginning of that Psalm might come true among the baptized: "Blessed are they whose transgressions are forgiven, and whose sins are covered." Therefore, after it had been said, "Your hand is heavy upon me," the Lord, as it were passing by so that now He removed His hand and His back parts were seen, there follows the voice of one who grieves and confesses and receives forgiveness of sins by faith in the resurrection of the Lord: "My moisture," he says, "is turned into the drought of summer. I acknowledged my sin unto You, and mine iniquity have I not hidden. I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the Lord, and You forgave the iniquity of my sin." For we ought not to be so wrapped up in the darkness of the flesh as to think that the face of God is indeed invisible, but His back visible, since both appeared visibly in the form of a servant. But far be it from us to think anything of the kind in the form of God. Far be it from us to think that the Word of God and the Wisdom of God has a face on one side and a back on the other, as a human body does, or is at all changed either in place or time by any appearance or motion.

31. For as to that, too, which follows in Exodus, I will cover you with mine hand while I pass by, and I will take away my hand and you shall see my back parts; many Israelites, of whom Moses was then a figure, believed in the Lord after His resurrection, as if His hand had been taken off from their eyes, and they now saw His back parts. And hence the evangelist also mentions that prophesy of Isaiah, Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes. Lastly, in the Psalm, that is not unreasonably understood to be said in their person, For day and night Your hand was heavy upon me. By day, perhaps, when He performed manifest miracles, yet was not acknowledged by them; but by night, when He died in suffering, when they thought still more certainly that, like any one among men, He was cut off and brought to an end. But since, when He had already passed by, so that His back parts were seen, upon the preaching to them by the Apostle Peter that it behooved Christ to suffer and rise again, they were pricked in their hearts with the grief of repentance, that that might come to pass among the baptized which is said in the beginning of that Psalm, Blessed are they whose transgressions are forgiven, and whose sins are covered; therefore, after it had been said, Your hand is heavy upon me, the Lord, as it were, passing by, so that now He removed His hand, and His back parts were seen, there follows the voice of one who grieves and confesses and receives remission of sins by faith in the resurrection of the Lord: My moisture, he says, is turned into the drought of summer. I acknowledged my sin unto You, and mine iniquity have I not hid. I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the Lord, and You forgave the iniquity of my sin. For we ought not to be so wrapped up in the darkness of the flesh, as to think the face indeed of God to be invisible, but His back visible, since both appeared visibly in the form of a servant; but far be it from us to think anything of the kind in the form of God; far be it from us to think that the Word of God and the Wisdom of God has a face on one side, and on the other a back, as a human body has, or is at all changed either in place or time by any appearance or motion.

Therefore, if the Lord Jesus Christ was revealed in those words spoken in Exodus and in all those physical appearances, or if in some cases Christ was revealed (as examination of this passage convinces us) and in others the Holy Spirit (as what we said above indicates), it does not necessarily follow that God the Father never appeared in any such form to the Fathers. Many such appearances occurred in those times without the Father, Son, or Holy Spirit being explicitly named and identified in them, yet with certain indications given through quite plausible interpretations. Thus it would be too hasty to say that God the Father never appeared through any visible forms to the fathers or the prophets. This opinion arose among those who were unable to understand, regarding the unity of the Trinity, texts such as "Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God" and "Whom no man has seen, nor can see." These texts are understood by sound faith as referring to that very substance—the highest and most supremely divine and unchangeable—by which the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is the one and only God. However, those visions were produced through the changeable creation, which is subject to the unchangeable God, and they did not reveal God properly as He is in Himself, but through signs suited to the particular circumstances and times of each event.

32. Wherefore, if in those words which were spoken in Exodus, and in all those corporeal appearances, the Lord Jesus Christ was manifested; or if in some cases Christ was manifested, as the consideration of this passage persuades us, in others the Holy Spirit, as that which we have said above admonishes us; at any rate no such result follows, as that God the Father never appeared in any such form to the Fathers. For many such appearances happened in those times, without either the Father, or the Son, or the Holy Spirit being expressly named and designated in them; but yet with some intimations given through certain very probable interpretations, so that it would be too rash to say that God the Father never appeared by any visible forms to the fathers or the prophets. For they gave birth to this opinion who were not able to understand in respect to the unity of the Trinity such texts as, Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God; and, Whom no man has seen, nor can see. Which texts are understood by a sound faith in that substance itself, the highest, and in the highest degree divine and unchangeable, whereby both the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit is the one and only God. But those visions were wrought through the changeable creature, made subject to the unchangeable God, and did not manifest God properly as He is, but by intimations such as suited the causes and times of the several circumstances.

I do not know how these men understand that the Ancient of Days appeared to Daniel, from whom the Son of man—which He chose to become for our sake—is understood to have received the kingdom; that is, from Him who says to Him in the Psalms, "You are my Son; this day have I begotten You; ask of me, and I shall give You the heathen for Your inheritance," and who has put all things under His feet. However, if both the Father giving the kingdom and the Son receiving it appeared to Daniel in bodily form, how can those men say that the Father never appeared to the prophets, and therefore that He alone ought to be understood to be invisible whom no man has seen, nor can see? For Daniel has told us this: "I beheld," he says, "till the thrones were set, and the Ancient of Days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of His head like the pure wool: His throne was like the fiery flame, and His wheels as burning fire; a fiery stream issued and came forth from before Him: thousand thousands ministered unto Him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before Him: the judgment was set, and the books were opened," and so on. And a little later, "I saw," he says, "in the night visions, and behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of Days, and they brought Him near before Him. And there was given Him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve Him: His dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and His kingdom that which shall not be destroyed." Here we see the Father giving and the Son receiving an eternal kingdom, and both are in the sight of the one who prophesies, in a visible form. Therefore, it is not unreasonable to believe that God the Father also customarily appeared in that manner to mortals.

33. I do not know in what manner these men understand that the Ancient of Days appeared to Daniel, from whom the Son of man, which He deigned to be for our sakes, is understood to have received the kingdom; namely, from Him who says to Him in the Psalms, You are my Son; this day have I begotten You; ask of me, and I shall give You the heathen for Your inheritance; and who has put all things under His feet. If, however, both the Father giving the kingdom, and the Son receiving it, appeared to Daniel in bodily form, how can those men say that the Father never appeared to the prophets, and, therefore, that He only ought to be understood to be invisible whom no man has seen, nor can see? For Daniel has told us thus: I beheld, he says, till the thrones were set, and the Ancient of Days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of His head like the pure wool: His throne was like the fiery flame, and His wheels as burning fire; a fiery stream issued and came forth from before Him: thousand thousands ministered unto Him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before Him: the judgment was set, and the books were opened, etc. And a little after, I saw, he says, in the night visions, and behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of Days, and they brought Him near before Him. And there was given Him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve Him: His dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and His kingdom that which shall not be destroyed. Behold the Father giving, and the Son receiving, an eternal kingdom; and both are in the sight of him who prophesies, in a visible form. It is not, therefore, unsuitably believed that God the Father also was wont to appear in that manner to mortals.

Unless, perhaps, someone might say that the Father is not visible because He appeared in a vision to someone who was dreaming, but that the Son and the Holy Spirit are visible because Moses saw all those things while awake. As if Moses actually saw the Word and Wisdom of God with physical eyes! Or as if even the human spirit that gives life to the flesh can be seen, or even that physical thing called wind—how much less can the Spirit of God be seen, who surpasses the minds of all people and angels by the ineffable excellence of the divine substance? Or can anyone fall into such error as to dare say that the Son and the Holy Spirit are visible even to people who are awake, but that the Father is visible only to those who dream? How, then, would they understand that statement about the Father alone: "Whom no man has seen, nor can see"? When people sleep, are they suddenly not human? Or cannot He who can create the likeness of a body to represent Himself through the visions of dreamers also create that same bodily form to represent Himself to the eyes of those who are awake? His own very substance, by which He Himself is what He is, cannot be shown by any bodily likeness to one who sleeps or by any bodily appearance to one who is awake—and this applies not only to the Father, but also to the Son and to the Holy Spirit. And certainly, as for those who are persuaded by the visions of waking people to believe that not the Father, but only the Son or the Holy Spirit, appeared to the physical sight of human beings—setting aside the great extent of the sacred writings and their many interpretations, which mean that no one of sound reason should claim that the person of the Father was never shown to the eyes of waking people by any bodily appearance—but, as I said, setting this aside, what do they say about our father Abraham, who was certainly awake and serving when, after Scripture had stated, "The Lord appeared unto Abraham," not one or two, but three men appeared to him? None of these is said to have stood out above the others, none to have shone with greater glory than the others, or to have acted more authoritatively.

34. Unless, perhaps, some one shall say, that the Father is therefore not visible, because He appeared within the sight of one who was dreaming; but that therefore the Son and the Holy Spirit are visible, because Moses saw all those things being awake; as if, forsooth, Moses saw the Word and the Wisdom of God with fleshly eyes, or that even the human spirit which quickens that flesh can be seen, or even that corporeal thing which is called wind — how much less can that Spirit of God be seen, who transcends the minds of all men, and of angels, by the ineffable excellence of the divine substance? Or can any one fall headlong into such an error as to dare to say, that the Son and the Holy Spirit are visible also to men who are awake, but that the Father is not visible except to those who dream? How, then, do they understand that of the Father alone, Whom no man has seen, nor can see.? When men sleep, are they then not men? Or cannot He, who can fashion the likeness of a body to signify Himself through the visions of dreamers, also fashion that same bodily creature to signify Himself to the eyes of those who are awake? Whereas His own very substance, whereby He Himself is that which He is, cannot be shown by any bodily likeness to one who sleeps, or by any bodily appearance to one who is awake; but this not of the Father only, but also of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. And certainly, as to those who are moved by the visions of waking men to believe that not the Father, but only the Son, or the Holy Spirit, appeared to the corporeal sight of men — to omit the great extent of the sacred pages, and their manifold interpretation, such that no one of sound reason ought to affirm that the person of the Father was nowhere shown to the eyes of waking men by any corporeal appearance — but, as I said, to omit this, what do they say of our father Abraham, who was certainly awake and ministering, when, after Scripture had premised, The Lord appeared unto Abraham, not one, or two, but three men appeared to him; no one of whom is said to have stood prominently above the others, no one more than the others to have shone with greater glory, or to have acted more authoritatively?

Since we set out in our three-part investigation to examine whether it was the Father, or the Son, or the Holy Spirit, or whether sometimes the Father, sometimes the Son, sometimes the Holy Spirit, or whether—without any distinction of persons—the one and only God (that is, the Trinity itself) who appeared to the fathers through those created forms, we have now examined as many passages of Holy Scripture as seemed sufficient. A modest and cautious consideration of divine mysteries leads us, as far as I can tell, to this conclusion: we must not rashly declare which person of the Trinity appeared to any particular father or prophet in some bodily form or bodily likeness, unless the context of the narrative provides some clear indication on the matter. For the nature itself, or substance, or essence, or whatever other name we should use for that very thing which is God, cannot be seen with bodily eyes. However, we must believe that through the creature subject to Him, not only the Son or the Holy Spirit, but also the Father, may have revealed Himself to mortal senses through a bodily form or likeness. Since this is how things stand, let us consider what remains in the books that follow, so that this second book does not grow to an excessive length.

35. Wherefore, since in that our threefold division we determined to inquire, first, whether the Father, or the Son, or the Holy Spirit; or whether sometimes the Father, sometimes the Son, sometimes the Holy Spirit; or whether, without any distinction of persons, as it is said, the one and only God, that is, the Trinity itself, appeared to the fathers through those forms of the creature: now that we have examined, so far as appeared to be sufficient what places of the Holy Scriptures we could, a modest and cautious consideration of divine mysteries leads, as far as I can judge, to no other conclusion, unless that we may not rashly affirm which person of the Trinity appeared to this or that of the fathers or the prophets in some body or likeness of body, unless when the context attaches to the narrative some probable intimations on the subject. For the nature itself, or substance, or essence, or by whatever other name that very thing, which is God, whatever it be, is to be called, cannot be seen corporeally: but we must believe that by means of the creature made subject to Him, not only the Son, or the Holy Spirit, but also the Father, may have given intimations of Himself to mortal senses by a corporeal form or likeness. And since the case stands thus, that this second book may not extend to an immoderate length, let us consider what remains in those which follow.

In the Retractations (ii. 15) Augustine describes this work in the following way:

In the Retractations (ii. 15) Augustine speaks of this work in the following terms:–

I spent several years writing fifteen books about the Trinity, which is God. However, when I had not yet finished the thirteenth book, some people who were extremely eager to have the work were being made to wait longer than they could endure, and it was stolen from me in a less polished state than it either could have been or would have been if it had been published when I intended. As soon as I discovered this, since I had other copies of it, I had initially decided not to publish it myself, but instead to mention what had happened in some other work. However, at the urgent request of fellow believers whom I could not refuse, I corrected it as much as I thought appropriate, and finished and published it, adding at the beginning a letter that I had written to the venerable Aurelius, Bishop of Carthage, in which I explained, by way of introduction, what had happened, what I had originally intended to do, and what the love of my fellow believers had compelled me to do.

I spent some years in writing fifteen books concerning the Trinity, which is God . When, however, I had not yet finished the thirteenth Book, and some who were exceedingly anxious to have the work were kept waiting longer than they could bear, it was stolen from me in a less correct state than it either could or would have been had it appeared when I intended. And as soon as I discovered this, having other copies of it, I had determined at first not to publish it myself, but to mention what had happened in the matter in some other work; but at the urgent request of brethren, whom I could not refuse, I corrected it as much as I thought fit, and finished and published it, with the addition, at the beginning, of a letter that I had written to the venerable Aurelius, Bishop of Carthage , in which I set forth, in the way of prologue, what had happened, what I had intended to do of myself, and what love of my brethren had forced me to do.

The letter he refers to here is as follows:

The letter to which he here alludes is the following:–

To the most blessed Lord, whom he respects with entirely genuine love, to his holy brother and fellow priest, Pope Aurelius, Augustine sends greetings in the Lord. I began as a very young man, and have published in my old age, some books concerning the Trinity, who is the supreme and true God. I had actually set the work aside when I discovered that it had been prematurely, or rather secretly, stolen from me before I had completed it and before I had revised and finished it as I had planned. I had not intended to publish the books one by one, but all at once, since the development of the investigation led me to add the later books to the ones that came before them. When these people prevented the fulfillment of my plan (because some of them had gained access to the work before I intended), I had stopped dictating it, intending to make my complaint public in some other work I might write, so that whoever could might know that the books had not been published by me but had been taken from my possession before they were in my own judgment ready for publication. However, compelled by the urgent requests of many of my brothers, and especially by your command, I have taken the trouble, with God's help, to complete the work, laborious as it is. As now corrected (not as I wished, but as I could, so that the books would not differ too greatly from those that had secretly gotten into people's hands), I have sent them to your Reverence through my very dear son and fellow deacon, and have allowed them to be heard, copied, and read by anyone who wishes. Certainly, if I could have carried out my original plan, although they would have contained the same ideas, they would have been worked out much more thoroughly and clearly, as far as the difficulty of explaining so profound a subject, and as far as my own abilities, might have permitted. There are some people, however, who have the first four, or rather five, books without the prefaces, and the twelfth with a considerable part of its later chapters missing. But these people, if they wish and are able, will correct the whole if they become familiar with the present edition. In any case, I must ask that you order this letter to be placed separately, but at the beginning of the books. Farewell. Pray for me.

To the most blessed Lord, whom he reveres with most sincere love , to his holy brother and fellow priest , Pope Aurelius, Augustine sends health in the Lord. I began as a very young man, and have published in my old age, some books concerning the Trinity, who is the supreme and true God. I had in truth laid the work aside, upon discovering that it had been prematurely, or rather surreptitiously, stolen from me before I had completed it, and before I had revised and put the finishing touches to it, as had been my intention. For I had not designed to publish the Books one by one, but all together, inasmuch as the progress of the inquiry led me to add the later ones to those which precede them. When, therefore, these people had hindered the fulfillment of my purpose (in that some of them had obtained access to the work before I intended), I had given over dictating it, with the idea of making my complaint public in some other work that I might write, in order that whoever could might know that the Books had not been published by myself, but had been taken away from my possession before they were in my own judgment fit for publication. Compelled, however, by the eager demands of many of my brethren, and above all by your command, I have taken the pains, by God's help, to complete the work, laborious as it is; and as now corrected (not as I wished, but as I could, lest the Books should differ very widely from those which had surreptitiously got into people's hands), I have sent them to your Reverence by my very dear son and fellow deacon , and have allowed them to be heard, copied, and read by every one that pleases. Doubtless, if I could have fulfilled my original intention, although they would have contained the same sentiments, they would have been worked out much more thoroughly and clearly, so far as the difficulty of unfolding so profound a subject, and so far, too, as my own powers, might have allowed. There are some persons , however, who have the first four, or rather five, Books without the prefaces, and the twelfth with no small part of its later chapters omitted. But these, if they please and can, will amend the whole, if they become acquainted with the present edition. At any rate, I have to request that you will order this letter to be prefixed separately, but at the beginning of the Books. Farewell. Pray for me.

This discussion about the Trinity, as the reader should know, has been written to guard against the clever arguments of those who refuse to begin with faith and are misled by an immature and twisted love of reasoning. One group of such people tries to apply ideas they have formed about physical things—whether through bodily sense experience, natural human intelligence and careful observation, or through systematic study—to things that are incorporeal and spiritual. They try to measure and understand the latter by means of the former. A second group forms whatever thoughts they have about God based on the nature or experiences of the human mind, and because of this mistake, they guide their arguments about God using distorted and deceptive rules. A third group does try to rise above the entire created order, which is certainly changeable, in order to lift their thinking to the unchangeable substance, which is God. But they are weighed down by the burden of mortality, and while they seem to want to know what they do not know and cannot know what they want to know, they block themselves from the very path of understanding through an overly bold assertion of their own presumptuous judgments. They would rather not correct their opinion when it is wrong than change what they have already defended. This is actually the common problem of all three groups I have mentioned—those who think about God based on physical things, those who do so based on the spiritual creature such as the soul, and those who consider neither the body nor the spiritual creature yet still think falsely about God. These last are even further from the truth because nothing corresponding to their ideas can be found either in the body, in the made or created spirit, or in the Creator himself. For example, whoever thinks that God is white or red is wrong, even though these things are found in the body. Likewise, whoever thinks of God as sometimes forgetting and sometimes remembering, or anything similar, is equally wrong, even though these things are found in the mind. But whoever thinks that God is so powerful as to have generated himself is even more wrong, because not only does God not exist in this way, but neither does the spiritual nor the bodily creature—for there is nothing at all that generates its own existence.

1. The following dissertation concerning the Trinity, as the reader ought to be informed, has been written in order to guard against the sophistries of those who disdain to begin with faith , and are deceived by a crude and perverse love of reason. Now one class of such men endeavor to transfer to things incorporeal and spiritual the ideas they have formed, whether through experience of the bodily senses, or by natural human wit and diligent quickness, or by the aid of art, from things corporeal; so as to seek to measure and conceive of the former by the latter. Others, again, frame whatever sentiments they may have concerning God according to the nature or affections of the human mind; and through this error they govern their discourse, in disputing concerning God , by distorted and fallacious rules. While yet a third class strive indeed to transcend the whole creation, which doubtless is changeable, in order to raise their thought to the unchangeable substance, which is God ; but being weighed down by the burden of mortality, while they both would seem to know what they do not, and cannot know what they would, preclude themselves from entering the very path of understanding, by an over-bold affirmation of their own presumptuous judgments; choosing rather not to correct their own opinion when it is perverse, than to change that which they have once defended. And, indeed, this is the common disease of all the three classes which I have mentioned — viz. , both of those who frame their thoughts of God according to things corporeal, and of those who do so according to the spiritual creature, such as is the soul ; and of those who neither regard the body nor the spiritual creature, and yet think falsely about God ; and are indeed so much the further from the truth , that nothing can be found answering to their conceptions, either in the body, or in the made or created spirit, or in the Creator Himself. For he who thinks, for instance, that God is white or red, is in error ; and yet these things are found in the body. Again, he who thinks of God as now forgetting and now remembering, or anything of the same kind, is none the less in error ; and yet these things are found in the mind . But he who thinks that God is of such power as to have generated Himself, is so much the more in error , because not only does God not so exist, but neither does the spiritual nor the bodily creature; for there is nothing whatever that generates its own existence .

To purify the human mind from errors of this kind, Holy Scripture has adapted itself to those who are immature. It has not avoided using words drawn from any category of things that actually exist, through which, like food, our understanding might gradually rise to divine and transcendent realities. When speaking of God, Scripture has used words taken from physical things, as when it says, "Hide me under the shadow of Your wings." It has also borrowed many things from the spiritual creation to signify what is not literally true but must be expressed this way—for example, "I the Lord your God am a jealous God" and "It repents me that I have made man." However, Scripture has drawn no words at all, whether for figures of speech or mysterious sayings, from things that do not exist whatsoever. This is why those who are blocked from the truth by this third type of error are more harmfully and emptily foolish than others, since they imagine things about God that can be found neither in Him nor in any creature. Divine Scripture customarily creates, as it were, attractions for children from things found in creation, by which the affections of the weak may be moved, according to their capacity and as if by steps, to seek what is above and leave what is below. But this same Scripture rarely uses things that are spoken properly of God alone and are not found in any creature—for instance, what was said to Moses: "I am that I am" and "I Am has sent me to you." Since both body and soul are also said in some sense to be, Holy Scripture certainly would not express itself this way unless it meant to be understood in some special sense. Similarly, what the Apostle says: "Who only has immortality." Since the soul is also said to be, and is, in a certain manner immortal, Scripture would not say "only has" unless true immortality is unchangeableness, which no creature can possess since it belongs to the creator alone. Likewise James says, "Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and comes down from the Father of Lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning." And David says, "You shall change them, and they shall be changed; but You are the same."

2. In order, therefore, that the human mind might be purged from falsities of this kind, Holy Scripture , which suits itself to babes has not avoided words drawn from any class of things really existing, through which, as by nourishment, our understanding might rise gradually to things divine and transcendent. For, in speaking of God , it has both used words taken from things corporeal, as when it says, Hide me under the shadow of Your wings; and it has borrowed many things from the spiritual creature, whereby to signify that which indeed is not so, but must needs so be said: as, for instance, I the Lord your God am a jealous God ; and, It repents me that I have made man. But it has drawn no words whatever, whereby to frame either figures of speech or enigmatic sayings, from things which do not exist at all. And hence it is that they who are shut out from the truth by that third kind of error are more mischievously and emptily vain than their fellows; in that they surmise respecting God , what can neither be found in Himself nor in any creature. For divine Scripture is wont to frame, as it were, allurements for children from the things which are found in the creature; whereby, according to their measure, and as it were by steps, the affections of the weak may be moved to seek those things that are above, and to leave those things that are below. But the same Scripture rarely employs those things which are spoken properly of God , and are not found in any creature; as, for instance, that which was said to Moses , I am that I am; and, I Am has sent me to you. For since both body and soul also are said in some sense to be , Holy Scripture certainly would not so express itself unless it meant to be understood in some special sense of the term. So, too, that which the Apostle says, Who only has immortality . Since the soul also both is said to be, and is, in a certain manner immortal , Scripture would not say only has, unless because true immortality is unchangeableness; which no creature can possess, since it belongs to the creator alone. So also James says, Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and comes down from the Father of Lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning. So also David, You shall change them, and they shall be changed; but You are the same.

It is difficult to contemplate and fully grasp the substance of God, who fashions changeable things without any change in Himself, and creates temporal things without any temporal movement in Himself. Therefore, we must purge our minds to be able to see ineffably that which is ineffable. Since we have not yet reached this point, we need to be nourished by faith and led along paths better suited to our capacity, so that we may become fit and able to comprehend it. This is why the Apostle says that all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge are indeed hidden in Christ. Yet he presented Christ to those who were babes in Christ—people already born again by His grace but still carnal and psychical—not through that divine virtue by which He is equal to the Father, but through that human weakness by which He was crucified. For Paul says, I determined not to know anything among you, save Jesus Christ and Him crucified, and then continues, And I was with you in weakness, and in fear, and in much trembling. Shortly afterward he tells them, And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ. I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto you were not able to bear it, neither yet now are you able. Some people become angry at this kind of language and think it is meant to insult them. They mostly prefer to believe that those who speak this way have nothing to say, rather than accept that they themselves cannot understand what has been said. Sometimes we do present to them not the full explanation they seek in their inquiries about God—because neither can they receive it, nor can we perhaps fully grasp or express it ourselves—but rather an explanation that demonstrates to them how incapable and completely unfit they are to understand what they are asking of us. But because they do not hear what they want, they think we are either deceiving them to hide our own ignorance or speaking maliciously because we begrudge them knowledge. And so they leave angry and upset.

3. Further, it is difficult to contemplate and fully know the substance of God ; who fashions things changeable, yet without any change in Himself, and creates things temporal, yet without any temporal movement in Himself. And it is necessary, therefore, to purge our minds, in order to be able to see ineffably that which is ineffable; whereto not having yet attained, we are to be nourished by faith , and led by such ways as are more suited to our capacity, that we may be rendered apt and able to comprehend it. And hence the Apostle says, that in Christ indeed are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge ; and yet has commended Him to us, as to babes in Christ , who, although already born again by His grace , yet are still carnal and psychical, not by that divine virtue wherein He is equal to the Father , but by that human infirmity whereby He was crucified. For he says, I determined not to know anything among you, save Jesus Christ and Him crucified; and then he continues, And I was with you in weakness, and in fear , and in much trembling. And a little after he says to them, And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ . I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto you were not able to bear it, neither yet now are you able. There are some who are angry at language of this kind, and think it is used in slight to themselves, and for the most part prefer rather to believe that they who so speak to them have nothing to say, than that they themselves cannot understand what they have said. And sometimes, indeed, we do allege to them, not certainly that account of the case which they seek in their inquiries about God — because neither can they themselves receive it, nor can we perhaps either apprehend or express it — but such an account of it as to demonstrate to them how incapable and utterly unfit they are to understand that which they require of us. But they, on their parts, because they do not hear what they desire, think that we are either playing them false in order to conceal our own ignorance , or speaking in malice because we grudge them knowledge ; and so go away indignant and perturbed.

With the Lord our God helping us, we will attempt to explain, as far as we are able, the very thing they so insistently demand: namely, that the Trinity is the one and only true God, and also how the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are rightly said, believed, and understood to be of one and the same substance or ousia, so that they cannot imagine we are putting them off with excuses, but may discover through actual experience both that the highest good is perceived only by the most purified minds, and that for this reason they themselves cannot perceive or understand it, because the eye of the human mind, being weak, is overwhelmed in such overwhelming light unless it is strengthened by the nourishment of the righteousness of faith. First, however, we must demonstrate according to the authority of the Holy Scriptures whether the faith is indeed so. Then, if God is willing and helps us, we may perhaps serve these talkative debaters—more prideful than capable, and therefore suffering from a more dangerous disease—well enough to enable them to find something they cannot doubt, so that when they cannot find the same clarity elsewhere, they may recognize the fault lies in their own minds rather than in the truth itself or in our arguments. In this way, if they have any love or fear of God in them, they may turn back and begin from faith in proper order, finally understanding how beneficial a remedy has been provided for the faithful in the holy Church, by which careful piety, healing the weakness of the mind, may make it able to perceive the unchangeable truth and prevent it from falling headlong through reckless disorder into destructive and false opinion. I myself will not shrink from investigation if I am uncertain about anything, nor be ashamed to learn if I am wrong about anything.

4. Wherefore, our Lord God helping, we will undertake to render, as far as we are able, that very account which they so importunately demand: viz ., that the Trinity is the one and only and true God , and also how the Father , the Son , and the Holy Spirit are rightly said, believed , understood, to be of one and the same substance or essence ; in such wise that they may not fancy themselves mocked by excuses on our part, but may find by actual trial, both that the highest good is that which is discerned by the most purified minds, and that for this reason it cannot be discerned or understood by themselves, because the eye of the human mind , being weak, is dazzled in that so transcendent light, unless it be invigorated by the nourishment of the righteousness of faith . First, however, we must demonstrate, according to the authority of the Holy Scriptures , whether the faith be so. Then, if God be willing and aid us, we may perhaps at least so far serve these talkative arguers — more puffed up than capable, and therefore laboring under the more dangerous disease — as to enable them to find something which they are not able to doubt , that so, in that case where they cannot find the like, they may be led to lay the fault to their own minds, rather than to the truth itself or to our reasonings; and thus, if there be anything in them of either love or fear towards God , they may return and begin from faith in due order: perceiving at length how healthful a medicine has been provided for the faithful in the holy Church, whereby a heedful piety , healing the feebleness of the mind , may render it able to perceive the unchangeable truth , and hinder it from falling headlong, through disorderly rashness, into pestilent and false opinion. Neither will I myself shrink from inquiry, if I am anywhere in doubt ; nor be ashamed to learn, if I am anywhere in error .

Further, let me ask my reader: wherever he is certain about something, as I am, let him continue with me; wherever he has doubts, as I do, let him join me in searching for answers; wherever he recognizes that he is wrong, let him come back to me; wherever he recognizes that I am wrong, let him call me back. In this way we may enter together upon the path of love and advance toward Him of whom it is said, Seek His face evermore. I would make this devout and safe agreement, in the presence of our Lord God, with all who read my writings—both in all other cases and especially in the case of those writings which investigate the unity of the Trinity, of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. In no other subject is error more dangerous, inquiry more difficult, or the discovery of truth more rewarding. If any reader should say, This is not well said, because I do not understand it, such a person is finding fault with my language, not with my faith. It might perhaps have been put more clearly, yet no one has ever spoken in such a way as to be understood in all things by all people. Therefore, let the reader who finds this fault with my writing see whether he can understand other authors who have handled similar subjects and questions, when he does not understand me. If he can, let him put down my book, or even, if he wishes, throw it away, and let him spend his effort and time instead on those whom he understands. Yet let him not think on that account that I ought to have been silent, just because I have not been able to express myself as smoothly and clearly to him as those authors do whom he understands. For not all things which all people have written come into the hands of all. It is possible that some who are capable of understanding even these writings of mine may not find those more readable works, and may come across mine only. For this reason it is useful that many people should write many books, differing in style but not in faith, concerning even the same questions, so that the subject matter itself may reach the greatest number of people—some in one way, some in another. But if the person who complains that he has not understood these things has never been able to comprehend any careful and precise reasonings at all upon such subjects, then in that case let him deal with himself through determination and study, so that he may know better—not with me through quarrels and disputes, demanding that I keep silent. Again, let the reader who says, when he reads my book, Certainly I understand what is said, but it is not true, assert, if he pleases, his own opinion, and refute mine if he is able. And if he does this with love and truth, and takes the trouble to make it known to me (if I am still alive), I shall then receive the most abundant fruit of this labor of mine. And if he cannot inform me myself, I would be most willing and glad if he would inform those whom he can. Yet, for my part, I meditate on the law of the Lord, if not day and night, at least for such brief times as I can, and I commit my meditations to writing lest they should escape me through forgetfulness. I hope by the mercy of God that He will make me hold firmly to all truths of which I feel certain; but if I am mistaken about anything, that He will Himself reveal even this to me, whether through secret inspiration and warning, or through His own plain words, or through the arguments of my brothers. This I pray for, and this hope and desire I commit to Him, who is fully able to keep those things which He has given me and to fulfill those things which He has promised.

5. Further let me ask of my reader, wherever, alike with myself, he is certain, there to go on with me; wherever, alike with myself, he hesitates, there to join with me in inquiring; wherever he recognizes himself to be in error , there to return to me; wherever he recognizes me to be so, there to call me back: so that we may enter together upon the path of charity, and advance towards Him of whom it is said, Seek His face evermore. And I would make this pious and safe agreement, in the presence of our Lord God , with all who read my writings, as well in all other cases as, above all, in the case of those which inquire into the unity of the Trinity, of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit ; because in no other subject is error more dangerous, or inquiry more laborious, or the discovery of truth more profitable. If, then, any reader shall say, This is not well said, because I do not understand it; such an one finds fault with my language, not with my faith : and it might perhaps in very truth have been put more clearly; yet no man ever so spoke as to be understood in all things by all men . Let him, therefore, who finds this fault with my discourse, see whether he can understand other men who have handled similar subjects and questions, when he does not understand me: and if he can, let him put down my book, or even, if he pleases, throw it away; and let him spend labor and time rather on those whom he understands. Yet let him not think on that account that I ought to have been silent, because I have not been able to express myself so smoothly and clearly to him as those do whom he understands. For neither do all things, which all men have written, come into the hands of all. And possibly some, who are capable of understanding even these our writings, may not find those more lucid works, and may meet with ours only. And therefore it is useful that many persons should write many books, differing in style but not in faith , concerning even the same questions, that the matter itself may reach the greatest number — some in one way, some in another. But if he who complains that he has not understood these things has never been able to comprehend any careful and exact reasonings at all upon such subjects, let him in that case deal with himself by resolution and study, that he may know better; not with me by quarrellings and wranglings, that I may hold my peace. Let him, again, who says, when he reads my book, Certainly I understand what is said, but it is not true , assert, if he pleases, his own opinion, and refute mine if he is able. And if he do this with charity and truth , and take the pains to make it known to me (if I am still alive), I shall then receive the most abundant fruit of this my labor. And if he cannot inform myself, most willing and glad should I be that he should inform those whom he can. Yet, for my part, I meditate in the law of the Lord, if not day and night, at least such short times as I can; and I commit my meditations to writing, lest they should escape me through forgetfulness; hoping by the mercy of God that He will make me hold steadfastly all truths of which I feel certain; but if in anything I be otherwise minded, that He will himself reveal even this to me, whether through secret inspiration and admonition, or through His own plain utterances, or through the reasonings of my brethren. This I pray for, and this my trust and desire I commit to Him, who is sufficiently able to keep those things which He has given me, and to render those which He has promised.

I do expect that some readers who are slower to understand will imagine that in certain parts of my books I have held opinions which I have not actually held, or have not held opinions which I actually have. But their error, as everyone knows, should not be blamed on me if they have strayed into false teaching by following my steps without understanding me, while I am forced to carefully navigate a difficult and unclear subject. After all, no one can rightly blame the holy testimonies of the divine books themselves for the many different errors of heretics, even though all heretics try to defend their own false and mistaken opinions from those same Scriptures. The law of Christ, which is charity, clearly teaches me and commands me with a gentle compulsion that when people think I have held some falsehood in my books which I have not held, and that same falsehood displeases one person and pleases another, I should prefer to be criticized by the one who condemns the falsehood rather than praised by the one who approves it. For although I, who never held the error, am not rightly blamed by the former person, the error itself is rightly condemned. Meanwhile, the latter person neither rightly praises me, since I am thought to have held what truth condemns, nor the opinion itself, which truth also condemns. Let us therefore undertake the work we have begun in the name of the Lord.

6. I expect, indeed, that some, who are more dull of understanding, will imagine that in some parts of my books I have held sentiments which I have not held, or have not held those which I have. But their error , as none can be ignorant , ought not to be attributed to me, if they have deviated into false doctrine through following my steps without apprehending me, while I am compelled to pick my way through a hard and obscure subject: seeing that neither can any one, in any way, rightly ascribe the numerous and various errors of heretics to the holy testimonies themselves of the divine books; although all of them endeavor to defend out of those same Scriptures their own false and erroneous opinions. The law of Christ , that is, charity, admonishes me clearly, and commands me with a sweet constraint, that when men think that I have held in my books something false which I have not held, and that same falsehood displeases one and pleases another, I should prefer to be blamed by him who reprehends the falsehood , rather than praised by him who praises it. For although I, who never held the error , am not rightly blamed by the former, yet the error itself is rightly censured; while by the latter neither am I rightly praised, who am thought to have held that which the truth censures, nor the sentiment itself, which the truth also censures. Let us therefore essay the work which we have undertaken in the name of the Lord.

All those Catholic interpreters of the divine Scriptures, both Old and New, whom I have been able to read, who have written before me concerning the Trinity, Who is God, have intended to teach, according to the Scriptures, this doctrine: that the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit reveal a divine unity of one and the same ousia in an indivisible equality; and therefore they are not three Gods, but one God. Although the Father has begotten the Son, and so He who is the Father is not the Son; and the Son is begotten by the Father, and so He who is the Son is not the Father; and the Holy Spirit is neither the Father nor the Son, but only the Spirit of the Father and of the Son, Himself also co-equal with the Father and the Son, and belonging to the unity of the Trinity. Yet it was not this Trinity that was born of the Virgin Mary, and crucified under Pontius Pilate, and buried, and rose again the third day, and ascended into heaven, but only the Son. Nor, again, did this Trinity descend in the form of a dove upon Jesus when He was baptized; nor on the day of Pentecost, after the ascension of the Lord, when there came a sound from heaven, as of a rushing mighty wind, did the same Trinity sit upon each of them with cloven tongues like fire, but only the Holy Spirit. Nor yet did this Trinity say from heaven, You are my Son, whether when He was baptized by John, or when the three disciples were with Him on the mount, or when the voice sounded, saying, I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again; but it was a word of the Father only, spoken to the Son. Although the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, as they are indivisible, so work indivisibly. This is also my faith, since it is the Catholic faith.

7. All those Catholic expounders of the divine Scriptures , both Old and New, whom I have been able to read, who have written before me concerning the Trinity, Who is God , have purposed to teach, according to the Scriptures , this doctrine, that the Father , and the Son , and the Holy Spirit intimate a divine unity of one and the same substance in an indivisible equality; and therefore that they are not three Gods, but one God: although the Father has begotten the Son , and so He who is the Father is not the Son; and the Son is begotten by the Father , and so He who is the Son is not the Father; and the Holy Spirit is neither the Father nor the Son , but only the Spirit of the Father and of the Son , Himself also co-equal with the Father and the Son , and pertaining to the unity of the Trinity. Yet not that this Trinity was born of the Virgin Mary , and crucified under Pontius Pilate , and buried, and rose again the third day, and ascended into heaven, but only the Son. Nor, again, that this Trinity descended in the form of a dove upon Jesus when He was baptized ; nor that, on the day of Pentecost, after the ascension of the Lord, when there came a sound from heaven, as of a rushing mighty wind, the same Trinity sat upon each of them with cloven tongues like as of fire, but only the Holy Spirit . Nor yet that this Trinity said from heaven, You are my Son, whether when He was baptized by John, or when the three disciples were with Him in the mount, or when the voice sounded, saying, I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again; but that it was a word of the Father only, spoken to the Son; although the Father , and the Son , and the Holy Spirit , as they are indivisible, so work indivisibly. This is also my faith , since it is the Catholic faith .

Some people, however, find this faith difficult. When they hear that the Father is God, and the Son God, and the Holy Spirit God, and yet that this Trinity is not three Gods but one God, they ask how they are to understand this. This is especially true when it is said that the Trinity works indivisibly in everything that God does, and yet a certain voice of the Father spoke that is not the voice of the Son; that only the Son was born in the flesh, suffered, rose again, and ascended into heaven; and that only the Holy Spirit came in the form of a dove. They want to understand how the Trinity uttered that voice which belonged only to the Father, how the same Trinity created that flesh in which only the Son was born of the Virgin, and how this very same Trinity produced that form of a dove in which only the Holy Spirit appeared. Otherwise, they argue, the Trinity does not work indivisibly, but the Father does some things, the Son does other things, and the Holy Spirit does yet other things. Or if they do some things together and some things separately, then the Trinity is not indivisible. It is also difficult for them to understand in what manner the Holy Spirit exists in the Trinity, whom neither the Father nor the Son, nor both together, have begotten, although He is the Spirit of both the Father and the Son. Since people weary us by asking such questions, let us explain to them, as well as we are able, whatever wisdom God's gift has bestowed upon our weakness on this subject, and let us not proceed with consuming envy. If we said we are not accustomed to thinking about such things, it would not be true. But if we acknowledge that such subjects commonly occupy our thoughts, since we are carried away by the love of investigating the truth, then by the law of charity they require us to make known to them what we have been able to discover about this. Not that I have already attained or am already perfect (for if the Apostle Paul said this, how much more must I, who lie far beneath his feet, count myself as not having apprehended!). But according to my measure, if I forget what is behind and reach forward to what is ahead, and press toward the goal for the prize of the high calling, I am asked to reveal how much of the road I have already traveled and the point I have reached, from which the course still remains to bring me to the end. And those who make this request are people whom generous charity compels me to serve. It must be that God will grant that in providing them with material to read, I shall also profit myself, and that in seeking to reply to their inquiries, I shall likewise find what I was looking for. Accordingly, I have undertaken this task by the command and help of the Lord my God, not so much to speak with authority about things I already know, as to learn these things by discussing them devoutly.

8. Some persons , however, find a difficulty in this faith ; when they hear that the Father is God , and the Son God , and the Holy Spirit God , and yet that this Trinity is not three Gods, but one God ; and they ask how they are to understand this: especially when it is said that the Trinity works indivisibly in everything that God works, and yet that a certain voice of the Father spoke, which is not the voice of the Son; and that none except the Son was born in the flesh, and suffered, and rose again, and ascended into heaven; and that none except the Holy Spirit came in the form of a dove. They wish to understand how the Trinity uttered that voice which was only of the Father; and how the same Trinity created that flesh in which the Son only was born of the Virgin; and how the very same Trinity itself wrought that form of a dove, in which the Holy Spirit only appeared. Yet, otherwise, the Trinity does not work indivisibly, but the Father does some things, the Son other things, and the Holy Spirit yet others: or else, if they do some things together, some severally, then the Trinity is not indivisible. It is a difficulty, too, to them, in what manner the Holy Spirit is in the Trinity, whom neither the Father nor the Son , nor both, have begotten, although He is the Spirit both of the Father and of the Son. Since, then, men weary us with asking such questions, let us unfold to them, as we are able, whatever wisdom God's gift has bestowed upon our weakness on this subject; neither let us go on our way with consuming envy . Should we say that we are not accustomed to think about such things, it would not be true ; yet if we acknowledge that such subjects commonly dwell in our thoughts, carried away as we are by the love of investigating the truth , then they require of us, by the law of charity, to make known to them what we have herein been able to find out. Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect (for, if the Apostle Paul , how much more must I, who lie far beneath his feet, count myself not to have apprehended!); but, according to my measure, if I forget those things that are behind, and reach forth unto those things which are before, and press towards the mark for the prize of the high calling, I am requested to disclose so much of the road as I have already passed, and the point to which I have reached, whence the course yet remains to bring me to the end. And those make the request, whom a generous charity compels me to serve. Needs must too, and God will grant that, in supplying them with matter to read, I shall profit myself also; and that, in seeking to reply to their inquiries, I shall myself likewise find that for which I was inquiring. Accordingly I have undertaken the task, by the bidding and help of the Lord my God , not so much of discoursing with authority respecting things I know already, as of learning those things by piously discoursing of them.

Those who have said that our Lord Jesus Christ is not God, or not very God, or not the One and only God with the Father, or not truly immortal because he is changeable, are proven wrong by the clearest and most unified voice of divine testimonies. For instance: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." It is clear that we should understand the Word of God to be the only Son of God, of whom it is said later, "And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us," referring to that birth of his incarnation, which took place in time from the Virgin. But this passage declares not only that he is God, but also that he is of the same ousia with the Father, because after saying "And the Word was God," it also says, "The same was in the beginning with God: all things were made by him, and without him was not anything made." Not simply all things, but only all things that were made—that is, the whole creation. From this it is evident that he himself was not made, since all things were made by him. And if he was not made, then he is not a creature. But if he is not a creature, then he is of the same ousia with the Father. For all ousia that is not God is creature, and all that is not creature is God. And if the Son is not of the same ousia with the Father, then he is an ousia that was made. And if he is an ousia that was made, then all things were not made by him. But all things were made by him, therefore he is of one and the same ousia with the Father. And so he is not only God, but also very God. And the same John most clearly affirms this in his epistle: "For we know that the Son of God has come, and has given us an understanding, that we may know the true God, and that we may be in his true Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life."

9. They who have said that our Lord Jesus Christ is not God , or not very God , or not with the Father the One and only God , or not truly immortal because changeable, are proved wrong by the most plain and unanimous voice of divine testimonies; as, for instance, In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God , and the Word was God. For it is plain that we are to take the Word of God to be the only Son of God , of whom it is afterwards said, And the Word was made flesh , and dwelt among us, on account of that birth of His incarnation , which was wrought in time of the Virgin . But herein is declared, not only that He is God , but also that He is of the same substance with the Father; because, after saying, And the Word was God , it is said also, The same was in the beginning with God: all things were made by Him, and without Him was not anything made. Not simply all things; but only all things that were made , that is; the whole creature. From which it appears clearly, that He Himself was not made, by whom all things were made. And if He was not made, then He is not a creature; but if He is not a creature, then He is of the same substance with the Father. For all substance that is not God is creature; and all that is not creature is God . And if the Son is not of the same substance with the Father , then He is a substance that was made: and if He is a substance that was made, then all things were not made by Him; but all things were made by Him, therefore He is of one and the same substance with the Father. And so He is not only God , but also very God. And the same John most expressly affirms this in his epistle: For we know that the Son of God has come, and has given us an understanding, that we may know the true God , and that we may be in His true Son Jesus Christ . This is the true God , and eternal life.

This means that when the Apostle Paul said "Who alone has immortality," he was not referring only to the Father, but to the One and only God, which is the Trinity itself. Whatever is itself eternal life cannot be mortal through any change. Therefore the Son of God, because He is Eternal Life, is also included with the Father when it says "Who only has immortality." We become partakers of this eternal life and become immortal in our own measure. But the eternal life itself, of which we become partakers, is one thing, while we ourselves, who will live eternally by partaking of it, are another. Even if Paul had said, "Whom in His own time the Father will show, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; who only has immortality," it would not necessarily mean that the Son is excluded. For the Son has not separated the Father from Himself, because He Himself, speaking elsewhere with the voice of wisdom (for He Himself is the Wisdom of God), says, "I alone compassed the circuit of heaven." Therefore it is even less necessary to understand the words "Who has immortality" as referring to the Father alone, excluding the Son, when they are stated like this: "That you keep this commandment without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ: whom in His own time He will show, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; who only has immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man has seen, nor can see: to whom be honor and power everlasting. Amen." In these words, neither the Father is specifically named, nor the Son, nor the Holy Spirit, but the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords—that is, the One and only and true God, the Trinity itself.

10. Hence also it follows by consequence, that the Apostle Paul did not say, Who alone has immortality , of the Father merely; but of the One and only God , which is the Trinity itself. For that which is itself eternal life is not mortal according to any changeableness; and hence the Son of God , because He is Eternal Life, is also Himself understood with the Father , where it is said, Who only has immortality . For we, too, are made partakers of this eternal life, and become, in our own measure, immortal . But the eternal life itself, of which we are made partakers, is one thing; we ourselves, who, by partaking of it, shall live eternally , are another. For if He had said, Whom in His own time the Father will show, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; who only has immortality ; not even so would it be necessarily understood that the Son is excluded. For neither has the Son separated the Father from Himself, because He Himself, speaking elsewhere with the voice of wisdom (for He Himself is the Wisdom of God), says, I alone compassed the circuit of heaven. And therefore so much the more is it not necessary that the words, Who has immortality , should be understood of the Father alone, omitting the Son; when they are said thus: That you keep this commandment without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ : whom in His own time He will show, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; who only has immortality , dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man has seen, nor can see: to whom be honor and power everlasting. Amen . In which words neither is the Father specially named, nor the Son , nor the Holy Spirit ; but the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; that is, the One and only and true God , the Trinity itself.

11. But perhaps what follows may interfere with this meaning, because it says, "Whom no man has seen, nor can see." However, this may also be understood as referring to Christ according to His divinity, which the Jews did not see, even though they saw and crucified Him in the flesh. His divinity cannot be seen by human sight in any way, but is seen with that kind of sight by which those who see are no longer merely human, but beyond human. Therefore, God Himself, the Trinity, is rightly understood to be the blessed and only Potentate, who shows the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ in His own time. For the words "Who only has immortality" are said in the same way as it is said, "Who only does wondrous things." And I would like to know of whom they take these words to be said. If only of the Father, how then is that true which the Son Himself says: "For whatever things the Father does, these also the Son does likewise"? Is there any work, among wonderful works, more wonderful than to raise up and give life to the dead? Yet the same Son says, "As the Father raises up the dead and gives them life, even so the Son gives life to whom He will." How, then, does the Father alone do wondrous things, when these words allow us to understand neither the Father only, nor the Son only, but assuredly the one only true God—that is, the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit?

11. But perhaps what follows may interfere with this meaning; because it is said, Whom no man has seen, nor can see: although this may also be taken as belonging to Christ according to His divinity, which the Jews did not see, who yet saw and crucified Him in the flesh; whereas His divinity can in no way be seen by human sight, but is seen with that sight with which they who see are no longer men, but beyond men. Rightly, therefore, is God Himself, the Trinity, understood to be the blessed and only Potentate, who shows the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ in His own time. For the words, Who only has immortality , are said in the same way as it is said, Who only does wondrous things. And I should be glad to know of whom they take these words to be said. If only of the Father , how then is that true which the Son Himself says, For whatever things the Father does, these also does the Son likewise? Is there any, among wonderful works , more wonderful than to raise up and quicken the dead? Yet the same Son says, As the Father raises up the dead, and quickens them, even so the Son quickens whom He will. How, then, does the Father alone do wondrous things, when these words allow us to understand neither the Father only, nor the Son only, but assuredly the one only true God , that is, the Father , and the Son , and the Holy Spirit ?

When the same apostle says, "But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by Him," who can doubt that he is speaking of all created things? This is the same as when John says, "All things were made by Him." I ask, therefore, about whom the apostle speaks in another place: "For of Him, and through Him, and in Him, are all things: to whom be glory forever. Amen." If this refers to the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, with each clause assigned to each person—"of Him" meaning of the Father, "through Him" meaning through the Son, "in Him" meaning in the Holy Spirit—then it is clear that the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit is one God, since the words that follow remain in singular number: "To whom be glory forever." For at the beginning of the passage he does not say, "O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of the Father," or "of the Son," or "of the Holy Spirit," but "of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments, and His ways past finding out! For who has known the mind of the Lord? Or who has been His counsellor? Or who has first given to Him and it shall be repaid to him again? For of Him, and through Him, and in Him, are all things: to whom be glory forever. Amen." But if they insist this should be understood only of the Father, then how are all things by the Father, as is said here, and also all things by the Son, as is said to the Corinthians, "And one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things," and as in the Gospel of John, "All things were made by Him"? For if some things were made by the Father and some by the Son, then not all things were made by the Father, nor all things by the Son. But if all things were made by the Father, and all things by the Son, then the same things were made by the Father and by the Son. Therefore, the Son is equal with the Father, and the working of the Father and the Son is indivisible. For if the Father made even the Son—whom the Son Himself certainly did not make—then not all things were made by the Son. But all things were made by the Son. Therefore He Himself was not made, so that with the Father He might make all things that were made. And the apostle has not refrained from using the very word itself, but has said most expressly, "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God," using here the name of God specially for the Father, as elsewhere, "But the head of Christ is God."

12. Also, when the same apostle says, But to us there is but one God , the Father , of whom are all things, and we in Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ , by whom are all things, and we by Him, who can doubt that he speaks of all things which are created; as does John, when he says, All things were made by Him ? I ask, therefore, of whom he speaks in another place: For of Him, and through Him, and in Him, are all things: to whom be glory forever. Amen . For if of the Father , and the Son , and the Holy Spirit , so as to assign each clause severally to each person: of Him, that is to say, of the Father; through Him, that is to say, through the Son; in Him, that is to say, in the Holy Spirit — it is manifest that the Father , and the Son , and the Holy Spirit is one God , inasmuch as the words continue in the singular number, To whom be glory forever. For at the beginning of the passage he does not say, O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of the Father , or of the Son , or of the Holy Spirit , but of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments, and His ways past finding out! For who has known the mind of the Lord? Or who has been His counsellor? Or who has first given to Him and it shall be recompensed unto him again? For of Him, and through Him, and in Him, are all things: to whom be glory forever. Amen . But if they will have this to be understood only of the Father , then in what way are all things by the Father , as is said here; and all things by the Son , as where it is said to the Corinthians, And one Lord Jesus Christ , by whom are all things, and as in the Gospel of John , All things were made by Him? For if some things were made by the Father , and some by the Son , then all things were not made by the Father , nor all things by the Son; but if all things were made by the Father , and all things by the Son , then the same things were made by the Father and by the Son. The Son, therefore, is equal with the Father , and the working of the Father and the Son is indivisible. Because if the Father made even the Son , whom certainly the Son Himself did not make, then all things were not made by the Son; but all things were made by the Son: therefore He Himself was not made, that with the Father He might make all things that were made. And the apostle has not refrained from using the very word itself, but has said most expressly, Who, being in the form of God , thought it not robbery to be equal with God ; using here the name of God specially of the Father; as elsewhere, But the head of Christ is God .

Similar evidence has been gathered concerning the Holy Spirit. Earlier writers who have discussed this subject have made full use of this evidence to show that the Holy Spirit is also God, and not a creature. If He is not a creature, then He is not only God in the ordinary sense (since even human beings are sometimes called gods), but truly God. Therefore, He is absolutely equal with the Father and the Son, and within the unity of the Trinity He is consubstantial and coeternal with them. That the Holy Spirit is not a creature is made especially clear by the passage where we are commanded not to serve the creature but the Creator. This is not the kind of service we are commanded to show one another through love, which in Greek is douleuein, but the kind of service that belongs to God alone, which in Greek is latreuein. This is why those who give to images the service that is due to God are called idolaters. This is the service referred to when it says, "You shall worship the Lord your God, and Him only shall you serve." This is found even more clearly in the Greek Scriptures, which use latreuein. Now if we are forbidden to serve the creature with this kind of service, since it is written, "You shall worship the Lord your God, and Him only shall you serve"—and the apostle likewise condemns those who worship and serve the creature rather than the Creator—then certainly the Holy Spirit is not a creature, since all the saints offer Him this service. As the apostle says, "For we are the circumcision, which serve the Spirit of God," which in Greek is latreuontes. Most Latin copies also have it this way: "We who serve the Spirit of God." Nearly all Greek copies have it so. Although in some Latin copies we find not "We worship the Spirit of God" but "We worship God in the Spirit," let those who are mistaken on this point and refuse to yield to the stronger authority tell us whether they also find this text varied in the manuscripts: "Do you not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit, which is in you, which you have from God?" What could be more foolish or more profane than for anyone to dare say that the members of Christ are the temple of one who, in their view, is a creature inferior to Christ? The apostle says elsewhere, "Your bodies are members of Christ." But if the members of Christ are also the temple of the Holy Spirit, then the Holy Spirit is not a creature, because we must owe to Him, whose temple our body is, that service which is to be given to God alone, which in Greek is called latreia. Accordingly the apostle says, "Therefore glorify God in your body."

13. Similar evidence has been collected also concerning the Holy Spirit , of which those who have discussed the subject before ourselves have most fully availed themselves, that He too is God , and not a creature. But if not a creature, then not only God (for men likewise are called gods ), but also very God ; and therefore absolutely equal with the Father and the Son , and in the unity of the Trinity consubstantial and co-eternal. But that the Holy Spirit is not a creature is made quite plain by that passage above all others, where we are commanded not to serve the creature, but the Creator; not in the sense in which we are commanded to serve one another by love , which is in Greek δουλεύειν , but in that in which God alone is served, which is in Greek λατρεύειν . From whence they are called idolaters who tender that service to images which is due to God . For it is this service concerning which it is said, You shall worship the Lord your God , and Him only shall you serve. For this is found also more distinctly in the Greek Scriptures, which have λατρεύσεις . Now if we are forbidden to serve the creature with such a service, seeing that it is written, You shall worship the Lord your God , and Him only shall you serve (and hence, too, the apostle repudiates those who worship and serve the creature more than the Creator), then assuredly the Holy Spirit is not a creature, to whom such a service is paid by all the saints ; as says the apostle, For we are the circumcision , which serve the Spirit of God , which is in the Greek λατρεύοντες . For even most Latin copies also have it thus, We who serve the Spirit of God ; but all Greek ones, or almost all, have it so. Although in some Latin copies we find, not We worship the Spirit of God , but, We worship God in the Spirit . But let those who err in this case, and refuse to give up to the more weighty authority, tell us whether they find this text also varied in the mss.: Do you not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost , which is in you, which you have of God? Yet what can be more senseless or more profane, than that any one should dare to say that the members of Christ are the temple of one who, in their opinion, is a creature inferior to Christ? For the apostle says in another place, Your bodies are members of Christ . But if the members of Christ are also the temple of the Holy Spirit , then the Holy Spirit is not a creature; because we must needs owe to Him, of whom our body is the temple, that service wherewith God only is to be served, which in Greek is called λατρεία . And accordingly the apostle says, Therefore glorify God in your body.

In these and similar testimonies from the divine Scriptures, which our predecessors freely used (as I have said) to refute the sophistries or errors of the heretics, the unity and equality of the Trinity are communicated to our faith. However, because many things are said in the sacred books in such a way as to signify, or even most clearly declare, the Father to be greater than the Son—due to the incarnation of the Word of God for accomplishing our salvation, so that the man Christ Jesus might be the Mediator between God and men—some people have made errors through failing to carefully examine or consider the whole scope of the Scriptures. They have tried to apply those things which are said of Jesus Christ according to the flesh to that substance of His which was eternal before the incarnation and is eternal. For instance, they say that the Son is less than the Father because it is written that the Lord Himself said, "My Father is greater than I." But the truth shows that in the same sense the Son is less also than Himself, for how was He not made less also than Himself, who emptied Himself and took upon Himself the form of a servant? For He did not take the form of a servant in such a way that He lost the form of God, in which He was equal to the Father. If, then, the form of a servant was taken without losing the form of God, since He Himself is the same only-begotten Son of God the Father both in the form of a servant and in the form of God—in the form of God equal to the Father, in the form of a servant the Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus—is there anyone who cannot understand that He Himself in the form of God is also greater than Himself, but likewise in the form of a servant less than Himself? And therefore Scripture rightly says both things: both that the Son is equal to the Father and that the Father is greater than the Son. For there is no confusion when the former is understood as referring to the form of God and the latter as referring to the form of a servant. In truth, this principle for resolving the question throughout all the sacred Scriptures is set forth in one chapter of an epistle of the Apostle Paul, where this distinction is clearly enough commended to us. For he says, "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God, but emptied Himself and took upon Him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men, and was found in fashion as a man." The Son of God, then, is equal to God the Father in nature, but less in fashion. For in the form of a servant which He took, He is less than the Father; but in the form of God, in which He also existed before He took the form of a servant, He is equal to the Father. In the form of God He is the Word, by whom all things are made; but in the form of a servant He was made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem those who were under the law. Similarly, in the form of God He made man; in the form of a servant He was made man. For if the Father alone had made man without the Son, it would not have been written, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness." Therefore, because the form of God took the form of a servant, both is God and both is man; but both God, on account of God who takes; and both man, on account of man who is taken. For neither by that taking is one of them turned and changed into the other: the Divinity is not changed into the creature so as to cease to be Divinity, nor the creature into Divinity so as to cease to be creature.

14. In these and like testimonies of the divine Scriptures , by free use of which, as I have said, our predecessors exploded such sophistries or errors of the heretics , the unity and equality of the Trinity are intimated to our faith . But because, on account of the incarnation of the Word of God for the working out of our salvation , that the man Christ Jesus might be the Mediator between God and men, many things are so said in the sacred books as to signify, or even most expressly declare, the Father to be greater than the Son; men have erred through a want of careful examination or consideration of the whole tenor of the Scriptures , and have endeavored to transfer those things which are said of Jesus Christ according to the flesh, to that substance of His which was eternal before the incarnation , and is eternal . They say, for instance, that the Son is less than the Father , because it is written that the Lord Himself said, My Father is greater than I. But the truth shows that after the same sense the Son is less also than Himself; for how was He not made less also than Himself, who emptied Himself, and took upon Him the form of a servant? For He did not so take the form of a servant as that He should lose the form of God , in which He was equal to the Father. If, then, the form of a servant was so taken that the form of God was not lost, since both in the form of a servant and in the form of God He Himself is the same only-begotten Son of God the Father , in the form of God equal to the Father , in the form of a servant the Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; is there any one who cannot perceive that He Himself in the form of God is also greater than Himself, but yet likewise in the form of a servant less than Himself? And not, therefore, without cause the Scripture says both the one and the other, both that the Son is equal to the Father , and that the Father is greater than the Son. For there is no confusion when the former is understood as on account of the form of God , and the latter as on account of the form of a servant. And, in truth , this rule for clearing the question through all the sacred Scriptures is set forth in one chapter of an epistle of the Apostle Paul , where this distinction is commended to us plainly enough. For he says, Who, being in the form of God , thought it not robbery to be equal with God ; but emptied Himself, and took upon Him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: and was found in fashion as a man . The Son of God , then, is equal to God the Father in nature, but less in fashion. For in the form of a servant which He took He is less than the Father; but in the form of God , in which also He was before He took the form of a servant, He is equal to the Father. In the form of God He is the Word, by whom all things are made; but in the form of a servant He was made of a woman , made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law. In like manner, in the form of God He made man; in the form of a servant He was made man. For if the Father alone had made man without the Son , it would not have been written, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. Therefore, because the form of God took the form of a servant, both is God and both is man; but both God , on account of God who takes; and both man, on account of man who is taken. For neither by that taking is the one of them turned and changed into the other: the Divinity is not changed into the creature, so as to cease to be Divinity; nor the creature into Divinity, so as to cease to be creature.

As for what the apostle says, "And when all things shall be subdued unto Him, then shall the Son also Himself be subject unto Him that put all things under Him": either the text has been expressed this way to prevent anyone from thinking that the form of Christ, which He took according to human nature, would later be transformed into the Divinity, or (to put it more precisely) into the Godhead itself, which is not a creature but is the unity of the Trinity—a nature incorporeal, unchangeable, consubstantial, and co-eternal with itself; or if anyone argues, as some have thought, that the text "Then shall the Son also Himself be subject unto Him that put all things under Him" is expressed this way so that one may believe that very subjection to be a future change and conversion of the creature into the substance or ousia itself of the Creator—that is, that what had been the substance of a creature shall become the substance of the Creator—such a person at least admits this, which truly cannot be doubted, that this had not yet happened when the Lord said, "My Father is greater than I." For He said this not only before He ascended into heaven, but also before He had suffered and risen from the dead. But those who think that the human nature in Him is to be changed and converted into the substance of the Godhead, and that it was said "Then shall the Son also Himself be subject unto Him that put all things under Him"—as if to say, Then also the Son of man Himself, and the human nature taken by the Word of God, shall be changed into the nature of Him who put all things under Him—must also think that this will happen when, after the day of judgment, He shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father. And therefore even still, according to this opinion, the Father is greater than that form of a servant which was taken from the Virgin. But if some claim even further that the man Christ Jesus has already been changed into the substance of God, at least they cannot deny that the human nature still remained when He said before His passion, "For my Father is greater than I"; so there is no question that it was said in this sense, that the Father is greater than the form of a servant, while in the form of God the Son is equal to Him. Nor should anyone, hearing what the apostle says, "But when He says all things are put under Him, it is manifest that He is excepted which did put all things under Him," think the words "that He has put all things under the Son" are to be understood of the Father in such a way that he should not think that the Son Himself put all things under Himself. For this the apostle plainly declares when he says to the Philippians, "For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ: who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like His glorious body, according to the working whereby He is able even to subdue all things unto Himself." For the working of the Father and of the Son is indivisible. Otherwise, neither has the Father Himself put all things under Himself, but the Son has put all things under Him, who delivers the kingdom to Him and puts down all rule and all authority and power. For these words are spoken of the Son: "When He shall have delivered up," says the apostle, "the kingdom to God, even the Father; when He shall have put down all rule, and all authority, and all power." For the same one who puts down also makes subject.

15. As for that which the apostle says, And when all things shall be subdued unto Him, then shall the Son also Himself be subject unto Him that put all things under Him: either the text has been so turned, lest any one should think that the fashion of Christ , which He took according to the human creature, was to be transformed hereafter into the Divinity, or (to express it more precisely) the Godhead itself, who is not a creature, but is the unity of the Trinity, — a nature incorporeal, and unchangeable, and consubstantial, and co-eternal with itself; or if any one contends, as some have thought, that the text, Then shall the Son also Himself be subject unto Him that put all things under Him, is so turned in order that one may believe that very subjection to be a change and conversion hereafter of the creature into the substance or essence itself of the Creator, that is, that that which had been the substance of a creature shall become the substance of the Creator;– such an one at any rate admits this, of which in truth there is no possible doubt , that this had not yet taken place, when the Lord said, My Father is greater than I. For He said this not only before He ascended into heaven, but also before He had suffered, and had risen from the dead. But they who think that the human nature in Him is to be changed and converted into the substance of the Godhead, and that it was so said, Then shall the Son also Himself be subject unto Him that put all things under Him, — as if to say, Then also the Son of man Himself, and the human nature taken by the Word of God , shall be changed into the nature of Him who put all things under Him — must also think that this will then take place, when, after the day of judgment, He shall have delivered up the kingdom to God , even the Father. And hence even still, according to this opinion, the Father is greater than that form of a servant which was taken of the Virgin . But if some affirm even further, that the man Christ Jesus has already been changed into the substance of God , at least they cannot deny that the human nature still remained, when He said before His passion , For my Father is greater than I; whence there is no question that it was said in this sense, that the Father is greater than the form of a servant, to whom in the form of God the Son is equal. Nor let any one, hearing what the apostle says, But when He says all things are put under Him, it is manifest that He is excepted which did put all things under Him, think the words, that He has put all things under the Son , to be so understood of the Father , as that He should not think that the Son Himself put all things under Himself. For this the apostle plainly declares, when he says to the Philippians, For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour , the Lord Jesus Christ : who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like His glorious body, according to the working whereby He is able even to subdue all things unto Himself. For the working of the Father and of the Son is indivisible. Otherwise, neither has the Father Himself put all things under Himself, but the Son has put all things under Him, who delivers the kingdom to Him, and puts down all rule and all authority and power. For these words are spoken of the Son: When He shall have delivered up, says the apostle, the kingdom to God , even the Father; when He shall have put down all rule, and all authority, and all power. For the same that puts down, also makes subject.

We should not think that Christ will hand over the kingdom to God the Father in such a way that He takes it away from Himself. Some foolish talkers have actually thought this. When it says "He shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father," He Himself is not excluded, because He is one God together with the Father. But the word "until" deceives those who read the divine Scriptures carelessly yet are eager for controversies. The text continues, "For He must reign, until He has put all enemies under His feet," as if when He had done so, He would no longer reign. They do not realize that this is said in the same way as that other text, "His heart is established: He shall not be afraid, until He see His desire upon His enemies." For He will not then be afraid when He has seen it. What then does "When He shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father" mean, as if God and the Father does not have the kingdom now? Because He is going to bring all the just—over whom the Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, now reigns as they live by faith—to that sight which the same apostle calls face to face, therefore the words "When He shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father" mean the same as "When He shall have brought believers to the contemplation of God, even the Father." For He says, "All things are delivered unto me of my Father, and no man knows the Son but the Father; neither knows any man the Father save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal Him." The Father will then be revealed by the Son when He shall have put down all rule, and all authority, and all power—that is, in such a way that there will no longer be any need for any economy of similitudes through angelic rulers, authorities, and powers. This is what is appropriately understood in what is said in the Song of Songs to the bride: "We will make you borders of gold, with studs of silver, while the King sits at His table"—that is, as long as Christ is in His secret place, since "your life is hid with Christ in God; when Christ, who is our life, shall appear, then shall you also appear with Him in glory." Before that time, "we see now through a glass, in an enigma"—that is, in similitudes—"but then face to face."

16. Neither may we think that Christ shall so give up the kingdom to God , even the Father , as that He shall take it away from Himself. For some vain talkers have thought even this. For when it is said, He shall have delivered up the kingdom to God , even the Father , He Himself is not excluded; because He is one God together with the Father. But that word until deceives those who are careless readers of the divine Scriptures , but eager for controversies. For the text continues, For He must reign, until He has put all enemies under His feet; as though, when He had so put them, He would no more reign. Neither do they perceive that this is said in the same way as that other text, His heart is established: He shall not be afraid, until He see His desire upon His enemies. For He will not then be afraid when He has seen it. What then means, When He shall have delivered up the kingdom to God , even the Father , as though God and the Father has not the kingdom now? But because He is hereafter to bring all the just, over whom now, living by faith , the Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, reigns, to that sight which the same apostle calls face to face; therefore the words, When He shall have delivered up the kingdom to God , even the Father , are as much as to say, When He shall have brought believers to the contemplation of God , even the Father. For He says, All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knows the Son , but the Father; neither knows any man the Father , save the Son , and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal Him. The Father will then be revealed by the Son , when He shall have put down all rule, and all authority, and all power; that is, in such wise that there shall be no more need of any economy of similitudes, by means of angelic rulers, and authorities, and powers. Of whom that is not unfitly understood, which is said in the Song of Songs to the bride, We will make you borders of gold, with studs of silver, while the King sits at His table; that is, as long as Christ is in His secret place: since your life is hid with Christ in God ; when Christ, who is our life, shall appear, then shall you also appear with Him in glory . Before which time, we see now through a glass, in an enigma, that is, in similitudes, but then face to face.

For this contemplation is presented to us as the goal of all our actions and the everlasting fullness of joy. For we are the sons of God, and it does not yet appear what we shall be, but we know that when He shall appear, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is. For what He said to His servant Moses—I am that I am, thus shall you say to the children of Israel, I Am has sent me to you—this is what we shall contemplate when we shall live in eternity. For so it is said, And this is life eternal, that they might know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom You have sent. This shall happen when the Lord shall have come and shall have brought to light the hidden things of darkness, when the darkness of this present mortality and corruption shall have passed away. Then will be our morning, which is spoken of in the Psalm, In the morning will I direct my prayer unto You, and will contemplate You. Of this contemplation I understand it to be said, When He shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father—that is, when He shall have brought the righteous, over whom now, living by faith, the Mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus, reigns, to the contemplation of God, even the Father. If in this I am foolish, let him who knows better correct me; to me at least the case seems as I have said. For we shall not seek anything else when we shall have come to the contemplation of Him. But that contemplation is not yet, so long as our joy is in hope. For hope that is seen is not hope, for what a man sees, why does he yet hope for? But if we hope for that we see not, then do we with patience wait for it, as long as the King sits at His table. Then will take place that which is written, In Your presence is fullness of joy. Nothing more than that joy will be required, because there will be nothing more that can be required. For the Father will be revealed to us, and that will satisfy us. And this much Philip had well understood, so that he said to the Lord, Show us the Father, and it satisfies us. But he had not yet understood that he himself was able to say this very same thing in this way also: Lord, show Yourself to us, and it satisfies us. For, that he might understand this, the Lord replied to him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet have you not known me, Philip? He that has seen me has seen the Father. But because He intended him, before he could see this, to live by faith, He went on to say, Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? For while we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord, for we walk by faith, not by sight. For contemplation is the reward of faith, for which reward our hearts are purified by faith, as it is written, Purifying their hearts by faith. And that our hearts are to be purified for this contemplation is proved above all by this text, Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God. And that this is life eternal, God says in the Psalm, With long life will I satisfy him, and show him my salvation. Whether, therefore, we hear, Show us the Son, or whether we hear, Show us the Father, it is all the same, since neither can be revealed without the other. For they are one, as He also Himself says, My Father and I are one. Finally, on account of this very indivisibility, it is sufficient that sometimes the Father alone, or the Son alone, should be named, as hereafter to fill us with the joy of His countenance.

17. For this contemplation is held forth to us as the end of all actions, and the everlasting fullness of joy . For we are the sons of God ; and it does not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when He shall appear, we shall be like Him; for we shall see Him as He is. For that which He said to His servant Moses , I am that I am; thus shall you say to the children of Israel , I Am has sent me to you; this it is which we shall contemplate when we shall live in eternity . For so it is said, And this is life eternal , that they might know You, the only true God , and Jesus Christ , whom You have sent. This shall be when the Lord shall have come, and shall have brought to light the hidden things of darkness; when the darkness of this present mortality and corruption shall have passed away. Then will be our morning, which is spoken of in the Psalm, In the morning will I direct my prayer unto You, and will contemplate You. Of this contemplation I understand it to be said, When He shall have delivered up the kingdom to God , even the Father; that is, when He shall have brought the just, over whom now, living by faith , the Mediator between God and man , the man Christ Jesus, reigns, to the contemplation of God , even the Father. If herein I am foolish, let him who knows better correct me; to me at least the case seems as I have said. For we shall not seek anything else, when we shall have come to the contemplation of Him. But that contemplation is not yet, so long as our joy is in hope. For hope that is seen is not hope: for what a man sees, why does he yet hope for? But if we hope for that we see not, then do we with patience wait for it, viz . as long as the King sits at His table. Then will take place that which is written, In Your presence is fullness of joy . Nothing more than that joy will be required; because there will be nothing more than can be required. For the Father will be manifested to us, and that will suffice for us. And this much Philip had well understood, so that he said to the Lord, Show us the Father , and it suffices us. But he had not yet understood that he himself was able to say this very same thing in this way also: Lord, show Yourself to us, and it suffices us. For, that he might understand this, the Lord replied to him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet have you not known me, Philip? He that has seen me has seen the Father. But because He intended him, before he could see this, to live by faith , He went on to say, Do you not believe that I am in the Father , and the Father in me? For while we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord: for we walk by faith , not by sight. For contemplation is the recompense of faith , for which recompense our hearts are purified by faith ; as it is written, Purifying their hearts by faith . And that our hearts are to be purified for this contemplation , is proved above all by this text, Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God. And that this is life eternal , God says in the Psalm, With long life will I satisfy him, and show him my salvation . Whether, therefore, we hear, Show us the Son; or whether we hear, Show us the Father; it is even all one, since neither can be manifested without the other. For they are one, as He also Himself says, My Father and I are one. Finally, on account of this very indivisibility, it suffices that sometimes the Father alone, or the Son alone, should be named, as hereafter to fill us with the joy of His countenance.

The Spirit of neither the Father nor the Son is excluded here—that is, the Holy Spirit who is specially called the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive. To enjoy God the Trinity, in whose image we are made, is truly the fullness of our joy, and there is no joy greater than this. For this reason, the Holy Spirit is sometimes spoken of as if He alone is enough for our blessedness. And He is indeed enough by Himself, because He cannot be separated from the Father and the Son. The Father alone is sufficient because He cannot be separated from the Son and the Holy Spirit. The Son alone is sufficient because He cannot be separated from the Father and the Holy Spirit. What does Christ mean when He says, "If you love me, keep my commandments; and I will pray the Father, and He shall give you another Comforter, that He may abide with you forever; even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive"—that is, whom the lovers of the world cannot receive? For the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God. But it might seem, furthermore, as if the words "And I will pray the Father, and He shall give you another Comforter" were spoken as if the Son alone were not sufficient. And that passage speaks of the Spirit as if He alone were completely sufficient: "When He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth." Tell me, then, is the Son excluded here, as if He did not teach all truth, or as if the Holy Spirit were to complete what the Son could not fully teach? Let them say, if they wish, that the Holy Spirit is greater than the Son, whom they usually call lesser. Or is it perhaps because the text does not say "He alone" or "No one else except Himself will guide you into all truth" that they allow that the Son also may be believed to teach together with Him? In that case, the apostle has excluded the Son from knowing the things of God where he says, "Even so the things of God knows no one, but the Spirit of God"—so that these misguided people might on this basis go on to say that only the Holy Spirit teaches even the Son the things of God, as the greater teaches the lesser. To this Holy Spirit the Son Himself gives so much importance that He says, "But because I have said these things to you, sorrow has filled your heart. Nevertheless I tell you the truth: it is expedient for you that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Comforter will not come to you."

18. Neither is the Spirit of either thence excluded, that is, the Spirit of the Father and of the Son; which Holy Spirit is specially called the Spirit of truth , whom the world cannot receive. For to have the fruition of God the Trinity, after whose image we are made, is indeed the fullness of our joy , than which there is no greater. On this account the Holy Spirit is sometimes spoken of as if He alone sufficed to our blessedness: and He does alone so suffice, because He cannot be divided from the Father and the Son ; as the Father alone is sufficient, because He cannot be divided from the Son and the Holy Spirit ; and the Son alone is sufficient because He cannot be divided from the Father and the Holy Spirit . For what does He mean by saying, If you love me, keep my commandments; and I will pray the Father , and He shall give you another Comforter, that He may abide with you for ever; even the Spirit of truth , whom the world cannot receive, that is, the lovers of the world? For the natural man receives not the things of the Spirit of God . But it may perhaps seem, further, as if the words, And I will pray the Father , and He shall give you another Comforter, were so said as if the Son alone were not sufficient. And that place so speaks of the Spirit , as if He alone were altogether sufficient: When He, the Spirit of truth , has come, He will guide you into all truth . Pray, therefore, is the Son here excluded, as if He did not teach all truth , or as if the Holy Spirit were to fill up that which the Son could not fully teach? Let them say then, if it pleases them, that the Holy Spirit is greater than the Son , whom they are wont to call less. Or is it, forsooth, because it is not said, He alone — or, No one else except Himself — will guide you into all truth , that they allow that the Son also may be believed to teach together with Him? In that case the apostle has excluded the Son from knowing those things which are of God , where he says, Even so the things of God knows no one, but the Spirit of God : so that these perverse men might, upon this ground, go on to say that none but the Holy Spirit teaches even the Son the things of God , as the greater teaches the less; to whom the Son Himself ascribes so much as to say, But because I have said these things unto you, sorrow has filled your heart. Nevertheless I tell you the truth ; it is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you.

This is said not because the Word of God and the Holy Spirit are unequal, but because the presence of the Son of man with them would hinder the coming of the one who was not less—since he did not empty himself by taking the form of a servant as the Son did. It was necessary, then, for the form of a servant to be removed from their sight, because by gazing upon it they thought that what they saw was all that Christ was. This also explains what is said: "If you loved me, you would rejoice because I said, 'I go unto the Father; for my Father is greater than I.'" This means: it is necessary for me to go to the Father because, while you see me in this way, you consider me less than the Father through what you see. Being focused on the creature and the form I have taken upon myself, you do not perceive the equality I have with the Father. This also explains: "Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father." Touch, as it were, limits their understanding, and he did not want the thought of the heart directed toward him to be so limited that he would be considered only what he appeared to be. But the ascension to the Father meant appearing as he is equal to the Father, so that the limit of the sight that suffices us might be reached there. Sometimes it is also said of the Son alone that he himself suffices, and the whole reward of our love and longing is presented as the sight of him. For it is said: "He that has my commandments, and keeps them, he it is that loves me; and he that loves me shall be loved of my Father; and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him." Because he did not say here, "And I will show the Father also to him," has he therefore excluded the Father? On the contrary, because it is true that "I and my Father are one," when the Father is manifested, the Son also, who is in him, is manifested; and when the Son is manifested, the Father also, who is in him, is manifested. Therefore, just as when it is said, "And I will manifest myself to him," it is understood that he manifests the Father also, so likewise in what is said, "When He shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father," it is understood that he does not take it away from himself. For when he brings believers to the contemplation of God, even the Father, he will doubtless bring them to the contemplation of himself, since he has said, "And I will manifest myself to him." Consequently, when Judas said to him, "Lord, how is it that You will manifest Yourself unto us, and not unto the world?" Jesus answered and said to him, "If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him." See, he manifests not only himself to the one who loves him, because he comes to him together with the Father and abides with him.

But this is said, not on account of any inequality of the Word of God and of the Holy Spirit , but as though the presence of the Son of man with them would be a hindrance to the coming of Him, who was not less, because He did not empty Himself, taking upon Him the form of a servant, as the Son did. It was necessary, then, that the form of a servant should be taken away from their eyes, because, through gazing upon it, they thought that alone which they saw to be Christ. Hence also is that which is said, If you loved me, you would rejoice because I said, 'I go unto the Father; for my Father is greater than I:' that is, on that account it is necessary for me to go to the Father , because, while you see me thus, you hold me to be less than the Father through that which you see; and so, being taken up with the creature and the fashion which I have taken upon me, you do not perceive the equality which I have with the Father. Hence, too, is this: Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father. For touch, as it were, puts a limit to their conception, and He therefore would not have the thought of the heart, directed towards Himself, to be so limited as that He should be held to be only that which He seemed to be. But the ascension to the Father meant, so to appear as He is equal to the Father , that the limit of the sight which suffices us might be attained there. Sometimes also it is said of the Son alone, that He himself suffices, and the whole reward of our love and longing is held forth as in the sight of Him. For so it is said, He that has my commandments, and keeps them, he it is that loves me; and he that loves me shall be loved of my Father; and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him. Pray, because He has not here said, And I will show the Father also to him, has He therefore excluded the Father? On the contrary, because it is true , I and my Father are one, when the Father is manifested, the Son also, who is in Him, is manifested; and when the Son is manifested, the Father also, who is in Him, is manifested. As, therefore, when it is said, And I will manifest myself to him, it is understood that He manifests also the Father; so likewise in that which is said, When He shall have delivered up the kingdom to God , even the Father , it is understood that He does not take it away from Himself; since, when He shall bring believers to the contemplation of God , even the Father , doubtless He will bring them to the contemplation of Himself, who has said, And I will manifest myself to him. And so, consequently, when Judas had said to Him, Lord, how is it that You will manifest Yourself unto us, and not unto the world? Jesus answered and said to him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him. Behold, that He manifests not only Himself to him by whom He is loved, because He comes to him together with the Father , and abides with him.

Perhaps someone might think that when the Father and the Son make their home with the person who loves them, the Holy Spirit is excluded from that home. But what about what is said earlier concerning the Holy Spirit: "Whom the world cannot receive, because it does not see Him, but you know Him; for He abides with you, and is in you"? He is therefore not excluded from that home, since it is said of Him, "He abides with you, and is in you"—unless perhaps someone is foolish enough to think that when the Father and the Son have come to make their home with the one who loves them, the Holy Spirit will leave and make room for those who are greater. But Scripture itself opposes this fleshly notion, for it says a little earlier: "I will pray the Father, and He shall give you another Comforter, that He may abide with you forever." He will not therefore leave when the Father and the Son come, but will be in the same home with them eternally, because He will not come without them, nor they without Him. But in order to indicate the Trinity, certain things are stated separately, with each Person being individually named; yet these are not to be understood as though the other Persons were excluded, because of the unity of the same Trinity and the one ousia and Godhead of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.

19. Will it perhaps be thought, that when the Father and the Son make their abode with him who loves them, the Holy Spirit is excluded from that abode? What, then, is that which is said above of the Holy Spirit : Whom the world cannot receive, because it sees Him not: but you know Him; for He abides with you, and is in you ? He, therefore, is not excluded from that abode, of whom it is said, He abides with you, and is in you; unless, perhaps, any one be so senseless as to think, that when the Father and the Son have come that they may make their abode with him who loves them, the Holy Spirit will depart thence, and (as it were) give place to those who are greater. But the Scripture itself meets this carnal idea; for it says a little above: I will pray the Father , and He shall give you another Comforter, that He may abide with you forever. He will not therefore depart when the Father and the Son come, but will be in the same abode with them eternally ; because neither will He come without them, nor they without Him. But in order to intimate the Trinity, some things are separately affirmed, the Persons being also each severally named; and yet are not to be understood as though the other Persons were excluded, on account of the unity of the same Trinity and the One substance and Godhead of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit .

Our Lord Jesus Christ will therefore deliver up the kingdom to God, even the Father, without excluding Himself or the Holy Spirit from it. He will do this when He brings believers to the contemplation of God, which is the goal of all good actions and represents everlasting rest and joy that will never be taken from us. He indicates this in His words: I will see you again, and your heart shall rejoice; and your joy no man takes from you. Mary, sitting at the Lord's feet and earnestly listening to His word, gave us a picture of this joy. She rested from all activity and focused on the truth in the way this present life allows, thereby prefiguring what will exist for eternity. While her sister Martha was busy with necessary tasks—good and useful though they were, but destined to pass away when rest comes—Mary herself was resting in the Lord's word. When Martha complained that her sister wasn't helping her, the Lord replied: Mary has chosen the best part, which shall not be taken away from her. He didn't say Martha was doing something bad, but rather that Mary had chosen the best part that will not be taken away. The part occupied with serving a need will be taken away when the need itself passes away, since the reward for good work that passes away is rest that will not pass away. In that contemplation, then, God will be all in all, because nothing else but Himself will be needed. It will be enough to be enlightened by and to enjoy Him alone. Therefore, the one in whom the Spirit makes intercession with groanings which cannot be uttered says: One thing have I desired of the Lord, that I will seek after; that I may dwell in the house of the Lord all the days of my life, to contemplate the beauty of the Lord. For we shall then contemplate God—the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit—when the Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father. At that point He will no longer make intercession for us as our Mediator and Priest, Son of God and Son of man. Instead, He Himself too, insofar as He is a Priest who took the form of a servant for us, shall be put under Him who has put all things under Him, and under whom He has put all things. This means that insofar as He is God, He with the Father will have put us under Himself; insofar as He is a Priest, He with us will be put under the Father. Therefore, since the incarnate Son is both God and man, it is more accurate to say that the manhood in the Son is another substance from the Son, than to say that the Son in the Father is another substance from the Father. This is similar to how the bodily nature of my soul is more another substance in relation to my soul itself, even though they exist in one and the same man, than the soul of another man is in relation to my soul.

20. Our Lord Jesus Christ , therefore, will so deliver up the kingdom to God , even the Father , Himself not being thence excluded, nor the Holy Spirit , when He shall bring believers to the contemplation of God , wherein is the end of all good actions, and everlasting rest, and joy which never will be taken from us. For He signifies this in that which He says: I will see you again, and your heart shall rejoice ; and your joy no man takes from you. Mary, sitting at the feet of the Lord, and earnestly listening to His word, foreshowed a similitude of this joy ; resting as she did from all business, and intent upon the truth , according to that manner of which this life is capable, by which, however, to prefigure that which shall be for eternity . For while Martha, her sister, was cumbered about necessary business, which, although good and useful, yet, when rest shall have succeeded, is to pass away, she herself was resting in the word of the Lord. And so the Lord replied to Martha, when she complained that her sister did not help her: Mary has chosen the best part, which shall not be taken away from her. He did not say that Martha was acting a bad part; but that best part that shall not be taken away. For that part which is occupied in the ministering to a need shall be taken away when the need itself has passed away. Since the reward of a good work that will pass away is rest that will not pass away. In that contemplation , therefore, God will be all in all; because nothing else but Himself will be required, but it will be sufficient to be enlightened by and to enjoy Him alone. And so he in whom the Spirit makes intercession with groanings which cannot be uttered, says, One thing have I desired of the Lord, that I will seek after; that I may dwell in the house of the Lord all the days of my life, to contemplate the beauty of the Lord. For we shall then contemplate God , the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit , when the Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, shall have delivered up the kingdom to God , even the Father , so as no longer to make intercession for us, as our Mediator and Priest, Son of God and Son of man ; but that He Himself too, in so far as He is a Priest that has taken the form of a servant for us, shall be put under Him who has put all things under Him, and under whom He has put all things: so that, in so far as He is God , He with Him will have put us under Himself; in so far as He is a Priest, He with us will be put under Him. And therefore as the [incarnate] Son is both God and man , it is rather to be said that the manhood in the Son is another substance [from the Son], than that the Son in the Father [is another substance from the Father]; just as the carnal nature of my soul is more another substance in relation to my soul itself, although in one and the same man, than the soul of another man is in relation to my soul .

When Christ delivers up the kingdom to God, even the Father—that is, when He brings those who believe and live by faith, for whom He now makes intercession as Mediator, to that contemplation for which we now long and groan, and when labor and groaning have passed away—then, since the kingdom will have been delivered up to God, even the Father, He will no longer make intercession for us. He indicates this when He says: "These things I have spoken to you in similitudes; but the time comes when I will no longer speak to you in similitudes, but I will declare to you plainly of the Father"—that is, they will no longer be similitudes when the sight is face to face. For this is what He means by "I will declare to you plainly of the Father," as if He said, "I will plainly show you the Father." He says "I will declare to you" because He is His Word. For He continues: "At that day you will ask in my name; and I do not say to you that I will pray the Father for you, for the Father Himself loves you, because you have loved me and have believed that I came out from God. I came forth from the Father and have come into the world; again, I leave the world and go to the Father." What does "I came forth from the Father" mean, except that I have not appeared in that form in which I am equal to the Father, but otherwise—that is, as less than the Father in the creature I have taken upon myself? And what does "I have come into the world" mean, except that I have revealed to the eyes even of sinners who love this world the form of a servant that I took, making myself of no reputation? And what does "Again, I leave the world" mean, except that I take away from the sight of the lovers of this world what they have seen? And what does "I go to the Father" mean, except that I teach those who are my faithful ones to understand me in that being in which I am equal to the Father? Those who believe this will be counted worthy of being brought by faith to sight—that is, to that very sight, in bringing them to which He is said to deliver up the kingdom to God, even the Father. For His faithful ones, whom He has redeemed with His blood, are called His kingdom, for whom He now intercedes; but then, making them to abide in Himself there where He is equal to the Father, He will no longer pray the Father for them. For He says, "the Father Himself loves you." Indeed, He prays insofar as He is less than the Father, but as He is equal with the Father, He grants with the Father. Therefore He certainly does not exclude Himself from what He says, "The Father Himself loves you," but He means it to be understood in the manner I have spoken of above and sufficiently indicated—namely, that for the most part each Person of the Trinity is so named that the other Persons are also to be understood. Accordingly, "For the Father Himself loves you" is said in such a way that consequently both the Son and the Holy Spirit are also to be understood. This does not mean He does not love us now, since He spared not His own Son but delivered Him up for us all. But God loves us as we shall be, not as we are, for those whom He loves are such as those whom He keeps eternally, which will be the case when He who now makes intercession for us will have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father, so as no longer to ask the Father, because the Father Himself loves us. But for what merit, except that of faith, by which we believe before we see what is promised? For by this faith we will arrive at sight, so that He may love us, being such as He loves us in order that we may become—and not such as He hates us because we are, and exhorts and enables us to wish not to be always.

21. When, therefore, He shall have delivered up the kingdom to God , even the Father , — that is, when He shall have brought those who believe and live by faith , for whom now as Mediator He makes intercession, to that contemplation , for the obtaining of which we sigh and groan, and when labor and groaning shall have passed away — then, since the kingdom will have been delivered up to God , even the Father , He will no more make intercession for us. And this He signifies, when He says: These things have I spoken unto you in similitudes; but the time comes when I shall no more speak unto you in similitudes, but I shall declare to you plainly of the Father: that is, they will not then be similitudes, when the sight shall be face to face. For this it is which He says, But I will declare to you plainly of the Father; as if He said I will plainly show you the Father. For He says, I will declare to you, because He is His word. For He goes on to say, At that day you shall ask in my name; and I say not unto you, that I will pray the Father for you: for the Father Himself loves you, because you have loved me, and have believed that I came out from God . I came forth from the Father , and have come into the world: again, I leave the world, and go to the Father. What is meant by I came forth from the Father , unless this, that I have not appeared in that form in which I am equal to the Father , but otherwise, that is, as less than the Father , in the creature which I have taken upon me? And what is meant by I have come into the world, unless this, that I have manifested to the eyes even of sinners who love this world, the form of a servant which I took, making myself of no reputation ? And what is meant by Again, I leave the world, unless this, that I take away from the sight of the lovers of this world that which they have seen? And what is meant by I go to the Father , unless this, that I teach those who are my faithful ones to understand me in that being in which I am equal to the Father? Those who believe this will be thought worthy of being brought by faith to sight, that is, to that very sight, in bringing them to which He is said to deliver up the kingdom to God , even the Father. For His faithful ones, whom He has redeemed with His blood, are called His kingdom, for whom He now intercedes; but then, making them to abide in Himself there, where He is equal to the Father , He will no longer pray the Father for them. For, He says, the Father Himself loves you. For indeed He prays , in so far as He is less than the Father; but as He is equal with the Father , He with the Father grants. Wherefore He certainly does not exclude Himself from that which He says, The Father Himself loves you; but He means it to be understood after that manner which I have above spoken of, and sufficiently intimated — namely, that for the most part each Person of the Trinity is so named, that the other Persons also may be understood. Accordingly, For the Father Himself loves you, is so said that by consequence both the Son and the Holy Spirit also may be understood: not that He does not now love us, who spared not His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all; but God loves us, such as we shall be, not such as we are, for such as they are whom He loves, such are they whom He keeps eternally ; which shall then be, when He who now makes intercession for us shall have delivered up the kingdom to God , even the Father , so as no longer to ask the Father , because the Father Himself loves us. But for what deserving, except of faith , by which we believe before we see that which is promised? For by this faith we shall arrive at sight; so that He may love us, being such, as He loves us in order that we may become; and not such, as He hates us because we are, and exhorts and enables us to wish not to be always.

Therefore, once we have mastered this rule for interpreting the Scriptures concerning the Son of God—that we must distinguish what relates to the form of God, in which He is equal to the Father, and what relates to the form of a servant which He took, in which He is less than the Father—we will not be troubled by apparently contradictory and conflicting statements in the sacred books. For both the Son and the Holy Spirit, according to the form of God, are equal to the Father, because neither of them is a creature, as we have already shown. But according to the form of a servant, He is less than the Father, because He Himself said, "My Father is greater than I." And He is less than Himself, because it is said of Him, "He emptied Himself." And He is less than the Holy Spirit, because He Himself says, "Whoever speaks a word against the Son of man will be forgiven, but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven." And in the Spirit He also worked miracles, saying, "But if I cast out demons by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God has come upon you." And in Isaiah He says—in the passage which He Himself read in the synagogue and showed without any doubt to be fulfilled concerning Himself—"The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me, because He has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim liberty to the captives," and so on. He declares that He was sent to do these things because the Spirit of God is upon Him. According to the form of God, all things were made by Him. According to the form of a servant, He was Himself made of a woman, made under the law. According to the form of God, He and the Father are one. According to the form of a servant, He came not to do His own will, but the will of Him who sent Him. According to the form of God, "As the Father has life in Himself, so He has given to the Son to have life in Himself." According to the form of a servant, His soul is sorrowful even to death, and He says, "O my Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from me." According to the form of God, He is the true God and eternal life. According to the form of a servant, He became obedient to death, even death on a cross. According to the form of God, all things that the Father has are His, and He says, "All that is mine is Yours, and Yours is mine." According to the form of a servant, the teaching is not His own, but belongs to Him who sent Him.

22. Wherefore, having mastered this rule for interpreting the Scriptures concerning the Son of God , that we are to distinguish in them what relates to the form of God , in which He is equal to the Father , and what to the form of a servant which He took, in which He is less than the Father; we shall not be disquieted by apparently contrary and mutually repugnant sayings of the sacred books. For both the Son and the Holy Spirit , according to the form of God , are equal to the Father , because neither of them is a creature, as we have already shown: but according to the form of a servant He is less than the Father , because He Himself has said, My Father is greater than I; and He is less than Himself, because it is said of Him, He emptied Himself; and He is less than the Holy Spirit , because He Himself says, Whosoever speaks a word against the Son of man , it shall be forgiven him; but whosoever speaks against the Holy Ghost , it shall not be forgiven Him. And in the Spirit too He wrought miracles , saying: But if I with the Spirit of God cast out devils, no doubt the kingdom of God has come upon you. And in Isaiah He says — in the lesson which He Himself read in the synagogue , and showed without a scruple of doubt to be fulfilled concerning Himself — The Spirit of the Lord God , He says, is upon me: because He has anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek He has sent me to proclaim liberty to the captives, etc.: for the doing of which things He therefore declares Himself to be sent, because the Spirit of God is upon Him. According to the form of God , all things were made by Him; according to the form of a servant, He was Himself made of a woman , made under the law. According to the form of God , He and the Father are one; according to the form of a servant, He came not to do His own will, but the will of Him that sent Him. According to the form of God , As the Father has life in Himself, so has He given to the Son to have life in Himself; according to the form of a servant, His soul is sorrowful even unto death; and, O my Father, He says, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me. According to the form of God , He is the True God , and eternal life; according to the form of a servant, He became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. — 23. According to the form of God , all things that the Father has are His, and All mine, He says, are Yours, and Yours are mine; according to the form of a servant, the doctrine is not His own, but His that sent Him.

Again, "Of that day and that hour knows no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven; neither the Son, but the Father." For He is ignorant of this in the sense of making others ignorant—that is, He did not know it in such a way as to reveal it to His disciples at that time. This is similar to what was said to Abraham, "Now I know that you fear God," which means "now I have caused you to know it," because Abraham, being tested in that trial, came to know this about himself. For Christ was certainly going to tell His disciples this same thing at the proper time. Speaking of this future event as if it were already past, He says, "From now on I call you not servants, but friends; for the servant does not know what his Lord does, but I have called you friends, for all things that I have heard of my Father I have made known to you." He had not yet done this, but spoke as though He had already done it, because He certainly would do it. For He says to the disciples themselves, "I have yet many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now." Among these things is to be understood also the matter of the day and hour. For the apostle Paul also says, "I determined not to know anything among you, except Jesus Christ, and Him crucified," because he was speaking to those who were not able to receive higher teachings concerning the Godhead of Christ. To them he also says a little later, "I could not speak to you as to spiritual people, but as to fleshly." He was ignorant, therefore, among them of what they were not able to learn from him. And he said he knew only what it was fitting for them to know from him. In short, he knew among the mature what he did not know among infants, for he says there, "We speak wisdom among those who are mature." For a man is said not to know what he conceals, according to that kind of speech by which a ditch is called blind when it is hidden. For the Scriptures do not use any other kind of speech than may be found in use among people, because they speak to people.

Again, Of that day and that hour knows no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven; neither the Son , but the Father. For He is ignorant of this, as making others ignorant ; that is, in that He did not so know as at that time to show His disciples : as it was said to Abraham , Now I know that you fear God , that is, now I have caused you to know it; because he himself, being tried in that temptation , became known to himself. For He was certainly going to tell this same thing to His disciples at the fitting time; speaking of which yet future as if past, He says, Henceforth I call you not servants, but friends; for the servant knows not what his Lord does: but I have called you friends; for all things that I have heard of my Father I have made known unto you; which He had not yet done, but spoke as though He had already done it, because He certainly would do it. For He says to the disciples themselves, I have yet many things to say unto you; but you cannot bear them now. Among which is to be understood also, Of the day and hour. For the apostle also says, I determined not to know anything among you, save Jesus Christ , and Him crucified; because he was speaking to those who were not able to receive higher things concerning the Godhead of Christ . To whom also a little while after he says, I could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal. He was ignorant , therefore, among them of that which they were not able to know from him. And that only he said that he knew , which it was fitting that they should know from him. In short, he knew among the perfect what he knew not among babes; for he there says: We speak wisdom among them that are perfect. For a man is said not to know what he hides, after that kind of speech, after which a ditch is called blind which is hidden. For the Scriptures do not use any other kind of speech than may be found in use among men , because they speak to men.

According to the form of God, it is said "Before all the hills He begot me," that is, before all the heights of created things, and "Before the dawn I begot You," that is, before all times and temporal things. But according to the form of a servant, it is said "The Lord created me in the beginning of His ways." Because, according to the form of God, He said "I am the truth," and according to the form of a servant, "I am the way." Since He Himself, being the first-begotten of the dead, made a passage to the kingdom of God and to eternal life for His Church, to which He is the Head in such a way as to make the body also immortal, therefore He was created in the beginning of the ways of God in His work. For according to the form of God, He is the beginning who also speaks to us, in which beginning God created the heaven and the earth. But according to the form of a servant, He is a bridegroom coming out of His chamber. According to the form of God, He is the first-born of every creature, and He is before all things and by Him all things hold together. According to the form of a servant, He is the head of the body, the Church. According to the form of God, He is the Lord of glory. From this it is clear that He Himself glorifies His saints, for "Whom He predestined, them He also called; and whom He called, them He also justified; and whom He justified, them He also glorified." Accordingly, it is said of Him that He justifies the ungodly. Of Him it is said that He is just and a justifier. If, therefore, He has also glorified those whom He has justified, then He who justifies also Himself glorifies. He is, as I have said, the Lord of glory. Yet according to the form of a servant, He replied to His disciples when they were inquiring about their own glorification: "To sit on my right hand and on my left is not mine to give, but it shall be given to them for whom it is prepared by my Father."

24. According to the form of God , it is said Before all the hills He begot me, that is, before all the loftinesses of things created and, Before the dawn I begot You, that is, before all times and temporal things: but according to the form of a servant, it is said, The Lord created me in the beginning of His ways. Because, according to the form of God , He said, I am the truth ; and according to the form of a servant, I am the way. For, because He Himself, being the first-begotten of the dead, made a passage to the kingdom of God to life eternal for His Church, to which He is so the Head as to make the body also immortal , therefore He was created in the beginning of the ways of God in His work. For, according to the form of God , He is the beginning, that also speaks unto us, in which beginning God created the heaven and the earth; but according to the form of a servant, He is a bridegroom coming out of His chamber. According to the form of God , He is the first-born of every creature, and He is before all things and by him all things consist; according to the form of a servant, He is the head of the body, the Church . According to the form of God , He is the Lord of glory . From which it is evident that He Himself glorifies His saints : for, Whom He did predestinate , them He also called; and whom He called, them He also justified; and whom He justified, them He also glorified . Of Him accordingly it is said, that He justifies the ungodly; of Him it is said, that He is just and a justifier. If, therefore, He has also glorified those whom He has justified, He who justifies, Himself also glorifies; who is, as I have said, the Lord of glory . Yet, according to the form of a servant, He replied to His disciples , when inquiring about their own glorification: To sit on my right hand and on my left is not mine to give, but [it shall be given to them] for whom it is prepared by my Father.

According to the form of God, He and the Father are one, so what the Father prepares is also prepared by the Son Himself. We have already shown through many passages in the divine Scriptures that in this Trinity, what is said of each person is also said of all, because of the indivisible working of one and the same substance. For example, Christ says of the Holy Spirit, "If I depart, I will send Him unto you." He did not say "We will send," but spoke as if the Son alone would send Him, not the Father. Yet in another place He says, "These things have I spoken unto you, being yet present with you; but the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, He shall teach you all things." Here again He speaks as if the Son would not send Him, but only the Father. Therefore, just as in these texts, so also when He says, "But for them for whom it is prepared by my Father," He means us to understand that He Himself, together with the Father, prepares seats of glory for those for whom He will. But someone may object: In the passages about the Holy Spirit, He says He will send Him without denying the Father will send Him, and says the Father will send Him without denying He will do so Himself; but here He explicitly says, "It is not mine to give," and then says these things are prepared by the Father. However, this is exactly what we have already established as being said according to the form of a servant: namely, that we should understand "It is not mine to give" as if He said, "This is not in the power of man to give," so that He may be understood to give it through that wherein He is God equal to the Father. "It is not mine," He says, "to give"—that is, I do not give these things by human power, but to those for whom it is prepared by my Father; but understand also that if all things which the Father has are mine, then this certainly is mine also, and I together with the Father have prepared these things.

25. But that which is prepared by His Father is prepared also by the Son Himself, because He and the Father are one. For we have already shown, by many modes of speech in the divine Scriptures , that, in this Trinity, what is said of each is also said of all, on account of the indivisible working of the one and same substance. As He also says of the Holy Spirit , If I depart, I will send Him unto you. He did not say, We will send; but in such way as if the Son only should send Him, and not the Father; while yet He says in another place, These things have I spoken unto you, being yet present with you; but the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost , whom the Father will send in my name, He shall teach you all things. Here again it is so said as if the Son also would not send Him, but the Father only. As therefore in these texts, so also where He says, But for them for whom it is prepared by my Father, He meant it to be understood that He Himself, with the Father , prepares seats of glory for those for whom He will. But some one may say: There, when He spoke of the Holy Spirit , He so says that He Himself will send Him, as not to deny that the Father will send Him; and in the other place, He so says that the Father will send Him, as not to deny that He will do so Himself; but here He expressly says, It is not mine to give, and so goes on to say that these things are prepared by the Father. But this is the very thing which we have already laid down to be said according to the form of a servant: viz. , that we are so to understand It is not mine to give, as if it were said, This is not in the power of man to give; that so He may be understood to give it through that wherein He is God equal to the Father. It is not mine, He says, to give; that is, I do not give these things by human power, but to those for whom it is prepared by my Father; but then take care you understand also, that if all things which the Father has are mine, then this certainly is mine also, and I with the Father have prepared these things.

26. I ask again, in what sense is it said, "If any man does not hear my words, I will not judge him"? Perhaps He said "I will not judge him" here in the same sense as He said elsewhere "It is not mine to give." But what follows here? "I came not," He says, "to judge the world, but to save the world"; and then He adds, "He that rejects me and does not receive my words has one that judges him." Now here we would naturally understand this to mean the Father, except that He added, "The word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day." Well then, will neither the Son judge, because He says "I will not judge him," nor the Father, but rather the word which the Son has spoken? No, but hear what follows next: "For I," He says, "have not spoken of myself; but the Father who sent me, He gave me a commandment, what I should say and what I should speak; and I know that His commandment is life everlasting: therefore whatever I speak, even as the Father said to me, so I speak." If therefore the Son does not judge, but the word which the Son has spoken does; and the word which the Son has spoken judges because the Son has not spoken of Himself, but the Father who sent Him gave Him a commandment what He should say and what He should speak: then certainly the Father judges, whose word it is that the Son has spoken; and this same Son Himself is the very Word of the Father. For the commandment of the Father is not one thing and the word of the Father another; for He has called it both a word and a commandment. Let us see, therefore, whether perhaps when He says "I have not spoken of myself," He meant to be understood thus: "I am not born of myself." For if He speaks the word of the Father, then He speaks Himself, because He is Himself the Word of the Father. Ordinarily when He says "The Father gave to me," He means it to be understood that the Father begot Him—not that He gave something to Him who already existed and did not possess it, but that the very meaning of "To have given that He might have" is "To have begotten that He might be." For it is not with the Son of God—before the incarnation and before He took upon Him our flesh, the Only-begotten by whom all things were made—as it is with the creature: that He is one thing and has another. Rather He is in such a way as to be what He has. And this is said more plainly, if anyone is able to receive it, in that place where He says: "For as the Father has life in Himself, so has He given to the Son to have life in Himself." For He did not give to Him—already existing and not having life—that He should have life in Himself; rather, in that He is, He is life. Therefore "He gave to the Son to have life in Himself" means He begot the Son to be unchangeable life, which is life eternal. Since, therefore, the Word of God is the Son of God, and the Son of God is the true God and eternal life, as John says in his Epistle, what else are we to acknowledge here when the Lord says "The word which I have spoken, the same shall judge him at the last day," and calls that very word the word of the Father and the commandment of the Father, and that very commandment everlasting life? And "I know," He says, "that His commandment is life everlasting."

26. For I ask again, in what manner this is said, If any man hear not my words, I will not judge him? For perhaps He has said here, I will not judge him, in the same sense as there, It is not mine to give. But what follows here? I came not, He says, to judge the world, but to save the world; and then He adds, He that rejects me, and receives not my words, has one that judges him. Now here we should understand the Father , unless He had added, The word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day. Well, then, will neither the Son judge, because He says, I will not judge him, nor the Father , but the word which the Son has spoken? Nay, but hear what yet follows: For I, He says, have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, He gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak; and I know that His commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said to me, so I speak. If therefore the Son judges not, but the word which the Son has spoken; and the word which the Son has spoken therefore judges, because the Son has not spoken of Himself, but the Father who sent Him gave Him a commandment what He should say, and what He should speak: then the Father assuredly judges, whose word it is which the Son has spoken; and the same Son Himself is the very Word of the Father. For the commandment of the Father is not one thing, and the word of the Father another; for He has called it both a word and a commandment. Let us see, therefore, whether perchance, when He says, I have not spoken of myself, He meant to be understood thus — I am not born of myself. For if He speaks the word of the Father , then He speaks Himself, because He is Himself the Word of the Father. For ordinarily He says, The Father gave to me; by which He means it to be understood that the Father begot Him: not that He gave anything to Him, already existing and not possessing it; but that the very meaning of, To have given that He might have, is, To have begotten that He might be. For it is not, as with the creature so with the Son of God before the incarnation and before He took upon Him our flesh, the Only-begotten by whom all things were made; that He is one thing, and has another: but He is in such way as to be what He has . And this is said more plainly, if any one is fit to receive it, in that place where He says: For as the Father has life in Himself, so has He given to the Son to have life in Himself. For He did not give to Him, already existing and not having life, that He should have life in Himself; inasmuch as, in that He is , He is life. Therefore He gave to the Son to have life in Himself means, He begot the Son to be unchangeable life, which is life eternal . Since, therefore, the Word of God is the Son of God , and the Son of God is the true God and eternal life, as John says in his Epistle; so here, what else are we to acknowledge when the Lord says, The word which I have spoken, the same shall judge him at the last day, and calls that very word the word of the Father and the commandment of the Father , and that very commandment everlasting life? And I know , He says, that His commandment is life everlasting.

I'm asking, then, how we should understand "I will not judge him; but the Word which I have spoken shall judge him." From what follows, this seems to be said as if He meant, "I will not judge, but the Word of the Father will judge." But the Word of the Father is the Son of God Himself. Should we understand it this way: "I will not judge, but I will judge"? How can this be true unless we take it like this: I will not judge by human power, because I am the Son of man; but I will judge by the power of the Word, because I am the Son of God? Or if it still seems contradictory and inconsistent to say "I will not judge, but I will judge," what should we say about that passage where He says, "My doctrine is not mine"? How is it His when it is not His? He didn't say "This doctrine is not mine," but "My doctrine is not mine." What He called His own, He also called not His own. How can this be true unless He called it His own in one respect and not His own in another? According to the form of God, it is His own; according to the form of a servant, it is not His own. When He says "It is not mine, but His that sent me," He directs us back to the Word itself. For the doctrine of the Father is the Word of the Father, which is the Only Son. And what does this mean: "He that believes in me, believes not on me"? How can someone believe in Him yet not believe in Him? How can such an opposite and inconsistent thing be understood—"Whoever believes in me," He says, "believes not on me, but on Him that sent me"—unless you understand it this way: whoever believes in me believes not in what he sees, so that our hope won't rest in the creature, but in Him who took the creature in order to appear to human eyes and so cleanse our hearts by faith to see Himself as equal to the Father? So when He directs the attention of believers to the Father and says "believes not on me, but on Him that sent me," He certainly didn't mean to separate Himself from the Father, that is, from Him that sent Him. Rather, He meant that people should believe in Himself in the same way they believe in the Father, to whom He is equal. He says this explicitly in another place: "You believe in God, believe also in me"—that is, in the same way as you believe in God, so also believe in me, because I and the Father are One God. Therefore, just as here He has, in a sense, withdrawn people's faith from Himself and transferred it to the Father by saying "believes not on me, but on Him that sent me"—from whom He certainly didn't separate Himself—so also when He says "It is not mine to give, but it shall be given to them for whom it is prepared by my Father," it's clear, I think, in what respect both should be taken. That other statement is of the same kind: "I will not judge," whereas He Himself shall judge the living and the dead. But because He will not do so by human power, He therefore, returning to the Godhead, lifts people's hearts upward—hearts which He Himself came down to raise up.

27. I ask, therefore, how we are to understand, I will not judge him; but the Word which I have spoken shall judge him: which appears from what follows to be so said, as if He would say, I will not judge; but the Word of the Father will judge. But the Word of the Father is the Son of God Himself. Is it to be so understood: I will not judge, but I will judge? How can this be true , unless in this way: viz ., I will not judge by human power, because I am the Son of man ; but I will judge by the power of the Word, because I am the Son of God ? Or if it still seems contradictory and inconsistent to say, I will not judge, but I will judge; what shall we say of that place where He says, My doctrine is not mine? How mine, when not mine? For He did not say, This doctrine is not mine, but My doctrine is not mine: that which He called His own, the same He called not His own. How can this be true , unless He has called it His own in one relation; not His own, in another? According to the form of God , His own; according to the form of a servant, not His own. For when He says, It is not mine, but His that sent me, He makes us recur to the Word itself. For the doctrine of the Father is the Word of the Father , which is the Only Son. And what, too, does that mean, He that believes in me, believes not on me? How believe in Him, yet not believe in Him? How can so opposite and inconsistent a thing be understood — Whoever believes in me, He says, believes not on me, but on Him that sent me; — unless you so understand it, Whoever believes in me believes not on that which he sees, lest our hope should be in the creature; but on Him who took the creature, whereby He might appear to human eyes, and so might cleanse our hearts by faith , to contemplate Himself as equal to the Father? So that in turning the attention of believers to the Father , and saying, Believes not on me, but on Him that sent me, He certainly did not mean Himself to be separated from the Father , that is, from Him that sent Him; but that men might so believe in Himself, as they believe in the Father , to whom He is equal. And this He says in express terms in another place, You believe in God , believe also in me: that is, in the same way as you believe in God , so also believe in me; because I and the Father are One God. As therefore, here, He has as it were withdrawn the faith of men from Himself, and transferred it to the Father , by saying, Believes not on me, but on Him that sent me, from whom nevertheless He certainly did not separate Himself; so also, when He says, It is not mine to give, but [it shall be given to them] for whom it is prepared by my Father, it is I think plain in what relation both are to be taken. For that other also is of the same kind, I will not judge; whereas He Himself shall judge the quick and dead. But because He will not do so by human power, therefore, reverting to the Godhead, He raises the hearts of men upwards; which to lift up, He Himself came down.

Yet unless the very same person were the Son of man because of the form of a servant which He took, who is the Son of God because of the form of God in which He exists, the apostle Paul would not say of the rulers of this world, "For had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory." For He was crucified according to the form of a servant, and yet the Lord of glory was crucified. For that taking was such that it made God man, and man God. Yet what is said because of what, and what is said according to what, the thoughtful, diligent, and pious reader discerns for himself, with the Lord's help. For instance, we have said that He glorifies His own as being God, and certainly then as being the Lord of glory; and yet the Lord of glory was crucified, because even God is rightly said to have been crucified, not according to the power of the divinity, but according to the weakness of the flesh. Just as we say that He judges as God, that is, by divine power, not by human power; and yet the man Himself will judge, just as the Lord of glory was crucified. For so He expressly says, "When the Son of man shall come in His glory, and all the holy angels with Him, and before Him shall be gathered all nations," and the rest that is foretold of the future judgment in that passage even to the last sentence. And the Jews, inasmuch as they will be punished in that judgment for persisting in their wickedness, as it is written elsewhere, shall look upon Him whom they have pierced. For whereas both good and bad shall see the Judge of the living and dead, without doubt the bad will not be able to see Him except according to the form in which He is the Son of man; but yet in the glory in which He will judge, not in the lowliness in which He was judged. But the ungodly without doubt will not see that form of God in which He is equal to the Father. For they are not pure in heart, and "Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God." And that sight is face to face, the very sight that is promised as the highest reward to the righteous, and which will then take place when He shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father. And in this kingdom He means the sight of His own form also to be understood, the whole creation being made subject to God, including that wherein the Son of God was made the Son of man. Because, according to this creation, "The Son also Himself shall be subject unto Him who put all things under Him, that God may be all in all." Otherwise, if the Son of God, judging in the form in which He is equal to the Father, shall appear when He judges to the ungodly also, what becomes of that which He promises, as some great thing, to him who loves Him, saying, "And I will love him, and will manifest myself to him"? Therefore He will judge as the Son of man, yet not by human power, but by that whereby He is the Son of God; and on the other hand, He will judge as the Son of God, yet not appearing in that form in which He is God equal to the Father, but in that form in which He is the Son of man.

28. Yet unless the very same were the Son of man on account of the form of a servant which He took, who is the Son of God on account of the form of God in which He is; Paul the apostle would not say of the princes of this world, For had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory . For He was crucified after the form of a servant, and yet the Lord of glory was crucified. For that taking was such as to make God man, and man God. Yet what is said on account of what, and what according to what, the thoughtful, diligent, and pious reader discerns for himself, the Lord being his helper. For instance, we have said that He glorifies His own, as being God , and certainly then as being the Lord of glory ; and yet the Lord of glory was crucified, because even God is rightly said to have been crucified, not after the power of the divinity, but after the weakness of the flesh: just as we say, that He judges as God , that is, by divine power, not by human ; and yet the man Himself will judge, just as the Lord of glory was crucified: for so He expressly says, When the Son of man shall come in His glory , and all the holy angels with Him, and before Him shall be gathered all nations; and the rest that is foretold of the future judgment in that place even to the last sentence. And the Jews , inasmuch as they will be punished in that judgment for persisting in their wickedness , as it is elsewhere written, shall look upon Him whom they have pierced. For whereas both good and bad shall see the Judge of the quick and dead, without doubt the bad will not be able to see Him, except after the form in which He is the Son of man ; but yet in the glory wherein He will judge, not in the lowliness wherein He was judged. But the ungodly without doubt will not see that form of God in which He is equal to the Father. For they are not pure in heart; and Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God. And that sight is face to face, the very sight that is promised as the highest reward to the just, and which will then take place when He shall have delivered up the kingdom to God , even the Father; and in this kingdom He means the sight of His own form also to be understood, the whole creature being made subject to God , including that wherein the Son of God was made the Son of man . Because, according to this creature, The Son also Himself shall be subject unto Him, that put all things under Him, that God may be all in all. Otherwise if the Son of God , judging in the form in which He is equal to the Father , shall appear when He judges to the ungodly also; what becomes of that which He promises, as some great thing, to him who loves Him, saying, And I will love him, and will manifest myself to him? Wherefore He will judge as the Son of man , yet not by human power, but by that whereby He is the Son of God ; and on the other hand, He will judge as the Son of God , yet not appearing in that [unincarnate] form in which He is God equal to the Father , but in that [incarnate form] in which He is the Son of man .

Therefore we can speak both ways: the Son of man will judge, and the Son of man will not judge. The Son of man will judge, so that the text "When the Son of man shall come, then before Him shall be gathered all nations" may be true. And the Son of man will not judge, so that the texts "I will not judge him" and "I seek not my own glory: there is One that seeks and judges" may be true. For in the judgment, it is not the form of God but the form of the Son of man that will appear, and in this respect the Father Himself will not judge. For according to this it is said, "For the Father judges no man, but has committed all judgment unto the Son." This statement is made either according to that mode of speech we mentioned above, where it says "So has He given to the Son to have life in Himself," which signifies that in this way He begot the Son, or according to what the apostle says: "Wherefore God also has highly exalted Him, and given Him a name which is above every name." This is said of the Son of man, in respect to whom the Son of God was raised from the dead, since He, being in the form of God equal to the Father, from which He emptied Himself by taking the form of a servant, both acts and suffers and receives in that same form of a servant what the apostle continues to mention: "He humbled Himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross; wherefore God also has highly exalted Him, and given Him a name which is above every name; that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, in the Glory of God the Father." Whether then the words "He has committed all judgment unto the Son" are said according to this or that mode of speech, it is sufficiently clear from this passage that if they were said according to the sense in which it says "He has given to the Son to have life in Himself," it certainly would not be said "The Father judges no man." For in respect to this, that the Father has begotten the Son equal to Himself, He judges with Him. Therefore it is in this respect that it is said that in the judgment, not the form of God but the form of the Son of man will appear. This does not mean He will not judge who has committed all judgment unto the Son, since the Son says of Him, "There is One that seeks and judges." Rather, it is said "The Father judges no man, but has committed all judgment unto the Son" as if to say: No one will see the Father in the judgment of the quick and the dead, but all will see the Son, because He is also the Son of man, so that He can be seen even by the ungodly, since they too shall see Him whom they have pierced.

29. Therefore both ways of speaking may be used; the Son of man will judge, and, the Son of man will not judge: since the Son of man will judge, that the text may be true which says, When the Son of man shall come, then before Him shall be gathered all nations; and the Son of man will not judge, that the text may be true which says, I will not judge him; and, I seek not my own glory : there is One that seeks and judges. For in respect to this, that in the judgment, not the form of God , but the form of the Son of man will appear, the Father Himself will not judge; for according to this it is said, For the Father judges no man, but has committed all judgment unto the Son. Whether this is said after that mode of speech which we have mentioned above, where it is said, So has He given to the Son to have life in Himself, that it should signify that so He begot the Son; or, whether after that of which the apostle speaks, saying, Wherefore God also has highly exalted Him, and given Him a name which is above every name: — (For this is said of the Son of man , in respect to whom the Son of God was raised from the dead; since He, being in the form of God equal to the Father , wherefrom He emptied Himself by taking the form of a servant, both acts and suffers, and receives, in that same form of a servant, what the apostle goes on to mention: He humbled Himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross; wherefore God also has highly exalted Him, and given Him a name which is above every name; that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, in the Glory of God the Father: — whether then the words, He has committed all judgment unto the Son , are said according to this or that mode of speech; it sufficiently appears from this place, that if they were said according to that sense in which it is said, He has given to the Son to have life in Himself, it certainly would not be said, The Father judges no man. For in respect to this, that the Father has begotten the Son equal to Himself, He judges with Him. Therefore it is in respect to this that it is said, that in the judgment, not the form of God , but the form of the Son of man will appear. Not that He will not judge, who has committed all judgment unto the Son , since the Son says of Him, There is One that seeks and judges: but it is so said, The Father judges no man, but has committed all judgment unto the Son; as if it were said, No one will see the Father in the judgment of the quick and the dead, but all will see the Son: because He is also the Son of man , so that He can be seen even by the ungodly, since they too shall see Him whom they have pierced.

However, to avoid appearing to conjecture this rather than proving it clearly, let us present a certain and plain statement of the Lord Himself, by which we may show that this was the reason why He said, The Father judges no man, but has committed all judgment unto the Son—namely, because He will appear as Judge in the form of the Son of man, which is not the form of the Father but of the Son. Nor is it even that form of the Son in which He is equal to the Father, but that in which He is less than the Father, so that in the judgment He may be visible both to the good and to the bad. For a little while later He says, Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that hears my word, and believes in Him that sent me, has everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but shall pass from death unto life. Now this eternal life is that vision which does not belong to the bad. Then follows, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God, and they that hear shall live. And this applies to the godly, who hear of His incarnation in such a way as to believe that He is the Son of God—that is, who receive Him, made less than the Father for their sake in the form of a servant, while believing Him equal to the Father in the form of God. And then He continues, emphasizing this very point, For as the Father has life in Himself, so has He given to the Son to have life in Himself. And then He comes to the vision of His own glory, in which He shall come to judgment, which vision will be common to the ungodly and to the just. For He goes on to say, And has given Him authority to execute judgment also, because He is the Son of man. I think nothing can be more clear. For insofar as the Son of God is equal to the Father, He does not receive this power of executing judgment, but He has it with the Father in secret. But He receives it so that the good and the bad may see Him judging, insofar as He is the Son of man. Since the vision of the Son of man will be shown to the bad also, for the vision of the form of God will not be shown except to the pure in heart, for they shall see God—that is, to the godly only, to whose love He promises this very thing, that He will show Himself to them. And see accordingly what follows: Marvel not at this, He says. Why does He forbid us to marvel, unless it be that, in truth, everyone marvels who does not understand that He said the Father gave Him power also to execute judgment because He is the Son of man, whereas it might rather have been expected that He would say, since He is the Son of God? But because the wicked are not able to see the Son of God as He is in the form of God equal to the Father, and yet it is necessary that both the just and the wicked should see the Judge of the living and dead when they are judged in His presence—Marvel not at this, He says, for the hour is coming, in which all that are in the graves shall hear His voice, and shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation. For this purpose, then, it was necessary that He should receive that power because He is the Son of man, so that all in rising again might see Him in the form in which He can be seen by all, but by some to damnation, by others to eternal life. And what is eternal life, unless that vision which is not granted to the ungodly? That they might know You, He says, the One true God, and Jesus Christ, whom You have sent. And how are they to know Jesus Christ Himself also, unless as the One true God, who will show Himself to them—not as He will show Himself in the form of the Son of man to those also who shall be punished?

30. Lest, however, we may seem to conjecture this rather than to prove it clearly, let us produce a certain and plain sentence of the Lord Himself, by which we may show that this was the cause why He said, The Father judges no man, but has committed all judgment unto the Son , viz . because He will appear as Judge in the form of the Son of man , which is not the form of the Father , but of the Son; nor yet that form of the Son in which He is equal to the Father , but that in which He is less than the Father; in order that, in the judgment, He may be visible both to the good and to the bad. For a little while after He says, Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that hears my word, and believes in Him that sent me, has everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but shall pass from death unto life. Now this life eternal is that sight which does not belong to the bad. Then follows, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God , and they that hear shall live. And this is proper to the godly, who so hear of His incarnation , as to believe that He is the Son of God , that is, who so receive Him, as made for their sakes less than the Father , in the form of a servant, that they believe Him equal to the Father , in the form of God . And thereupon He continues, enforcing this very point, For as the Father has life in Himself, so has He given to the Son to have life in Himself. And then He comes to the sight of His own glory , in which He shall come to judgment; which sight will be common to the ungodly and to the just. For He goes on to say, And has given Him authority to execute judgment also, because He is the Son of man . I think nothing can be more clear. For inasmuch as the Son of God is equal to the Father , He does not receive this power of executing judgment, but He has it with the Father in secret; but He receives it, so that the good and the bad may see Him judging, inasmuch as He is the Son of man . Since the sight of the Son of man will be shown to the bad also: for the sight of the form of God will not be shown except to the pure in heart, for they shall see God ; that is, to the godly only, to whose love He promises this very thing, that He will show Himself to them. And see, accordingly, what follows: Marvel not at this, He says. Why does He forbid us to marvel, unless it be that, in truth , every one marvels who does not understand, that therefore He said the Father gave Him power also to execute judgment, because He is the Son of man ; whereas, it might rather have been anticipated that He would say, since He is the Son of God ? But because the wicked are not able to see the Son of God as He is in the form of God equal to the Father , but yet it is necessary that both the just and the wicked should see the Judge of the quick and dead, when they will be judged in His presence; Marvel not at this, He says, for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear His voice, and shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil , unto the resurrection of damnation. For this purpose, then, it was necessary that He should therefore receive that power, because He is the Son of man , in order that all in rising again might see Him in the form in which He can be seen by all, but by some to damnation, by others to life eternal . And what is life eternal , unless that sight which is not granted to the ungodly? That they might know You, He says, the One true God , and Jesus Christ , whom You have sent. And how are they to know Jesus Christ Himself also, unless as the One true God , who will show Himself to them; not as He will show Himself, in the form of the Son of man , to those also that shall be punished?

He is good according to that sight by which God appears to the pure in heart, for truly God is good to Israel, even to those who are clean in heart. But when the wicked see the Judge, He will not seem good to them, because they will not rejoice in their heart to see Him. Instead, all kindreds of the earth will wail because of Him, being counted among all the wicked and unbelievers. For this reason, He also replied to the man who had called Him Good Master, when seeking His advice on how to attain eternal life, Why do you ask me about good? There is none good but One, that is, God. And yet the Lord Himself, in another place, calls man good: A good man, He says, out of the good treasure of his heart, brings forth good things, and an evil man, out of the evil treasure of his heart, brings forth evil things. But because that man was seeking eternal life, and eternal life consists in that contemplation in which God is seen, not for punishment, but for everlasting joy, and because he did not understand with whom he was speaking, and thought Him to be only the Son of man, He says, Why do you ask me about good? That is, with respect to that form which you see, why do you ask about good, and call me, according to what you see, Good Master? This is the form of the Son of man, the form which has been taken, the form that will appear in judgment, not only to the righteous, but also to the ungodly, and the sight of this form will not be for good to those who are wicked. But there is a sight of that form of mine, in which when I was, I thought it not robbery to be equal with God, but in order to take this form I emptied myself. That one God, therefore, the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, who will not appear except for joy which cannot be taken away from the just, for which future joy he sighs who says, One thing have I desired of the Lord, that will I seek after, that I may dwell in the house of the Lord all the days of my life, to behold the beauty of the Lord. That one God, therefore, Himself, I say, is alone good, for this reason, that no one sees Him for sorrow and wailing, but only for salvation and true joy. If you understand me according to this latter form, then I am good, but if according to that former only, then why do you ask me about good? If you are among those who shall look upon Him whom they have pierced, that very sight itself will be evil to them, because it will be penal. That the Lord said, Why do you ask me about good? There is none good but One, that is, God, with this meaning, is probable based on the proofs I have given, because that sight of God, by which we shall contemplate the ousia (substance) of God unchangeable and invisible to human eyes, which is promised to the saints alone, which the Apostle Paul speaks of as face to face, and of which the Apostle John says, We shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is, and of which it is said, One thing have I desired of the Lord, that I may behold the beauty of the Lord, and of which the Lord Himself says, I will both love him, and will manifest myself to him, and on account of which alone we cleanse our hearts by faith, that we may be those pure in heart who are blessed for they shall see God, and whatever else is spoken of that sight, which whosoever turns the eye of love to seek it may find most abundantly scattered through all the Scriptures, that sight alone, I say, is our chief good, for the attaining of which we are directed to do whatever we do rightly. But that sight of the Son of man which is foretold, when all nations shall be gathered before Him, and shall say to Him, Lord, when saw we You hungry, or thirsty, and so on, will neither be a good to the ungodly, who shall be sent into everlasting fire, nor the chief good to the righteous. For He still goes on to call these to the kingdom which has been prepared for them from the foundation of the world. For, as He will say to those, Depart into everlasting fire, so to these, Come, you blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you. And as those will go into everlasting burning, so the righteous will go into life eternal. But what is life eternal, except that they may know You, He says, the One true God, and Jesus Christ, whom You have sent, but know Him now in that glory of which He says to the Father, Which I had with You before the world was. For then He will deliver up the kingdom to God, even the Father, that the good servant may enter into the joy of his Lord, and that He may hide those whom God keeps in the hiding of His countenance from the confusion of men, namely, of those men who shall then be confounded by hearing this sentence, of which evil hearing the righteous man shall not be afraid if only he be kept in the tabernacle, that is, in the true faith of the Catholic Church, from the strife of tongues, that is, from the sophistries of heretics. But if there is any other explanation of the Lord's words, where He says, Why do you ask me about good? There is none good, but One, that is, God, provided only that the ousia of the Father not therefore be believed to be of greater goodness than that of the Son, according to which He is the Word by whom all things were made, and if there is nothing in it contrary to sound doctrine, let us securely use it, and not one explanation only, but as many as we are able to find. For the more outlets are open for avoiding their snares, the more powerfully are the heretics proved wrong. But let us now start afresh, and address ourselves to the consideration of that which still remains.

31. He is good, according to that sight, according to which God appears to the pure in heart; for truly God is good unto Israel even to such as are of a clean heart. But when the wicked shall see the Judge, He will not seem good to them; because they will not rejoice in their heart to see Him, but all kindreds of the earth shall then wail because of Him, namely, as being reckoned in the number of all the wicked and unbelievers. On this account also He replied to him, who had called Him Good Master, when seeking advice of Him how he might attain eternal life, Why do you ask me about good? there is none good but One, that is, God. And yet the Lord Himself, in another place, calls man good: A good man, He says, out of the good treasure of his heart, brings forth good things: and an evil man, out of the evil treasure of his heart, brings forth evil things. But because that man was seeking eternal life, and eternal life consists in that contemplation in which God is seen, not for punishment, but for everlasting joy ; and because he did not understand with whom he was speaking, and thought Him to be only the Son of man : Why, He says, do you ask me about good? That is, with respect to that form which you see, why do you ask about good, and call me, according to what you see, Good Master? This is the form of the Son of man , the form which has been taken, the form that will appear in judgment, not only to the righteous, but also to the ungodly; and the sight of this form will not be for good to those who are wicked . But there is a sight of that form of mine, in which when I was, I thought it not robbery to be equal with God: but in order to take this form I emptied myself. That one God , therefore, the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit , who will not appear, except for joy which cannot be taken away from the just; for which future joy he sighs, who says, One thing have I desired of the Lord, that will I seek after; that I may dwell in the house of the Lord all the days of my life, to behold the beauty of the Lord: that one God , therefore, Himself, I say, is alone good, for this reason, that no one sees Him for sorrow and wailing, but only for salvation and true joy . If you understand me after this latter form, then I am good; but if according to that former only, then why do you ask me about good? If you are among those who shall look upon Him whom they have pierced, that very sight itself will be evil to them, because it will be penal. That after this meaning, then, the Lord said, Why do you ask me about good? There is none good but One, that is, God , is probable upon those proofs which I have alleged, because that sight of God , whereby we shall contemplate the substance of God unchangeable and invisible to human eyes (which is promised to the saints alone; which the Apostle Paul speaks of, as face to face; and of which the Apostle John says, We shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is; and of which it is said, One thing have I desired of the Lord, that I may behold the beauty of the Lord, and of which the Lord Himself says, I will both love him, and will manifest myself to him; and on account of which alone we cleanse our hearts by faith , that we may be those pure in heart who are blessed for they shall see God: and whatever else is spoken of that sight: which whosoever turns the eye of love to seek it, may find most copiously scattered through all the Scriptures ) — that sight alone, I say, is our chief good, for the attaining of which we are directed to do whatever we do aright. But that sight of the Son of man which is foretold, when all nations shall be gathered before Him, and shall say to Him, Lord, when saw we You an hungered, or thirsty, etc.? will neither be a good to the ungodly, who shall be sent into everlasting fire , nor the chief good to the righteous. For He still goes on to call these to the kingdom which has been prepared for them from the foundation of the world. For, as He will say to those, Depart into everlasting fire ; so to these, Come, you blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you. And as those will go into everlasting burning; so the righteous will go into life eternal . But what is life eternal , except that they may know You, He says, the One true God , and Jesus Christ , whom You have sent? but know Him now in that glory of which He says to the Father , Which I had with You before the world was. For then He will deliver up the kingdom to God , even the Father , that the good servant may enter into the joy of his Lord, and that He may hide those whom God keeps in the hiding of His countenance from the confusion of men , namely, of those men who shall then be confounded by hearing this sentence; of which evil hearing the righteous man shall not be afraid if only he be kept in the tabernacle, that is, in the true faith of the Catholic Church , from the strife of tongues, that is, from the sophistries of heretics . But if there is any other explanation of the words of the Lord, where He says, Why do you ask me about good? There is none good, but One, that is, God ; provided only that the substance of the Father be not therefore believed to be of greater goodness than that of the Son , according to which He is the Word by whom all things were made; and if there is nothing in it abhorrent from sound doctrine; let us securely use it, and not one explanation only, but as many as we are able to find. For so much the more powerfully are the heretics proved wrong, the more outlets are open for avoiding their snares. But let us now start afresh, and address ourselves to the consideration of that which still remains.