On the Trinity 21
Summary: Christ's power to raise his own body, his title “firstborn of all creation,” and his putting off and on of the flesh show that the Word who took up a man is both God and man.
Latin text · PL 3:955a–957a
Et poteram quidem omnium Scripturarum coelestium eventilare tractatus, et ingentem circa istam speciem Christi divinitatis, ut ita dixerim, silvam commovere: nisi quoniam non tam mihi contra hanc haeresim propositum est dicere, quam breviter, circa personam Christi regulam veritatis aperire. Quamvis tamen ad alia festinem, illud non arbitror praetermittendum, quod in Evangelio Dominus ad significantiam suae majestatis expressit dicendo: Solvite templum hoc, et ego in triduo suscitabo illud. Aut quando in alio loco, et alia parte pronuntiat: Potestatem habeo animam meam ponendi et rursus recipere eam: hoc enim mandatum accepi a Patre. Quis est enim qui dicit animam suam se posse ponere aut animam suam posse se rursum recuperare, quia hoc mandatum acceperit a Patre? Aut quis dicit, destructum corporis sui templum resuscitare rursum et reaedificare se posse: nisi quoniam Sermo ille, qui ex Patre, qui apud Patrem, per quem facta sunt omnia, et sine quo factum est nihil, imitator paternorum operum atque virtutum, imago invisibilis Dei, qui descendit de coelo, qui quae vidit et audivit testificatus est, qui non venit ut faceret suam voluntatem, sed potius ut faciat Patris voluntatem, a quo missus ad hoc ipsum fuerat ut magni consilii Angelus factus arcanorum coelestium nobis jura reseraret, quique Verbum caro factus habitavit in nobis, ex nobis hic Christus non homo tantum, quia hominis Filius, sed etiam Deus, quia Dei Filius, comprobatur? Quod si et primogenitus omnis creaturae ab Apostolo dictus sit Christus, quomodo omnis creaturae primogenitus esse potuit, nisi quoniam secundum divinitatem ante omnem creaturam ex Patre Deo Sermo processit? Quod nisi ita haeretici acceperint, Christum hominem primogenitum omnis creaturae monstrare cogentur; quod facere non poterunt. Aut igitur ante omnem est creaturam ut primogenitus sit omnis creaturae, et non homo est tantum, quia homo post omnem creaturam est; aut homo tantum est, et est post omnem creaturam. Et quomodo primogenitus est omnis creaturae, nisi quoniam dum Verbum illud quod est ante omnem creaturam, et ideo primogenitus omnis creaturae, caro fit et habitat in nobis, hoc est, assumit hunc hominem qui est post omnem creaturam, et sic cum illo et in illo habitat in nobis, ut neque homo Christo subtrahatur, neque divinitas negetur? Nam si tantummodo ante omnem creaturam est, homo in illo subtractus est: si autem tantummodo homo est, divinitas quae ante omnem creaturam est, intercepta est. Utrumque ergo in Christo confoederatum est, et utrumque conjunctum est, et utrumque connexum est. Et merito dum est in illo aliquid quod superat creaturam, pignerata in illo divinitatis et humanitatis videtur esse concordia. Propter quam causam, qui mediator Dei et hominum effectus exprimitur, in se Deum et hominem sociasse reperitur. Ac si idem Apostolus de Christo refert, ut exutus carnem potestates dehonestavit, palam triumphatis illis in semetipso: non utique otiose exutum carne proposuit, nisi quoniam et in resurrectione rursum indutum voluit intelligi. Quis est ergo iste exutus et rursus indutus? requirant haeretici. Nos enim Sermonem Dei scimus indutum carnis substantiam, eumdemque rursum exutum eadem corporis materia, quam rursus in resurrectione suscepit et quasi indumentum resumpsit. Sed enim neque exutus neque indutus hominem Christus fuisset, si homo tantum fuisset. Nemo enim umquam se ipso aut spoliatur aut induitur. Sit enim necesse est aliud, quidquid aliunde aut spoliatur aut induitur. Ex quo merito Sermo Dei fuit, qui exutus est carnem et in resurrectione rursus indutus; exutus autem, quoniam et in nativitate fuerat indutus. Itaque in Christo Deus est qui induitur, atque etiam exutus sit oportet: propterea is qui induitur, pariter et exuatur necesse est. Induitur autem et exuitur homo, quasi quadam contexti corporis tunica. Ac propterea consequenter Sermo fuit, ut diximus, Dei; qui modo indutus, modo exutus esse reperitur. Hoc enim etiam in benedictionibus ante praedixit: Lavabit stolam suam in vino, et in sanguine uvae amictum suum. Si stola in Christo caro est, et amictum ipsum corpus est, requiratur quisquis est ille cujus corpus amictum est, et stola caro. Nobis enim manifestum est carnem stolam et corpus amictum Verbi fuisse, quique sanguine, id est vino, lavit substantiam corporis, et materiam carnis abluens, ex parte suscepti hominis passione. Ex quo siquidem lavatur, homo est; quia amictum quod lavatur, caro est: qui autem lavat, Verbum Dei est; qui ut lavaret amictum, amicti susceptor effectus est. Merito ex ea substantia, quae recepta est ut lavaretur, homo exprimitur: sicut ex Verbi auctoritate qui lavit, Deus esse monstratur.
English · Claude translation
I could indeed sift through the treatments of all the heavenly Scriptures and stir up, so to speak, a huge forest of evidence concerning this aspect of Christ's divinity, were it not that my purpose is not so much to speak against this heresy as to set out briefly the rule of truth concerning the person of Christ. Yet, though I hasten to other matters, I do not think I should pass over what the Lord expressed in the Gospel to signify his majesty, saying, “Destroy this temple, and I will raise it up in three days.” Or when in another place and passage he declares, “I have power to lay down my life and to take it up again: for this command I have received from the Father.” For who is it that says he can lay down his life, or can recover his life again, because he has received this command from the Father? Or who says that he can raise again and rebuild the destroyed temple of his body, unless it is that that Word who is from the Father, who is with the Father, through whom all things were made and without whom nothing was made, the imitator of the Father's works and powers, the image of the invisible God, who came down from heaven, who testified to what he had seen and heard, who came not to do his own will but rather to do the Father's will, by whom he had been sent for this very purpose, that, made the Angel of great counsel, he might unlock for us the laws of heavenly secrets, and who, the Word made flesh, dwelt in us: that this Christ, from us, is proved not only man, because he is the Son of man, but also God, because he is the Son of God?
And if Christ has also been called by the Apostle the firstborn of all creation, how could he be the firstborn of all creation, unless it is that, according to his divinity, the Word proceeded from God the Father before all creation? If the heretics will not accept this, they will be forced to show that Christ the man is the firstborn of all creation, which they will not be able to do. Either, then, he is before all creation, so as to be the firstborn of all creation, and is not only man, since man is after all creation; or he is only man, and is after all creation. And how is he the firstborn of all creation, unless it is that the Word, which is before all creation and therefore the firstborn of all creation, becomes flesh and dwells in us, that is, takes up this man who is after all creation, and so dwells in us with him and in him, so that neither is the man taken away from Christ nor the divinity denied? For if he is only before all creation, the man in him has been taken away; but if he is only man, the divinity, which is before all creation, has been cut off. Both, then, are allied in Christ, both joined, and both connected. And rightly, since there is in him something that surpasses creation, the concord of divinity and humanity is seen to be pledged in him. For this reason he who is declared to have been made the Mediator of God and men is found to have united God and man in himself.
And if the same Apostle reports of Christ that, having put off the flesh, he disgraced the powers, triumphing over them openly in himself, he surely did not say to no purpose “having put off the flesh,” unless he wished it to be understood that he put it on again in the resurrection. Who, then, is this one who put off and put on again? Let the heretics inquire. For we know that the Word of God put on the substance of flesh, and that the same put off again that same material of the body, which he took up again in the resurrection and resumed like a garment. But Christ would neither have put off nor put on the man if he had been only man. For no one is ever either stripped of himself or clothed with himself. For whatever is stripped off or put on from elsewhere must necessarily be something else. Hence rightly it was the Word of God who put off the flesh and in the resurrection put it on again; and put it off because he had put it on in his birth. And so in Christ it is God who puts on, and he must also have put off; therefore he who puts on must likewise put off. And the man is put on and put off, as a kind of tunic of a woven body. And therefore, consequently, it was, as we have said, the Word of God who is found now to have put on, now to have put off. For this is what was foretold in the blessings: “He will wash his robe in wine, and his cloak in the blood of the grape.” If the robe in Christ is the flesh, and the cloak is the body itself, let it be asked who he is whose body is the cloak and whose flesh is the robe. For to us it is plain that the flesh was the robe and the body the cloak of the Word, who washed the substance of the body and cleansed the material of the flesh with blood, that is, with wine, by the passion on the side of the man he had taken up. Hence, inasmuch as he is washed, he is man, because the cloak that is washed is flesh; but he who washes is the Word of God, who, in order to wash the cloak, became the taker-up of the cloak. Rightly, from the substance which was taken up to be washed, he is declared man; just as from the authority of the Word who washed, he is shown to be God.
About this passage
Notes
Translation notes
- The quotations and allusions are John 2:19; John 10:18; John 1:3; John 5:19; Col 1:15; John 3:13, 31–32; John 6:38; Isa 9:6 (LXX “Angel of great counsel”); John 1:14; 1 Tim 2:5; Col 2:15 (in an Old Latin form, “having put off the flesh”); Gen 49:11. Novatian's language of the Word “taking up this man” and putting him on “like a garment” is pre-Chalcedonian and is translated as written; the concord of divinity and humanity is his concern.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (OCR: b for h; OCR: broken word; OCR: i for t; OCR: n for u; word dropped in the digital text (the parallel clause requires 'si')): ponendi ei rursus → ponendi et rursus; ex nobis bic → ex nobis hic; subtractus est: autem → subtractus est: si autem; Induitur antem → Induitur autem; lava· ret → lavaret.
Cite this passage
Novatian, Trin. 21 (PL 3:955a–957a; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/novatian-trinitate/21/).
The SBL abbreviation for this work has not been checked yet.
Plain text
Novatian, Trin. 21 (PL 3:955a–957a; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/novatian-trinitate/21/).
Download citation:BibTeX ·RIS (Zotero, EndNote)
Whole work:BibTeX ·RIS ·Markdown text