BOOK V.

PROLOGUE.

Who is a faithful and wise servant? His reward is pointed out in the case 
of Peter, as also in the case of Paul. Ambrose, being anxious to follow 
Paul's guidance, wished this book to be added to the others, for it could 
not be included in the preceding one. The subject for discussion is then 
stated, and the reason for such a discussion given. He must needs be 
pardoned, for usury is to be demanded from every servant for the money 
which has been entrusted to him. Their faithfulness is the usury desired in 
his own case. He will be happy if he may hope for a reward; but he does not 
look so much for the recompense of the saints, as for exemption from 
punishment. He urges all to seek to merit this.

    1. "Who, then, is a faithful and wise servant, whom his lord hath made 
ruler over his household, to give them meat in due season? Blessed is that 
servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doing." (2) Not 
worthless is this servant: some great one ought he to be. Let us think who 
he may be.

    2. It is Peter, chosen by the Lord Himself to feed His flock, who 
merits thrice to hear the words: "Feed My little lambs; feed My lambs; feed 
My sheep."(3) And so, by feeding well the flock of Christ with the food of 
faith, he effaced the sin of his former fall. For this reason is he thrice 
admonished to feed the flock; thrice is he asked whether he loves the Lord, 
in order that he may thrice confess Him, Whom he had thrice denied before 
His Crucifixion.(4)

    3. Blessed also is that servant who can say: "I have fed you with milk 
and not with meat; for hitherto ye were not able to bear it."(5) For he 
knew how to feed them. Who of us can do this? Who of us can truly say: "To 
the weak became Ins weak, that I might gain the weak"?(6)

    4. Yet he, being so great a man, and chosen by Christ for the care of 
His flock, so as to strengthen the weak and to heal the sick,--he, I say, 
rejects forthwith after one admonition(7) a heretic from the fold entrusted 
to him, for fear that the taint of one erring sheep might infect the whole 
flock with a spreading sore. He further bids that foolish questions and 
contentions be avoided.(8)

    5. How, then, shall we act, being but ignorant dwellers set amongst 
these fresh tares in the old-standing harvest field?(9) If we are silent, 
we shall seem to be giving way; and if we contend against them, there is 
the fear that we too shall be held to be carnal. For it is written of 
matters of this sort, which beget strife: "The servant of the Lord must not 
strive, but be gentle unto all, apt to teach, patient, with moderation 
instructing those that oppose themselves."(1) And in another place: "If any 
man is contentious, we have no such custom, neither the Church of God."(2) 
For this reason it was our intention to write somewhat, in order that our 
writings might without any din answer the impiety of heretics on our 
behalf.

    6. And so we prepare to commence this our Fifth Book, O Emperor 
Augustus. For it was but right that the Fourth Book should end with our 
discussion on the Vine, lest otherwise we should seem to have overloaded 
that book with a tumultuous mass of subjects, rather than to have filled it 
with the fruit of the spiritual vineyard. On the other hand, it was not 
seemly that the gathering of the vintage of the faith should be left 
unfinished, whilst there was still all abundance of such great matters for 
discussion.

    7. In the Fifth Book, therefore, we speak of the indivisible Godhead of 
the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost (omitting, however, a full 
discussion on the Holy Ghost), being urged by the teaching of the Gospel to 
let out on interest to human minds the five talents(3) of the faith 
entrusted to these five books being as it were the principal; lest perhaps 
when the Lord comes, and finds His money hidden in the earth, He may say to 
me: "Thou wicked and slothful servant, thou knewest that I reap where I do 
not sow; and gather where I have not strawed; thou oughtest therefore to 
have put My money to the exchangers, that at My coming I might have 
received Mine Own,"(4) or as it stands in another book: "And I," it says, 
"at My coming might have received it with usury."(5)

    8. I pray those to pardon me, whom the boldness of such a lengthy 
address displeases. The thought of my office compels me to entrust to 
others what I have received. "We are stewards of the heavenly 
mysteries."(6) We are ministers, but not all alike. "But," it says, "even 
as the Lord gave to every man, I have planted; Apollos watered; but God 
gave the increase."(7) Let each one then strive that be may be able to 
receive a reward according to his labour. "For we are labourers together 
with God," as the Apostle said; "we are God's husbandry, God's 
building."(1) Blessed therefore is he who sees such usury on his principal; 
blessed too is he who beholds the fruit of his work; blessed again is he 
"who builds upon the foundation of faith, gold, silver, precious 
stones."(2)

    9. Ye who hear or read these words are all things to us. Ye are the 
usury of the money-lender,--the usury on speech, not on money; ye are the 
return given to the husbandman; ye are the gold, the silver, the precious 
stones of the builder. In your merits lie the chief results of the labours 
of the priest; in your souls shines forth the fruit of a bishop's work; in 
your progress glitters the gold of the Lord; the silver is increased if ye 
hold fast the divine words. "The words of the Lord are pure words, as 
silver tried in the fire; proved on the earth, purified seven times."(3) Ye 
therefore will make the lender rich, the husbandman to abound in produce; 
ye will prove the master-builder to be skilful. I do not speak boastfully; 
for I do not desire so much my own advantage as yours.

    10. Oh that I might safely say of you at that time: "Lord, Thou gavest 
me five talents, behold I have gained five other talents;"(4) and that I 
might show the precious talents of your virtues! "For we have a treasure in 
earthen vessels."(5) These are the talents which the Lord bids us 
spiritually to trade with, or the two coins of the New and the Old 
Testament, which that Samaritan in the Gospel left for the man robbed by 
the thieves, for the purpose of getting his wounds healed.(6)

    11. Neither do I, my brethren, with greedy desires, long for this, so 
that I may be set over many things; the recompense I get from the fact of 
your advance is enough for me. Oh that I may not be found unworthy of that 
which I have received! Let those things which are too great for me be 
assigned to better men. I demand them not! Yet mayest Thou say, O Lord: "I 
will give unto this last, even as unto thee."(7) Let the man that deserves 
it receive authority over ten cities.(8)

    12. Let him be such an one as was Moses, who wrote the Ten Words of the 
Law. Let him be as Joshua, the son of Nun, who subdued five kings, and 
brought the Gibeonites into subjection, that he might be the figure of a 
Man of his own name Who was to come, by Whose power all fleshly lust should 
be overcome, and the Gentiles should be converted, so that they might 
follow the faith of Jesus Christ rather than their former pursuits and 
desires. Let him be as David, whom the young maidens came to meet with 
songs, saying: "Saul hath triumphed over thousands, David over ten 
thousands."(1)

    13. It is enough for me, if I am not thrust out into the outer 
darkness, as he was, who hid the talent entrusted to him in the earth so to 
speak, of his own flesh. This the ruler of the synagogue did, and the other 
rulers of the Jews; for they employed(2),(3) the words of the Lord, which 
had been entrusted to them, on the ground as it were of their bodies; and, 
delighting in the pleasures of the flesh, sunk the heavenly trust as though 
into the pit of an overweening heart.

    14. Let us then not keep the Lord's money buried and hidden in the 
flesh; nor let us hide our one talent in a napkin;(4) but like good money-
changers let us ever weigh it out with labour of mind and body, with an 
even and ready will, that the word may be near, even in thy mouth and in 
thy heart.(5)

    15. This is the word of the Lord, this is the precious talent, whereby 
thou art redeemed. This money must often be seen on the tables of souls, in 
order that by constant trading the sound of the good coins may be able to 
go forth into every land, by the means of which eternal life is purchased. 
"This is eternal life," which Thou, Almighty Father, givest freely, that we 
may know "Thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ Whom Thou hast sent."(6)

CHAPTER I.

How impious the Arians are, in attacking that on which human happiness 
depends. John ever unites the Son with the Father, especially where he 
says: "That they may know Thee, the only true God, etc." In that place, 
then, we must understand the words "true God" also of the Son; for it 
cannot be denied that He is God, and it cannot be said He is a false god, 
and least of all that He is God by appellation only. This last point being 
proved from the Apostle's words, we rightly confess that Christ is true 
God.

    16. Wherefore let the Arians observe, how impious they are in calling 
in question our hope and the object of our desires. And since they are wont 
to cry out on this point above all others, saying that Christ is distinct 
from the only and true God, let us confute their impious ideas so far as 
lies in our power.

    17. For on this point they ought rather to understand, that this is the 
benefit, this the reward of perfect virtue, namely, this divine and 
incomparable gift, that we may know Christ together with the Father, and 
not separate the Son from the Father; as also the Scriptures do not 
separate them. For the following tells rather for the unity than for the 
diversity of the Divine Majesty, namely, that the knowledge of the Father 
and of the Son gives us the same recompense, and one and the same honour; 
which reward no man will have but he that has known both the Father and the 
Son. For as the knowledge of the Father procures eternal life, so also does 
the knowledge of the Son.

    18. Therefore as the Evangelist forthwith at the outset joined the Word 
with God the Father in his devout confession of faith, saying: "And the 
Word was with God;"(1) and here too, in writing the words of the Lord: 
"That they may know Thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ Whom Thou 
hast sent,"(2) he has undoubtedly, by thus connecting Them, bound together 
the Father and the Son, so that no one may separate Christ as true God from 
the majesty of the Father, for union does not dissever.

    19. Therefore in saying, "That they may know Thee, the only true God, 
and Jesus Christ Whom Thou hast sent," he put an end to the Sabellians, and 
has also put the Jews out of court,--those at any rate who heard him speak; 
so that the former might not suppose the Same to be the Father as the Son, 
which they might have done if he had not added also Christ, and that the 
latter might not sever the Son from the Father.

    20. But, I ask, why do they not think we ought to gather and understand 
this from what has been already said; that as he has declared the Father to 
be only, true God, so we may understand Jesus Christ also to be only, true 
God? For it could not be expressed in any other way, for fear he might seem 
to be speaking of two Gods. For neither do we speak of two Gods; and yet we 
confess the Son to be of the same Godhead with the Father.

    21. May we ask, therefore, on what grounds they think a distinction is 
made in the Godhead, and whether they deny Christ to be God? But they 
cannot deny it. Do they deny Him to be true God? But if they deny Him to be 
true God, let them say whether they declare Him to be a false God, or God 
by appellation only. For according to the Scriptures the word "God" is used 
either of the true God, or by appellation only, or of a false god. True God 
as the Father; God by appellation as the saints; a false god like the 
demons and idols. Let them say then how they will acknowledge and describe 
the Son of God. Do they suppose the name of God to have been falsely 
assumed; or was there in truth merely an indwelling of God within Him, as 
it were by appellation only?

    22. I do not think they can say the name was falsely assumed, and so 
involve themselves in the open wickedness of blasphemy; lest they should 
betray themselves on the one hand to the demons and idols, and on the other 
to Christ, by insinuating that the name of God was falsely given to Him. 
But if they think He is called God because He had an indwelling of the 
Godhead within Him,--as many holy men were (for the Scripture calls them 
Gods to whom the word of God came),(1)--they do not place Him before other 
men, but think He is to be compared with them; so that they consider Him to 
be the same as He has granted other men to be, even as He says to Moses: "I 
have made thee a god unto Pharaoh."(2) Wherefore it is also said in the 
Psalms: "I have said, ye are gods."(3)

    23. This idea of these blasphemers Paul puts aside; for he said: "For 
though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth."(4) He 
said not: "There be gods," but "There be that are called gods." But 
"Christ, as it is written, "is the same yesterday and to-day."(5) "He is," 
it says; that is, not only in name but also in truth.

    24. And well is it written: "He is the same yesterday and to-day," so 
that the impiety of Arius might find no room to pile up its profanity. For 
he, in reading in the second psalm of the Father saying to the Son, "Thou 
art My Son, this day have I begotten Thee,"(6) noted the word "to-day," not 
"yesterday," referring this which was spoken of the assumption of our flesh 
to the eternity of the divine generation; of which Paul also says in the 
Acts of the Apostles: "And we declare unto you the promise which was made 
to our fathers: for God has fulfilled the same to our children, in that He 
hath raised up the Lord Jesus Christ again, as it is written in the second 
psalm: Thou art My Son, this day have I begotten Thee."(1) Thus the 
Apostle, filled with the Holy Ghost, in order that he might destroy that 
fierce madness of his, said: "The same, yesterday, to-day, and for ever." 
"Yesterday" on account of His eternity; "to-day" on account of His taking 
to Himself a human body.

    35. Christ therefore is, and always is; for He, Who is, always is. And 
Christ always is, of Whom Moses says: "He that is hath sent me."(2) Gabriel 
indeed was, Raphael was, the angels were; but they who sometime have not 
been are by no means with equal reason said always to be. But Christ, as we 
read, "was not it is, and, it is not, but, it is was in Him."(3) Wherefore 
it is the property of God alone to be, Who ever is.

    26. Therefore if they dare not say He is God by appellation, and it is 
a mark of deep impiety to say He is a false god, it remains that He is true 
God, not unlike to the true Father, but equal to Him. And as He sanctifies 
and justifies whom He will,(4) not by assuming that power from without 
Himself, but having within Himself the power of sanctification, how is He 
not true God? For the Apostle called Him indeed true God, Who according to 
His nature was God, as it is written: "Howbeit then, when ye knew not God, 
ye did service unto them, who by nature were not gods;"(5) that is, who 
could not be true gods, for this title by no means belonged to them by 
nature.

CHAPTER II.

Since it has been proved that the Son is true God, and in that is not 
interior to the Father, it is shown that by the word solus (alone) when 
used of the Father in the Scriptures, the Son is not excluded; nay, that 
this expression befits Him above all, and Him alone. The Trinity is alone, 
not amongst all, but above all. The Son alone does what the Father does, 
and alone has immortality. But we must not for this reason separate Him 
from the Father in our controversies. We may, however, understand that 
passage of the Incarnation. Lastly the Father is shut out from a share in 
the redemption of men by those who would have the Son to be separated from 
Him.

    27. We have fully demonstrated by passages of Scripture, in the earlier 
books, that Christ is true, yea, very true God. Therefore if Christ, as it 
has been taught, is true God, let us enquire why they desire to separate 
the Son from the Father, when they read that the Father is the only true 
God.

    28. If they say that the Father alone is true God, they cannot deny 
that God the Son alone is the Truth; for Christ is the Truth. Is the Truth 
then something inferior to Him that is true, seeing that according to the 
use of terms a man is called true from the word "truth," as also wise from 
wisdom, just from justice? We donor deem it so between the Father and the 
Son. For there is nothing wanting to the Father, because the Father is full 
of truth; and the Son, because He is the Truth, is equal to Him that is 
true.

    29. But that they may know, when they see the word "alone," that the 
Son is in no wise to be separated from the Father, let them remember it was 
said by God in the Prophets: "I stretched forth the heavens alone."(1) The 
Father certainly did not stretch them forth without the Son. For the Son 
Himself, Who is the Wisdom of God, says: "When He prepared the heavens I 
was present with Him."(2) And Paul declares that it was said of the Son: 
"Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth, and 
the heavens are the work of Thy hands."(3) Whether therefore the Son made 
the heavens, as also the Apostle would have it understood, whilst He 
Himself certainly did not alone spread out the heavens without the Father; 
or as it stands in the Book of Proverbs: "The Lord in wisdom hath rounded 
the earth, in understanding hath He prepared the heavens;"(4) it is proved 
that neither the Father made the heavens alone without the Son, nor yet the 
Son without the Father. And yet He who spread out the heavens is said to be 
alone.

    30. To show indeed how plainly we must understand the expression 
"alone" of the Son (although we may never believe that He did anything 
without the knowledge of the Father), we have here also another passage, 
where it is written: "Which alone spreadeth out the heavens, and walketh as 
it were on a pavement over the sea."(5) For the Gospel of the Lord has 
taught us that it was not the Father but the Son that walked upon the sea, 
when Peter asked Him, saying, "Lord, bid me come unto Thee."(6) But even 
prophecy itself gives proof of this. For holy Job prophesied of the coming 
of the Lord; of Whom he said in truth that He would vanquish the great 
Leviathan,(7) and it was done. For that dread Leviathan that is, the devil, 
He smote, and struck down, and laid low in the last times by the adorable 
Passion of His own Body.(1)

    31. The Son therefore is only and true God for this also is assigned to 
the Son as His sole right. For of no created being can it be accurately 
said that he is alone. How can he to whom fellowship in creation belongs be 
separated from the rest, as though he were alone? Thus man is seen to be a 
rational being amongst all earthly creatures, yet he is not the only 
rational being; for we know that the heavenly works of God also are 
rational, we confess that angels and archangels are rational beings. If 
then the angels are rational, man cannot be said to be the only rational 
being.

    32. But they say that the sun can be said to be alone, because there is 
no second sun. But the sun himself has many things in common with the 
stars, for he travels across the heavens, he is of that ethereal and 
heavenly substance, he is a creature, and is reckoned amongst all the works 
of God. He serves God in union with all, blesses Him with all, praises Him 
with all.(2) Therefore he cannot accurately be said to be alone, for he is 
not set apart from the rest.

    33. Wherefore since no created being can be compared with the Godhead 
of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, Which is alone, not amongst 
all, but over all (our declaration concerning the Spirit being meanwhile 
held back); as the Father is said to be the only true God, because He has 
nothing in common with others; so also is the Son alone the Image of the 
true God, He alone is the Hand of the Father, He alone is the Virtue and 
Wisdom of God.

    34. Thus the Son alone does what the Father does; for it is written: 
"Whatsoever things I do, He doth."(3) And since the work of the Father and 
of the Son is one, it is well said of the Father and the Son, that God 
worked alone; wherefore also when we speak of the Creator, we own both the 
Father and the Son. For assuredly when Paul said, "Who served the creature 
more than the Creator,"(4) he neither denied the Father to be the Creator, 
from Whom are all these things, nor yet the Son, through Whom are all 
things.(5)

    35. And it does not seem out of agreement with this that it is written: 
"Who alone hath immortality."(6) For how could He not have immortality Who 
has life in Himself? He has it in His nature; He has it in His essential 
Being; and He has it not as a temporal grace, but owing to His eternal 
Godhead. He has it not by way of a gift as a servant, but by peculiar fight 
of His Generation, as the co-eternal Son. He has it, too, as has the 
Father. "For as the Father hath life in Himself, so also hath He given to 
the Son to have life in Himself."(1) As He has it, it says, so He has given 
it. Thou hast learnt already how He gave it,(2) that thou mayest not think 
it to be a free gift of grace, when it is a secret of His generation. 
Since, then, there is no divergence of life between the Father and the Son, 
how can it be supposed that the Father alone has immortality, whilst the 
Son has it not?

    36. Wherefore let them understand that in this passage the Son is not 
to be separated from the Father, Who is the only true God. For they cannot 
prove that the Son is not the only and true God, especially as here also it 
may be gathered, as I have said, that Christ too is true and only God; or 
the passage may at least be understood partly in reference to the Godhead 
of the Father and the Son, and partly to the Incarnation of Christ: for 
knowledge is not perfect unless it confesses Jesus Christ from eternity to 
be only-begotten God, true Son of God, and, according to the flesh, 
begotten of a Virgin. Which also this very Evangelist has taught us 
elsewhere, saying: "Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come 
in the flesh, is of God."(3)

    37. Lastly, the whole of our passage teaches us that it is not improper 
in this verse to understand a reference to the sacrament of the 
Incarnation. For thus it is written: "Father, the hour is come, glorify Thy 
Son."(4) When, therefore, He states that the hour is come, and prays to be 
glorified, how can one suppose Him to have spoken but only in accordance 
with the assumption of our flesh? For the Godhead has no fixed moments of 
time, nor does eternal light stand in need of glorification. Therefore in 
the only true God, Who is the Father, we also understand the only true Son 
of God to be in accordance with the unity of the Godhead. And in the name 
of Jesus Christ, which He received when born of the Virgin, we acknowledge 
the sacrament of the Incarnation.

    38. But if they wish to separate the Son, when they read that the 
Father is the only true God, I suppose that when they read of the 
Incarnation of the Son: "This is the stone which was set at naught of you 
builders, which is become the head of the corner;" and further: "There is 
none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved;"(1) 
then they imagine the Father is to be cut off from the benefit of imparting 
salvation to us. But there is neither salvation without the Father, nor 
eternal life without the Son.

CHAPTER III.

To the objection of the Arians, that two Gods are introduced by a unity of 
substance, the answer is that a plurality of Gods is more likely to be 
inferred from diversity of substance. Further, their charge recoils upon 
themselves. Manifold diversity is the reason why two men cannot be said to 
be one man, though all men are called individually man, where a unity of 
nature is referred to. There is one nature alone in them, but there is 
wholly a unity in the Divine Persons. Therefore the Son is not to be 
severed from the Father, especially as they dare not deny that worship is 
due to Him.

    39. But the Arians maintain the following: If you say that, as the 
Father is the only true God, so also is the Son, and confess that the 
Father and the Son are both of one substance, you introduce not one God, 
but two. For they who are of one substance seem not to be one God but two 
Gods. Just as two men or two sheep or more are spoken of, but a man and a 
sheep are not spoken of as two men or two sheep, but as one man and one 
sheep.

    40. This is what the Arians say; and by this cunning argument they 
attempt to catch the more simple-minded. However if we read the divine 
Scriptures we shall find that plurality occurs rather amongst those things 
which are of a diverse and different substance, that is, heterou'sia. We 
have this set forth in the books of Solomon, in that passage in which he 
said: "There are three things impossible to understand, yea, a fourth which 
I know not, the track of an eagle in the air, the way of a serpent upon a 
rock, the path of a ship in the sea, and the way of a man in his youth."(2) 
An eagle and a ship and a serpent are not of one family and nature, but of 
a distinguishable and different substance, and yet they are three. On the 
testimony of Scripture, therefore, they learn that their arguments are 
against themselves.

    41. Therefore, in saying that the substance of the Father and of the 
Son is diverse and their Godhead distinguishable, they themselves assert 
there are two Gods. But we, when we confess the Father and' the Son, in 
declaring them still to be of one Godhead, say that there are not two Gods, 
but one God. And this we establish by the word of the Lord. For where there 
are several, there is a difference either of nature or of will and work. 
Lastly, that they may be refuted on their own witness, two men are 
mentioned: But though they are of one nature by right of birth, yet in time 
and thought and work and place, they are apart; and so one man cannot be 
spoken of under the signification and number of two; for there is no unity 
where there is diversity. But God is said to be one, and the glory and 
completeness of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit is thus expressed.

    42. Such, indeed, is the truth of unity that, when the nature alone of 
human birth or of human flesh is indicated, one man is the term used for 
the many, as it is written "The Lord is my helper, I will not fear what man 
can do unto me;"(1) that is, not the one person of a man, but the one 
flesh, the one frailty of human birth. It added also: "It is better to 
trust in the Lord than to trust in man."(2) Here, too, it did not denote 
one particular man, but a universal condition. Then, immediately after it 
added, speaking of many: "It is better to put confidence in the Lord than 
to put confidence in princes."(3) Where man is spoken of, as we have 
already said, there the common unity of the nature, which exists between 
all is indicated; but where the princes are mentioned, there is a certain 
distinction between their different powers.

    43. Amongst men, or in men, there exists a unity in some one thing, 
either in love, or desire, or flesh, or devotion, or faith. But a universal 
unity, that embraces within itself all things agreeably to the divine 
glory, is the property of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit alone.

    44. Wherefore the Lord also, in pointing out the diversity that exists 
among men, who have nothing in common that can tend towards the unity of an 
indivisible substance, says: "In your law it is written that the testimony 
of two men is true."(4) But though He had said, "The testimony of two men 
is true," when He came to the testimony of Himself and His Father, He said 
not: "Our testimony is true, for it is the testimony of two Gods;" but: "I 
am One that bear witness of Myself, and the Father that sent Me beareth 
witness of Me.", Earlier He also says: "If I judge, My judgment is true; 
for I am not alone, but I and the Father that sent Me."(2) Thus, both in 
one place and the other, He indicated both the Father and the Son, but 
neither implied the plurality, nor severed the unity of their divine 
Substance.

    45. It is plain, then, that whatsoever is of one substance cannot be 
severed, even though it be not single, but one. By singleness I mean that 
which the Greeks call monoth's. Singleness has to do with a person; unity 
with a nature. That those things which are of a different substance are 
wont to be called, not one alone, but many, though already proved on the 
testimony of the prophet, the Apostle himself has stated in so many words, 
saying: "For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in 
earth."(3) Dost thou see, then, that those who are of different substances, 
and not of the verity of one nature, are called "gods"? But the Father and 
the Son, being of one substance, are not two Gods, but "One God, the 
Father, of Whom are all things, and one Lord Jesus Christ, through Whom are 
all things."(4) "One God," he says, "and one Lord Jesus;" and above: "One 
God, not two Gods;" and then: "One Lord, not two Lords."(5)

    46. Plurality, therefore, is excluded, but the unity is not destroyed. 
But as, on the one hand, when we read of the Lord Jesus, we do not 
dissociate the Father, as I have already said, from the prerogative of 
ruling, because He has that in common with the Son; so, on the other hand, 
when we read of the only true God, the Father, we cannot sever the Son from 
the prerogative of the only true God, for He has that in common with the 
Father.

    47. Let them say what they feel or what they think, when we read: "Thou 
shall worship the Lord thy God, and Him only shall thou serve."(6) Do they 
think Christ should not be worshipped, and that He Ought not to be served? 
But if that woman of Canaan who worshipped Him,(7) merited to gain what she 
asked for, and the Apostle Paul, who confessed himself to be the servant of 
Christ in the very outset of his letters, merited to be an Apostle "not of 
men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ;"(8) let them say what they think 
should follow. Would they prefer to join with Arius in a league of 
treachery, and so show, by denying Christ to be the only true God, that 
they consider He should neither be worshipped nor served? Or would they 
sooner go in company with Paul, who in serving and worshipping Christ did 
not disown in word and heart the only true God, Whom he acknowledged with 
dutiful service?

CHAPTER IV.

It is objected by heretics that Christ offered worship to His Father. But 
instead it is shown that this must be referred to His humanity, as is clear 
from an examination of the passage. However, it also offers fresh witness 
to His Godhead, as we often see it happening in other actions that Christ 
did.

    48. But if any one were to say that the Son worships God the Father, 
because it is written, "Ye worship ye know not what, we know what we 
worship,"(1) let him consider when it was said, and to whom, and to whose 
wishes it was in answer.

    49. In the earlier verses of this chapter it was stated, not without 
reason, that Jesus, being weary with the journey, was sitting down, and 
that He asked a woman of Samaria to give Him drink;(2) for He spoke as man; 
for as God He could neither be weary nor thirst.

    50. So when this woman addressed Him as a Jew, and thought Him a 
prophet, He answers her, as a Jew who spiritually taught the mysteries of 
the Law: "Ye worship ye know not what, we know what we worship." "We," He 
says; for He joined Himself with men. But how is He joined with men, but 
according to the flesh? And to show that He answered as being incarnate, He 
added: "for salvation is of the Jews."(3)

    51. But immediately after this He put aside His human feelings, saying: 
"But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship 
the Father."(4) H e said not: "We shall worship." This He would certainly 
have said, if He had a share in our obedience.

    52. And when we read that Mary worshipped Him,(5) we ought to learn 
that it is not possible for Him under the same nature both to worship as a 
servant, and to be worshipped as Lord; but rather that as man He is said to 
worship among men, and that as Lord He is worshipped by His servants.

    53. Many things therefore we read and believe, in the light of the 
sacrament of the Incarnation. But even in the very feelings of our human 
nature we may behold the Divine Majesty. Jesus is wearied with His journey, 
that He may refresh the weary; He desires to drink, when about to give 
spiritual drink to the thirsty; He was hungry, when about to supply the 
food of salvation to the hungry; He dies, to live again; He is buried, to 
rise again; He hangs upon the dreadful tree, to strengthen those in dread; 
He veils the heaven with thick darkness, that He may give light; He makes 
the earth to shake, that He may make it strong; He rouses the sea, that He 
may calm it; He opens the tombs of the dead, that He may show they are the 
homes of the living; He is made of a Virgin, that men may believe He is 
born of God; He feigns not to know, that He may make the ignorant to know; 
as a Jew He is said to worship, that the Son may be worshipped as true God.

CHAPTER V.

Ambrose answers those who press the words of the Lord to the mother of 
Zebedee's children, by saying that they were spoken out of kindness, 
because Christ was unwilling to cause her grief. Ample reason for such 
tenderness is brought forward. The Lord would rather leave the granting of 
that request to the Father, than declare it to be impossible. This answer 
of Christ's, however, is not to His detriment, as is shown both by His very 
words, and also by comparing them with other passages.

    54. "How," they say, "can the Son of God be the only true God, like to 
the Father, when He Himself said to the sons of Zebedee: 'Ye shall drink 
indeed of My cup; but to sit on My right hand or on My left, is not Mine to 
give to you, but to those for whom it has been prepared of My Father'?"(1) 
This, then, is, as you desire, your proof of divine inequality; though in 
it you ought rather to reverence the Lord's kindness and to adore His 
grace; if, that is, you could but perceive the deep secrets of the virtue 
and wisdom of God.

    55. For think of her who, with and for her sons, makes this request. It 
is a mother, who in her anxiety for the honour of her sons, though somewhat 
unrestrained in the measure of her desires, may for all that yet find 
pardon. It is a mother, old in years, devout in her zeal, deprived of 
consolation; who at that time, when she might have been helped and 
supported by the aid of her able bodied offspring, suffered her children to 
leave her, and preferred the reward her sons should receive in following 
Christ to her own pleasure. For they when called by the Lord, at the first 
word, as we read, left their nets and their father and followed Him.(1)

    56. She then, somewhat yielding to the devotion of a mother's zeal, 
besought the Saviour, saying: "Grant that these my two sons may sit the one 
on Thy right hand, the other on Thy left in Thy kingdom."(2) Although it 
was an error, it was an error of a mother's affections; for a mother's 
heart knows no patience. Though eager for the object of her desires, yet 
her longing was pardonable, for she was not greedy for money, but for 
grace. Not shameless was her request, for she thought not of herself, but 
of her children. Contemplate the mother, reflect upon her.

    57. But it is nothing wonderful if the feelings of parents for their 
children seem nothing to you, who think the love of the Almighty Father for 
His only-begotten Son a trifling matter. The Lord of heaven and earth was 
ashamed (to speak as accords with the assumption of our flesh and the 
virtues of the soul)--He was ashamed, I say, and, to use His own word, 
disturbed, to refuse a share even in His own seat to a mother making 
request for her sons. You maintain sometimes that the proper Son of the 
eternal God stands to give service, at other times you would have His co-
session to be as that of an attendant, that is, not because there is a 
oneness of majesty, but because it is the order of the Father; and you deny 
to the Son of God, Who is true God, that which He plainly was unwilling to 
refuse to men.

    58. For He thought of the mother's love, who solaced her old age with 
the thought of her sons' reward, and, though harassed with a mother's 
longings, endured the absence of those dearest pledges of her love.

    59. Think also of the woman, that is, the weaker sex, whom the Lord had 
not yet strengthened by His own Passion. Think, I say, of a descendant of 
Eve, the first woman, sinking under the inheritance of unrestrained 
passion, which had been passed on to all; one, too, whom the Lord had not 
yet redeemed with His own Blood, and from whom He had not yet washed out in 
His Blood the desire implanted in the hearts of all for unbounded honour 
even beyond what is right. Thus the woman offended owing to an inherited 
tendency to wrong.

    60. And what wonder if a mother should strive to win preference for her 
children (which is far better than if she had done it for herself), when 
even the Apostles themselves, as we read, strove amongst themselves, as to 
who should have the preference?(1)

    61. The physician, therefore, ought not to wound a mother who has been 
deprived of all, nor a suffering mind, with shameful reproaches, lest when 
the request had been made and had been proudly denied, she should grieve 
over the condemnation of her petition as being unreasonable.

    62. Lastly, the Lord, Who knew that a mother's affection is to be 
honoured, answered not the woman, but her sons, saying: "Are ye able to 
drink of the cup that I shall drink of?" When they say: "We are able," 
Jesus says to them: "Ye shall drink indeed of My cup; but to sit on My 
right hand and on My left is not Mine to give to you, but to those for whom 
it is prepared of My Father."(2)

    63. How patient and kind the Lord is; how deep is His wisdom and good 
His love! For wishing to show that the disciples asked for no slight thing, 
but one they could not obtain, He reserved His own peculiar rights for His 
Father's honour, not fearing to detract aught from His own rights: "Who 
thought it not robbery to be equal with God;"(3) and loving, too, His 
disciples (for "He loved them," as it is written, "unto the end"),(4) He 
was unwilling to seem to refuse to those whom He loved what they desired; 
He, I say, the good and holy Lord, Who would rather keep some of His own 
prerogative secret, than lay aside aught of His love. "For charity 
suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not, and seeketh not her 
own."(5)

    64. Lastly, that you may learn it was no sign of weakness, but rather 
of tenderness, that He said: "It is not Mine to give to you;" note that 
when the sons of Zebedee make the request without their mother, He said 
nothing about the Father; for thus it is written: "It is not Mine to give 
to you, but those for whom it has been prepared."(6) So the Evangelist Mark 
has stated it. But when the mother makes this request on her sons' behalf, 
as we find it in Matthew, He says: "It is not Mine to give to you, but to 
those for whom it has been prepared of My Father."(7) Here He added: "of My 
Father," for a mother's feelings demanded greater tenderness.

    65. But if they think that by saying, "For whom it hath been prepared 
of My Father," He assigned greater power to His Father, or detracted aught 
from His own; let them say whether they think there is any detraction from 
the Father's power, because the Son in the Gospel says of the Father: "The 
Father judgeth no man."(1)

    66. But if we think it impious to believe that the Father has handed 
over all judgment to the Son in such wise that He has it not Himself,--for 
He has it, and cannot lose what the Divine Majesty has by its very nature,-
-we ought to consider it equally impious to suppose that the Son cannot 
give what either men can merit, or any creature can receive; especially as 
He Himself has said: "I go unto My Father, and whatsoever ye shall ask of 
Him in My name, that will I do."(2) For if the Son cannot give what the 
Father can give, the Truth has lied, and cannot do what the Father has been 
asked for in His name. He therefore did not say: "For whom it has been 
prepared of My Father," in order that requests should be made only of the 
Father. For all things which are asked of the Father, He has declared that 
He will give. Lastly, He did not say: "Whatsoever ye shall ask of Me, that 
will I do;" but: "Whatsoever ye shall ask of Him in My name, that will I 
do."

CHAPTER VI.

Wishing to answer the above-stated objection somewhat more fully, he 
maintains that this request, had it not been impossible in itself, would 
have been possible for Christ to grant; especially as the Father has given 
all judgment to Him; which gift we must understand to have been given 
without any feature of imperfection. However, he proves that the request 
must be reckoned amongst the impossibilities. To make it really possible, 
he teaches that Christ's answer must be taken in accordance with His human 
nature, and shows this next by an exposition of the passage. Lastly, he 
once more confirms the reply he as given on the impossibility of Christ's 
session.

    67. I Ask now whether they think the request made by the wife and sons 
of Zebedee was possible or impossible to human circumstances, or to any 
created being? If it was possible, how is it that He Who made all things 
which were not had not the power of granting a seat to His apostles on His 
right hand and on His left? or how was it that He, to Whom the Father gave 
all judgment, could not judge of men's merits?

    68. We know well in what way He gave it; for how did the Son, who 
created all things out of nothing, receive it as though in want? Had He not 
the judgment of those whose natures He had made? The Father gave all 
judgment to the Son, "that all men should honour the Son, even as they 
honour the Father."(1) It is not therefore the power of the Son, but our 
knowledge of it, that increases; nor does what is learnt by us add aught to 
His being, but only to our advantage; so that by knowing the Son of God, we 
may have eternal life.

    69. As, then, in our knowledge of the Son of God His honour, but our 
profit, not His, is concerned; if any one thinks that the power of God is 
augmented by that honour, He must also believe that God the Father can 
receive augmentation; for He is glorified by our knowledge of Him, as is 
the Son: as it is written on the word of the Son: "I have glorified Thee 
upon the earth."(2) Therefore if that which was asked for was at all 
possible, it certainly was in the power of the Son to grant it.

    70. Let them show, if they consider it possible, who of men or of other 
created beings sits either on the right hand or the left of God. For the 
Father says to the Son: "Sit Thou on My right hand."(3) Therefore if any 
one sits on the right hand of the Son, the Son is found to be sitting (to 
speak in human wise) between Himself and the Father.

    71. A thing impossible for man, then, was asked of Him. But He was 
unwilling to say that men could not sit with Him; seeing that He desired 
His divine glory should be veiled, and not revealed before He rose 
again.(4) For before this, when He had appeared in glory between His 
attendants Moses and Elias, He had warned His disciples that they should 
tell no man what they had seen.

    72. Therefore if it was not possible for men or other created beings to 
merit this, the Son ought not to seem to have less power because He gave 
not to His apostles, what the Father has not given to men or other created 
beings. Or else let them say to which of them He has given it. Certainly 
not to the angels; of whom Scripture says that all the angels stood round 
about the throne.(5) Thus Gabriel said that he stands, as it says: "I am 
Gabriel that stand before God."(6)

    73. Not to the angels, then, has He given it, nor to the elders who 
worship Him that sitteth; for they do not sit upon the seat of majesty, but 
as the Scripture has said, round about the throne; for there are four and 
twenty other seats, as we have it in the Revelation of John: "And upon the 
seats four and twenty elders sitting."(1) In the Gospel also the Lord 
Himself says: "When the Son of Man shall sit in the throne of His glory, ye 
also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of 
Israel."(2) He did not say that a share in His own throne could be given to 
the apostles, but that there were those other twelve thrones; which, 
however, we ought not to think of as referring to actual sitting down, but 
as showing the happy issue of spiritual grace.

    74. Lastly, in the Book of the Kings, Micaiah the prophet said: "I saw 
the Lord God of Israel sitting on His throne, and all the host of heaven 
standing around Him, on His right hand and on His left."(3) How then, when 
the angels stand on the right hand and on the left of the Lord God, when 
all the host of heaven stands, shall men sit on the right hand of God or on 
His left, to whom is promised as a reward for virtue likeness to the 
angels, as the Lord says: "Ye shall be as the angels in heaven?"(4) "As the 
angels," He says, not "more than the angels."

    75. If, then, the Father has given nothing more than the Son, the Son 
certainly has given nothing less than the Father. Therefore the Son can in 
no wise be less than the Father.

    76. Suppose, however, that it had been possible for men to obtain what 
was desired; what does it mean when He says: "But to sit on My right hand 
and on My left is not Mine to give to you"?(5) What is "Mine"? Above He 
said: "Ye shall drink indeed of My cup;" and again He added: "It is not 
Mine to give to you." Above He said "Mine," and again lower down He said 
"Mine." He made no change. And so the earlier passages tell us why He said 
"Mine."

    77. For being asked by a woman as man to allow her sons to sit on His 
right hand and His left, because she asked Him as man, the Lord also as 
though only man answered concerning His Passion: "Are ye able to drink of 
the cup that I shall drink of?"(6)

    78. Therefore because He spoke according to the flesh of the Passion of 
His Body, He wished to show that according to the flesh He left behind Him 
an example and pattern to us of the endurance of suffering; but that 
according to His position as man He could not grant them fellowship in the 
throne above. This is the reason why He said: "It is not Mine;" as also in 
another place He says: "My doctrine is not Mine."(1) It is not, He says, 
spoken after my flesh; for the words which are divine belong not to the 
flesh.

    79. But how plainly He showed His tenderness for His disciples, whom He 
loved, saying first: "Will ye drink of My cup?" For as He could not grant 
what they sought, He offered them something else, so that He might mention 
what He would assign to them, before He denied them anything; in order that 
they might understand that the failure lay more in the equity of their 
request to Him, than in the wish of their Lord to show kindness.

    80. "Ye shall indeed drink of My cup," He says; that is, "I will not 
refuse you the suffering, which My flesh will undergo. For all that I have 
taken on Myself as man, ye can imitate. I have granted you the victory of 
suffering, the inheritance of the cross. 'But to sit on My right hand and 
on My left is not Mine to give to you."' He did not say, "It is not Mine to 
give," but: "It is not Mine to give to you;" meaning by this, not that He 
lacked the power, but that His creatures were wanting in merit.

    81. Or take in another way the words: "It is not Mine to give to you," 
that is. "It is not Mine, for I came to teach humility; it is not Mine, for 
I came, not to be ministered unto, but to minister; it is not Mine, for I 
show justice, not favour."

    82. Then, speaking of the Father, He added: "For whom it has been 
prepared," to show that the Father also is not wont to give heed merely to 
requests, but to merits; for God is not a respecter of persons.(2) 
Wherefore also the Apostle says: "Whom He did foreknow, He also did 
predestinate."(3) He did not predestinate them before He knew them, but He 
did predestinate the reward of those whose merits He foreknew.

    83. Rightly then is the woman checked, who demanded what was 
impossible, as a special kind of privilege from Him the Lord, Who of His 
own free gift granted not only to two apostles, but to all the disciples, 
those things which He had adjudged to be given to the saints; and that too 
without a prayer from any one, as it is written: "Ye shall sit upon twelve 
thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel."(4)

    84. Therefore, although we may think the demand to have been possible, 
there is no room for false attacks. However, when I  read that the seraphim 
stand,(1) how can I suppose that men may sit on the right hand or the left 
of the Son of God? The Lord sits upon the cherubim, as it says: "Thou that 
sittest upon the cherubim, show myself."(2) And how shall the apostles sit 
upon the cherubim?

    85. And I do not come to this conclusion of my own mind, but because of 
the utterances of our Lord's own mouth. For the Lord Himself later on, in 
commending the apostles to the Father, says: "Father, I will that they also 
whom Thou hast given Me be with Me where I am."(3) But if He had thought 
that the Father would give the divine throne to men, He would have said: "I 
will that where I sit, they also may sit with Me." But He says: "I will 
that they be with Me," not "that they may sit with Me;" and "where I am," 
not "as I am."

    86. Then follow the words: "That they may see My glory." Here too He 
did not say: "that they may have My glory," but "that they may see" it. For 
the servant sees, the Lord possesses; as David also has taught us, saying: 
"That I may see the delight of the Lord."(4) And the Lord Himself in the 
Gospel has revealed it, stating: "Blessed are the pure in heart, for they 
shall see God."(5) "They shall see," He says; not "They shall sit with God 
upon the cherubim."

    87. Let them therefore cease to think little of the Son of God 
according to His Godhead, lest they should think little also of the Father. 
For he who believes wrongly of the Son cannot think rightly of the Father; 
he who thinks wrongly of the Spirit cannot think rightly of the Son. For 
where there is one dignity, one glory, one love, one majesty, whatsoever 
thou thinkest is to be withdrawn in the case of any one of the Three 
Persons, is withdrawn from all alike, For that can never have completeness 
which thou canst separate and divide into various portions.

CHAPTER VII.

Objection is taken to the following passage: "Thou hast loved them, as Thou 
hast loved Me." To remove it, he shows first the impiety of the Arian 
explanation; then compares these words with others; and lastly, takes the 
whole passage into consideration. Hence he gathers that the mission of 
Christ, although it is to be received according to the flesh, is not to His 
detriment. When this is proved he shows how the divine mission takes place.

    88. There are some, O Emperor Augustus, who in their desire to deny the 
unity of the divine Substance, strive to make little of the love of the 
Father and the Son, because it is written: "Thou hast loved them, as Thou 
hast loved Me."(1) But when they say this, what else do they do but adopt a 
likeness of comparison between the Son of God and men?

    89. Can men indeed be I loved by God as the Son is, in Whom the Father 
is well-pleased?(2) He is well-pleasing in Himself; we through Him. For 
those in whom God sees His own Son after His own likeness, He admits 
through His Son into the favour of sons. So that as we go through likeness 
unto likeness, so through the Generation of the Son are we called unto 
adoption. The eternal love of God's Nature is one thing, that of grace is 
another.

    90. And if they start a debate on the words that are written: "And Thou 
hast loved them, as Thou hast loved Me," and think a comparison is 
intended; they must think that the following also was said by way of 
comparison: "Be ye merciful, as your Father Which is in heaven is 
merciful;"(3) and elsewhere: "Be ye perfect, as My Father Which is in 
heaven is perfect."(4) But if He is perfect in the fulness of His glory, we 
are but perfect according to the growth of virtue within us. The Son also 
is loved by the Father according to the fulness of a love that ever 
abideth, but in us growth in grace merits the love of God.

    91. Thou seest, then, how God has given grace to men, and dost thou 
wish to dissever the natural and indivisible love of the Father and the 
Son? And dost thou still strive to make nothing of words, where thou dost 
note the mention of a unity of majesty?

    92. Consider the whole of this passage, and see from what standpoint He 
speaks; for thou hearest Him saying: "Father, glorify Thou Me with the 
glory which I had with Thee before the world was."(5) See how He speaks 
from the standpoint of the first man. For He begs for us in that request 
those things which, as Man, He remembered were granted in paradise before 
the Fall, as also He spoke of it to the thief at His Passion: "Verily, 
verily, I say unto thee, today shall thou be with Me in paradise."(6) This 
is the glory before the world was. But He used the word "world" instead 
"men," as also thou hast it: "Lo! the whole world goeth after Him;"(1) and 
again "That the world may know that Thou hast sent Me."(2)

    93. But that thou mightest know the great God, even the life-giving and 
Almighty Son of God, He has added a proof of His majesty by saying: "And 
all Mine are Thine, and Thine are Mine."(3) He has all things, and dost 
thou turn aside the fact that He was sent, to wrong Him?

    94. But if thou dost not accept the truth of His mission according to 
the flesh, as the Apostle spoke of it,(4) and dost raise out of a mere word 
a decision against it, to enable thee to say that inferiors are wont to be 
sent by superiors; what answer wilt thou give to the fact that the Son was 
sent to men? For if thou dost think that he who is sent is inferior to him 
by whom he is sent, thou must learn also that an inferior has sent a 
superior, and that superiors have been sent to inferiors. For Tobias sent 
Raphael the archangel,(5) and an angel was sent to Balsam,(6) and the Son 
of God to the Jews.

    95. Or was the Son of God inferior to the Jews to whom He was sent? For 
of Him it is written: "Last of all He sent unto them His only Son, saying, 
They will reverence My Son."(7) And mark that He mentioned first the 
servants, then the Son, that thou mayest know that God, the only-begotten 
Son according to the power of His Godhead, has neither name nor lot in 
common with servants. He is sent forth to be reverenced, not to be compared 
with the household.

    96. And rightly did He add the word "My," that we might believe He 
came, not as one of many, nor as one of a lower nature or of some inferior 
power, but as true from Him that is true, as the Image of the Father's 
Substance.

    97. Suppose, however, that he who is sent is inferior to him by whom he 
is sent. Christ then was inferior to Pilate; for Pilate sent Him to Herod. 
But a word does not prejudice His power. Scripture, which says that He was 
sent from the Father, says that He was sent from a ruler.

    98. Wherefore, if we sensibly hold to those things which be worthy of 
the Son of God, we ought to understand Him to have been sent in such a way 
that the Word of God, out of the incomprehensible and ineffable mystery of 
the depths of His majesty, gave Himself for comprehension to our minds, so 
far as we could lay hold of Him, not only when He "emptied" Himself, but 
also when He dwelt in us, as it is written: "I will dwell in them."(1) 
Elsewhere also it stands that God said: "Go to, let us go down and confound 
their language."(2) God, indeed, never descends from any place; for He 
says: "I fill heaven and earth."(3) But He seems to descend when the Word 
of God enters our hearts, as the prophet has said: "Prepare ye the way of 
the Lord, make His paths straight."(4) We are to do this, so that, as He 
Himself promised, He may come together with the Father and make His abode 
with us.(5) It is clear, then, how He comes.

CHAPTER VIII.

Christ, so far as He is true Son of God, has no Lord, but only so far as He 
is Man; as is shown by His words in which He addressed at one time the 
Father, at another the Lord. How many heresies are silenced by one verse of 
Scripture! We must distinguish between the things that belong to Christ as 
Son of God or as Son of David. For under the latter title only must we 
ascribe it to Him that He was a servant. Lastly, he points out that many 
passages cannot be taken except as referring to the Incarnation.

    99. Wherefore also it is plain how He calls Him Lord, Whom He knew as 
Father. For He says: "I confess to Thee, Father, Lord of heaven and 
earth."(6) First Wisdom spoke of His own Father, and then proclaimed Him 
Lord of creation. For this reason the Lord shows in His Gospel that no 
lordship is exercised where there is a true offspring, saying: "What think 
ye of Christ? Whose Son is He? They say unto Him, The son of David. Jesus 
saith to them, How then doth David in spirit call Him Lord, saying: The 
Lord said unto my Lord: Sit Thou on My right hand"? Then he added: "If 
David in spirit then call Him Lord. how is He his son? And no man was able 
to answer Him a word."(7)

    100. With what care did the Lord provide for the faith in this witness 
because of the Arians! For He did not say: "The spirit calls Him Lord," but 
that "David spake in spirit;" in order that men might believe that as He is 
his, that is, David's son according to the flesh, so also He is his Lord 
and God according to His Godhead. Thou seeest, then, that there is a 
distinction between the titles that are used of relationship and of 
lordship.

    101. And rightly did the Lord speak of His own Father, but of the Lord 
of heaven and earth; so that thou, when thou readest of the Father and the 
Lord, mayest understand it is the Father of the Son, and the Lord of 
Creation. In the one title rests the claim of nature, in the other the 
authority to rule. For taking on Himself the form of a servant, He calls 
Him Lord, because He has submitted to service; being equal to Him in the 
form of God, but being a servant in the form of His body: for service is 
the due of the flesh, but lordship is the due of the Godhead. Wherefore 
also the Apostle says: "The God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of 
glory,"(1) that is, terming Him God of the adoption of humanity but the 
Father of glory. Did God have two Sons, Christ and Glory? Certainly not. 
Therefore if there is one Son of God, even Christ, Christ is Glory. Why 
dost thou strive to belittle Him who is the glory of the Father?

    102. If then the Son is glory, and the Father is glory (for the Father 
of glory cannot be anything else than glory), there is no separation of 
glories, but glory is one. Thus glory is referred to its own proper nature, 
but lordship to the service of the body that was assumed. For if the flesh 
is subject to the soul of a just man as it is written: "I chastise my body 
and bring it into subjection;"(2) how much more is it subject to the 
Godhead, of Which it is said: "For all things serve Thee"?(3)

    103. By one question the Lord has shut out both Sabellians and 
Photinians and Arians. For when He said that the Lord spoke to the Lord, 
Sabellius is set aside, who will have it that the same Person is both 
Father and Son. Photinus is set aside, who thinks of Him merely as man; for 
none could be Lord of David the King, but He Who is God, for it is written: 
"Thou shalt worship the Lord 'thy God, and Him only shalt thou serve."(4) 
Would the prophet who ruled under the Law act contrary to the Law? Arius is 
set aside, who hears that the Son sits on the right hand of the Father; so 
that if he argues from human ways, he refutes himself, and makes the poison 
of his blasphemous arguments to flow back upon himself. For in interpreting 
the inequality of the Father and the Son by the analogy of human habits 
(wandering from the truth in either case), he puts Him first Whom he makes 
little of, confessing Him to be the First, Whom he hears to be at the right 
hand. The Manichaean also is set aside, for he does not deny that He is the 
Son of David according to the flesh, Who, at the cry of the blind men, 
"Jesus, Thou Son of David, have mercy on us,"' was pleased at their faith 
and stood and healed them. But He does deny that this refers to His 
eternity, if He is called Son of David alone by those who are false.

    104. For "Son of God" is against Ebion,(2) "Son of David," is against 
the Manichees; 3 "Son of God" is against Photinus,(4) "Son of David" is 
against Marcion;(5) "Son of God" is against Paul of Samosata,(6) "Son of 
David" is against Valentinus;(7) "Son of God" is against Arius and 
Sabellius, the inheritors of heathen errors. "Lord of David "is against the 
Jews, who beholding the Son of God in the flesh, in impious madness 
believed Him to be only man.

    105. But in the faith of the Church one and the same is both Son of God 
the Father and Son of David. For the mystery of the Incarnation of God is 
the salvation of the whole of creation, according to that which is written: 
"That without God He should taste death for every man;"(8) that is, that 
every creature might be redeemed without any suffering at the price of the 
blood of the Lord's Divinity, as it stands elsewhere: "Every creature shall 
be delivered from the bondage of corruption."(9)

    106. It is one thing to be named Son according to the divine Substance, 
it is another thing to be so called according to the adoption of human 
flesh. For, according to the divine Generation, the Son is equal to God the 
Father; and, according to the adoption of a body, He is a servant to God 
the Father. "For," it says, "He took upon Him the form of a servant."(10) 
The Son is, however, one and the same. On the other hand, according to His 
glory, He is Lord to the holy patriarch David, but his Son in the line of 
actual descent, not abandoning aught of His own, but acquiring for Himself 
the rights that go with the adoption into our race.

    107. Not only does He undergo service in the character of man by reason 
of His descent from David, but also by reason of His name, as it is 
written: "I have found David My Servant;"(11) and elsewhere: "Behold I will 
send unto you My Servant, the Orient is His name.(1) And the Son Himself 
says: "Thus saith the Lord, that formed Me from the womb to be His servant, 
and said unto Me: It is a great thing for Thee to be called My Servant. 
Behold I have set Thee up for a witness to My people, and a light to the 
Gentiles, that Thou mayest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth."(2) 
To whom is this said, if not to Christ? Who being in the form of God, 
emptied Himself and took upon Him the form of a servant.(3) But what can be 
in the form of God, except that which exists in the fulness of the Godhead?

    108. Learn, then, what this means: "He took upon Him the form of a 
servant." It means that He took upon Him all the perfections of humanity in 
their completeness, and obedience in its completeness. And so it says in 
the thirtieth Psalm: "Thou hast set my feet in a large room. I am made a 
reproach above all mine enemies. Make Thy face to shine upon Thy 
servant."(4) "Servant" means the Man in whom He was sanctified; it means 
the Man in whom He was anointed; it means the Man in whom He was made under 
the law, made of the Virgin; and, to put it briefly, it means the Man in 
whose person He has a mother, as it is written: "O Lord, I am Thy Servant, 
I am Thy Servant, and the Son of Thy hand-maid;"(5) and again: "I am cast 
down and sore humbled."(6)

    109. Who is sore humbled, but Christ, Who came to free all through His 
obedience? "For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by 
the obedience of one shall many be made righteous."(7) Who received the cup 
of salvation? Christ the High Priest, or David who never held the 
priesthood, nor endured suffering? Who offered the sacrifice of 
Thanksgiving?(8)

    110. But that is insufficient; take again: "Preserve My soul, for I am 
holy."(9) Did David say this of himself? Nay, He says it, Who also says: 
"Thou wilt not leave My soul in hell, neither wilt Thou suffer Thine Holy 
One to see corruption."(10) The Same then says both of these.

    111. He has added further: "Save Thy Servant;"(11) and, further on: 
"Give Thy strength to Thy servant, and to the Son of Thy handmaid;"(12) 
and, elsewhere, that is, m Ezekiel: "And I will set up one Shepherd over 
them, and He shall rule them, even My Servant David. He shall feed them, 
and He shall be their Shepherd. And I the Lord will be their God, and My 
Servant David a prince among them."(1) Now David the Son of Jesse was 
already dead. Therefore he speaks of Christ, Who for our sakes was made the 
Son of a handmaiden in the form of man; for according to His divine 
Generation He has no Mother, but a Father only: nor is He the fruit of 
earthly desire, but the eternal Power of God.

    112. And so, also, when we read that the Lord said: "My time is not yet 
full come;"(2) and: "Yet a little while I am with you;" and: "I go unto Him 
that sent Me;"(3) and: "Now is the Son of Man glorified;"(4) we ought to 
refer all this to the sacrament of the Incarnation. But when we read: "And 
God is glorified in Him, and God hath glorified Him;" s what doubt is there 
here, where the Son is glorified by the Father, and the Father is glorified 
by the Son?

    113. Next, to make clear the faith of the Unity, and the Union of the 
Trinity, He also said that He would be glorified by the Spirit, as it 
stands: "He shall receive of Mine, and shall glorify Me."(6) Therefore the 
Holy Spirit also glorifies the Son of God. How, then, did He say: "If I 
glorify Myself, My glory is nothing."(7) Is then the glory of the Son 
nothing? It is blasphemy to say so, unless we apply these words to His 
flesh; for the Son spoke in the character of man, for by comparison with 
the Godhead, there is no glory of the flesh.

    114. Let them cease from their wicked objections which are but thrown 
back upon their own falseness. For they say, it is written: "Now is the Son 
of Man glorified." I do not deny that it is written: "The Son of Man is 
glorified." But let them see what follows:

    "And God is glorified in Him." I can plead some excuse for the Son of 
Man, but He has none for His Father; for the Father took not flesh upon 
Himself. I can plead an excuse, but do not use it. He has none, and is 
falsely attacked. I can either understand it in its plain sense, or I can 
apply to the flesh what concerns the flesh. A devout mind distinguishes 
between the things which are spoken after the flesh or after the Godhead. 
An impious mind turns aside to the dishonour of the Godhead, all that is 
said with regard to the littleness of the flesh.

CHAPTER IX.

The saint meets those who in Jewish wise object to the order of the words: 
"In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the oly Ghost," with the 
retort that the Son also is often placed before the Father; though he first 
points out that an answer to this objection has been already given by him.

    115. Why is it that the Arians, after the Jewish fashion, are such 
false and shameless interpreters of the divine words, going indeed so far 
as to say that there is one power of the Father, another of the Son, and 
another of the Holy Ghost, since it is written: "Go ye, teach all nations, 
baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy 
Ghost"? And why do they make a distinction of divine power owing to the 
mere order of words?

    116. Though I have already given this very witness for a unity of 
majesty and name in my former books, yet if they make this the ground of 
debate, I can maintain on the testimony of the Scriptures that the Son is 
mentioned first in many places, and that the Father is spoken of after Him. 
Is it therefore a fact that, because the name of the Son is placed first, 
by the mere accident of a word, as the Arians would have it, the Father 
comes second to the Son? God forbid, I say, God forbid. Faith knows nothing 
of such order as this;it knows nothing of a divided honour of the Father 
and the Son. I have not read of, nor heard of, nor found any varying degree 
in God. Never have I read of a second, never of a third God. I have read of 
a first God,(1) I have heard of a first and only God.

    117. If we pay such excessive regard to order, then the Son ought not 
to sit at the right hand of the Father, nor ought He to call Himself the 
First and the Beginning. The Evangelist was wrong in beginning with the 
Word and not with God, where he says: "In the beginning was the Word, and 
the Word was with God."(2) For, according to the order of human usage, he 
ought to name the Father first. The Apostle also was ignorant of their 
order, who says: "Paul the servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an 
Apostle, separated unto the Gospel of Go;"(3) and elsewhere: "The grace of 
our Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy 
Ghost."(4) If we follow the order of the words, he has placed the Son 
first, and the Father second. But the order of the words is often changed; 
and therefore thou oughtest not to question about order or degree, in the 
case of God the Father and His Son, for there is no severance of unity in 
the Godhead.

CHAPTER X.

The Arians openly take sides with the heathen in attacking the words: "He 
that believeth on Me, believeth not on Me," etc. The true meaning of the 
passage is unfolded; and to prevent us from believing that the Lord forbade 
us to have faith in Him, it is shown how He spoke at one time as God, at 
another as Man. After bringing forward examples of various results of that 
faith, he shows that certain other passages also must be taken in the same 
way.

    118. LAST of all, to show that they are not Christians, they deny that 
we are to believe on Christ, saying that it is written: Me that believeth 
on Me, believeth not on Me, but on Him that sent Me."(1) I was awaiting 
this confession; why did you delude me with your quibbles? I knew I had to 
contend with heathens. Nay, they indeed are converted, but ye are not. If 
they believe, that the sacrament [of Baptism] is safe; ye have received it, 
and destroyed it, or perchance it has never been received, but was 
unreal(1) from the first.

    119. It is written, they say: "He that believeth on Me, believeth not 
on Me, but on Him that sent Me." But see what follows, and see how the Son 
of God wishes to be seen; for it continues: "And he that seeth Me, seeth 
Him that sent Me,"(3) for the Father is seen in the Son. Thus, He has 
explained what He had spoken earlier, that he who confesses the Father 
believes on the Son. For he who knows not the Son, neither knows the 
Father. For every one that denies the Son has not the Father, but he that 
confesses the Son has both the Father and the Son.(4)

    120. What, then, is the meaning of "Believeth not on Me"? That is, not 
on that which you can perceive in bodily form, nor merely on the man whom 
you see. For He has stated that we are to believe not merely on a man, but 
that thou mayest believe that Jesus Christ Himself is both God and Man. 
Wherefore, for both reasons He says: "I came not from Myself;"(3) and 
again: "I am the beginning, of which also I speak to you."(6) As Man He 
came not from Himself; as Son of God He takes not His beginning from men; 
but "I am," He says, "Myself 'the beginning of which also I speak to you.' 
Neither are the words which I speak human,' but divine."

    121. Nor is it right to believe that He denied we were to believe on 
Him, since He Himself said: "That whosoever believeth on Me should not 
abide in darkness;"(1) and in another place again: "For this is the will of 
My Father that sent Me, that every one that seeth the Son, and believeth on 
Him, may have eternal life;"(2) and again: "Ye believe in God, believe also 
in Me."(3)

    122. Let no one, therefore, receive the Son without the Father, because 
we read of the Son. The Son hath the Father, but not in a temporal sense, 
nor by reason of His passion, nor owing to His conception, nor by grace. I 
have read of His Generation, I have not read of His Conception. And the 
Father says: "I have begotten;"(4) He does not say: "I have created." And 
the Son calls not God His Creator in the eternity of His divine Generation, 
but Father.

    123. He represents Himself also now in the character of man, now in the 
majesty of God; now claiming for Himself oneness of Godhead with the 
Father, now taking upon Him all the frailty of human flesh; now saying that 
He has not His own doctrine, and now that He seeks not His own will; now 
pointing out that His testimony is not true, and now that it is true. For 
He Himself has said: "If I bear witness of Myself, My witness is not 
true."(5) Later on He says: "If I bear witness of Myself, My witness is 
true."(6)

    124. And how is Thy testimony, Lord Jesus, not true? Did not he who 
believed it, though he hung upon the cross, and paid the penalty for the 
crime he owned to, cast aside the deserts of the robber and gain the reward 
of the innocent?(7)

    125. Was Paul deceived, who received his sight, because he believed;(8) 
which sight he had lost, before he believed?

    126. And did Joshua, the son of Nun, err in recognizing the leader of 
the heavenly host?(9) But after he believed, be forthwith conquered, being 
found worthy to triumph in the battle of faith. Again, he did not lead 
forth his armed ranks into the fight, nor did he overthrow the ramparts of 
the enemy's walls, with battering rams or other engines of war, but with 
the sound of the seven trumpets of the priests. Thus the blare of the 
trumpet and the badge of the priest brought a cruel war to an end.

    127. A harlot saw this; and she who in the destruction of the city lost 
all hope of any means of safety, because her faith had conquered, bound a 
scarlet thread in her window, and thus uplifted a sign of her faith and the 
banner of the Lord's Passion;(1) so that the semblance of the mystic blood, 
which should redeem the world, might be in memory. So, without, the name of 
Joshua was a sign of victory to those who fought; within, the semblance of 
the Lord's Passion was a sign of salvation to those in danger. Wherefore, 
because Rahab understood the heavenly mystery, the Lord says in the Psalm: 
"I will be mindful of Rahab and Babylon that know Me."(2)

    128. How, then, is Thy testimony not true, O Lord, except it be given 
in accordance with the frailty of man? For "every man is a liar."(3)

    129. Lastly, to prove that He spoke as man, He says: "The Father that 
sent Me, He beareth witness of Me."(4) But His testimony as God is true, as 
He Himself says: "My record is true: for I know whence I come, and whither 
I go, but ye know not whence I come, and whither I go. Ye judge after the 
flesh."(5) They judge then not after the Godhead but after the manhood, who 
think that Christ had not the power of bearing witness.

    130. Therefore, when thou hearest: "He that believeth, believeth not on 
Me;" or: "The Father that sent Me, He gave Me a commandment;"(6) thou hast 
now learnt whither thou oughtest to refer those words. Lastly, He shows 
what the commandment is, saying: "I lay down My life, that I may take it 
again. No man taketh it from Me, but I lay it down of Myself."(7) Thou 
seest, then, what is said so as to show He had full power to lay down or to 
take up His life; as He also said: "I have power to lay it down, and I have 
power again to take it up. This commandment have I received of My 
Father."(8)

    131. Whether, then, a command, or, as some Latin manuscripts have it, a 
direction was given, it was certainly not given to Him as God, but as 
incarnate man, with reference to the victory He should gain in undergoing 
His Passion.

CHAPTER XI.

We must refer the fact that Christ is said to speak nothing of Himself, to 
His human nature. After explaining how it is fight to say that He hears and 
sees the Father as being God, He shows conclusively, by a large number of 
proofs, that the Son of God is not a creature.

    132. Are we indeed to bring the Son of God to such a low estate that He 
may not know how to act or speak, except as He hears, and are we to suppose 
that a fixed measure of action or of speech is assigned to Him, because it 
is written: "I speak not of Myself," and, further on: "As the Father hath 
said unto Me, even so I speak"?(1) But those words have reference to the 
obedience of the flesh, or else to the faith in the Unity. For many learned 
men allow that the Son hears, and that the Father speaks to the Son through 
the unity of their Nature; for that which the Son, through the unity of 
their will, knows that the Father wills, He seems to have heard.

    133. Whereby is meant no personal duty, but an indivisible sentence of 
co-operation. For this does not signify any actual hearing of words, but 
the unity of will and of power, which exists both in the Father and in the 
Son. He has stated that this exists also in the Holy Spirit, in another 
place, saying, "For He shall not speak of Himself, but whatsoever He shall 
hear, that shall He speak,"(2) so that we may learn that whatsoever the 
Spirit says, the Son also says; and whatsoever the Son says, the Father 
says also; for there is one mind and one mode of working in the Trinity. 
For, as the Father is seen in the Son, not indeed in bodily appearance, but 
in the unity of the Godhead, so also the Father speaks in the Son, not with 
a voice of earth, not with a human sound, but in the unity of Their work. 
So when He had said: "The Father that dwelleth in Me, He speaketh; and the 
works that I do, He doeth;"(3) He added: "Believe Me, that I am in the 
Father, and the Father in Me; or else believe Me for the very work's 
sake."(4)

    134. This is what we understand according to the whole course of the 
holy Scriptures; but the Arians, who will not think of God the things that 
be right, may be put to silence by an example just suited to their deserts; 
that they may not believe everything in carnal fashion, since they 
themselves do not see the works of their father the devil with bodily eyes. 
So the Lord has declared of their fellows the Jews, saying: "Ye do what ye 
have seen your father doing;"(1) though they are reproved not because they 
saw the work of the devil, but because they did his will, since the devil 
unseen works out sin in them in accordance with their own wickedness, We 
have written this, as the Apostle did, because of the folly of these 
traitors.(2)

    135. But we have sufficiently proved by examples from Scripture that it 
is a property of the unity of the divine majesty that the Father should 
abide in the Son, and that the Son should seem to have heard from the 
Father those things which He speaks. How else can we understand the unity 
of majesty than by the knowledge that the same deference is paid to the 
Father and the Son? For what can be better put than the Apostle's saying 
that the Lord of glory was crucified?(3)

    136. The Son then is the God of glory and the Lord of glory, but glory 
is not subject to creatures; the Son therefore is not a creature.

    137. The Son is the Image of the Father's Substance;(4) but every 
creature is unlike that divine Substance, but the Son of the Father is not 
unlike God; therefore the Son is not a creature.

    138. The Son thought it not robbery to be equal with God;(5) but no 
creature is equal with God, the Son, however, is equal; therefore the Son 
is not a creature.

    139. Every creature is changeable; but the Son of God is not 
changeable; therefore the Son of God is not a creature.

    140. Every creature meets with chance occurrences of good and evil 
after the powers of its nature, and also feels their passing away; but 
nothing can pass away from or bring addition to the Son of God in His 
Godhead; therefore the Son of God is not a creature.

    141. Every work of His God will bring into judgment;(6) but the Son of 
God is not brought into judgment; for He Himself judges; therefore the Son 
of God is not a creature.

    142. Lastly, that thou mayest understand the unity, the Saviour in 
speaking of His sheep says: "No man is able to pluck them out of My hand. 
My Father Which gave them to Me is greater than all, and no man is able to 
pluck them out of My Father's hand. I and My Father are one."(7)

143. So the Son gives life as does the Father. "For as the Father raiseth 
up the dead and quickeneth them, even so the Son quickeneth whom He 
will."(1) So the Son raises up as does the Father: so too the Son preserves 
as does the Father. He Who is not unequal in grace, how is He unequal in 
power? So also the Son does not destroy, as neither does the Father. 
Therefore lest any one should believe there were two Gods, or should 
imagine a diversity of power, He said that He was one with His Father. How 
can a creature say that? Therefore the Son of God is not a creature.

    144. It is not the same thing to rule as to serve; but Christ is both a 
King and the Son of a King. The Son of God therefore is not a servant.  
Every creature, however, gives service. But the Son of God, Who makes 
servants become the sons of God, does not give service. Therefore the Son 
of God is not a servant.

CHAPTER XII.

He confirms what has been already said, by the parable of the rich man who 
went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom; and shows that 
when the Son delivers up the kingdom to the Father, we must not regard the 
fact that the Father is said to put all things in subjection under Him, in 
a disparaging way. Here we are the kingdom of Christ, and in Christ's 
kingdom. Hereafter we shall be in the kingdom of God, where the Trinity 
will reign together.

    145. Is divine fashion has He represented that parable of the rich man, 
who went to a far-off country to receive a kingdom, and to return,(2) thus 
describing Himself in the substance of the Godhead, and of His Manhood. For 
He being rich in the fulness of His Godhead, Who was made poor for us 
though He was rich and an eternal King," and the Son of an eternal King; 
He, I say, went to a foreign country in taking on Him a body, for He 
entered upon the ways of men as though upon a strange journey, and came 
into this world to preparefor Himself a kingdom from amongst us.

    146. Jesus therefore came to this earth to receive for Himself a 
kingdom from us, to whom He says: "The kingdom of God is within you."(3) 
This is the kingdom which Christ has received, this the kingdom which He 
has delivered to the Father. For how did He receive for Himself a kingdom, 
Who was a King eternal? "The Son of Man therefore came to receive a kingdom 
and to return." The Jews were unwilling to acknowledge Him, of whom He 
says: "They which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither and 
slay them."(1)

    147. Let us follow the course of the Scriptures. He Who came will 
deliver up the kingdom to God the Father; and when He has delivered up the 
kingdom, then also shall He be subject to Him, Who has put all things in 
subjection under Him, that God may be all in all.(2) If the Son of God has 
received the kingdom as Son of Man, surely as Son of Man also He will 
deliver up what He has received. If He delivers it up as Son of Man, as Son 
of Man He confesses His subjection indeed under the conditions of the 
flesh, and not in the majesty of His Godhead.

    148. And dost thou make objections and contemn Him, because God has put 
all things in subjection under Him, when thou hearest that the Son of Man 
delivers up the kingdom to God, and hast read, as we said in our earlier 
books: "No man can come to Me, except the Father draw him; and I will raise 
him up at the last day"?(3) If we follow it literally, see rather and 
notice the unity of honour each gives to other: The Father has put all 
things in subjection under the Son, and the Son delivers the kingdom to the 
Father. Say now which is  the greater, to deliver up, or to raise up to   
life?  Do we not after human fashion speak of the service of delivering up, 
and the power of raising to life? But both the Son delivers up to the 
Father, and also the Father to the Son. The Son raises to life, and the 
Father also raises to life, Let them create the fiction of a blasphemous 
division where there is a unity of power.

    149. Let the Son then deliver up His kingdom to the Father. The kingdom 
which He delivers up is not lost to Christ, hut grows. We are the kingdom, 
for it was said to us: "The kingdom of God is within you."(4) And we are 
the kingdom, first of Christ, then of the Father; as it is written: "No man 
cometh to the Father, but by Me."(5) When I am on the way, I am Christ's; 
when I have passed through, I am the Father's; but everywhere through 
Christ, and everywhere under Him.

    150. It is a good thing to be in the kingdom of Christ, so that Christ 
may be with us; as He Himself says: "Lo I am with you always, even unto the 
end of the world."(6) But it is better to be with Christ: "For to depart 
and be with Christ is far better."(1) Though we are under sin in this 
world, Christ is with us, that "by the obedience of one man many may be 
made just."(2) And if I escape the sin of this world, I shall begin to be 
with Christ. And so He says: "I will come again, and receive you unto 
Myself;"(3) and further on: "I will that where I am, there ye may be also 
with Me."(4)

    151. Therefore we are now under Christ's rule, whilst we are in the 
body, and are not yet stripped of the form of a servant, which He put upon 
Him, when He "emptied Himself." But when we shall see His glory, which He 
had before the world was, we shall be in the kingdom of God, in which are 
the patriarchs and prophets, of whom it is written: "When ye shall see 
Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets in the kingdom of God;"(5) 
and shall thus acquire a deeper knowledge of God.

    152. But in the kingdom of the Son the Father also reigns; and in the 
kingdom of the Father the Son also reigns: for the Father is in the Son, 
and the Son in the Father; and in whomsoever the Son dwells, in him also 
the Father dwells; and in whomsoever the Father dwells, in him also the Son 
dwells, as it is written: "Both I and My Father will come to Him, and make 
Our abode with Him."(6) Thus as there is one dwelling, so also there is one 
kingdom. Yea, and so far is the kingdom of the Father and of the Son but 
one, that the Father receives what the Son delivers, and the Son does not 
lose what the Father receives. Thus in the one kingdom there is a unity of 
power. Let no one therefore sever the Godhead between the Father and the 
Son.

CHAPTER XIII.

With the desire to learn what subjection to Christ means after putting 
forward and rejecting various ideas of subjection, he runs through the 
Apostle s words; and so puts an end to the blasphemous opinions of the 
heretics on this matter. The subjection, which is shown to be future, 
cannot concern the Godhead, since there has always been the greatest 
harmony of wills between the Father and the Son. Also to that same Son in 
His Godhead all things have indeed been made subject; but they are said to 
be not yet subject to Him in this sense, because all men do not obey His 
commands. But after that they have been made subject, then shall Christ 
also be made subject in them, and the Father's work be perfected.

    153. But if the one name and right of God belong to both the Father and 
the Son, since the Son of God is also true God, and a King eternal, the Son 
of God is not made subject in His Godhead. Let us then, Emperor Augustus, 
think how we ought to regard His subjection.

    154. How is the Son of God made subject? As the creature to vanity? But 
it is blasphemous to have any such idea of the Substance of the Godhead.

    155. Or as every creature is to the Son of God, for it is rightly 
written: "Thou hast put all things in subjection under His feet"?(1) But 
Christ is not made subject to Himself.

    156. Or as a woman to a man, as we read: "Let the wives be subject to 
their husbands;"(2) and again: "Let the woman learn in silence in all 
subjection"?(3) But it is impious to compare a man to the Father, or a 
woman to the Son of God.

    157. Or as Peter said: "Submit yourselves to every human creature"?(4) 
But Christ was certainly not so subject.

    158. Or as Paul wrote: "Submitting yourselves mutually to God and the 
Father in the fear of Christ"?(5) But Christ was not subject either in His 
own fear, nor in the fear of another Christ. For Christ is but one. But 
note the force of these words, that we are subject to the Father, whilst we 
also fear Christ.

    159. How, then, do we understand His subjection? Shall we review the 
whole chapter which the Apostle wrote, so as to give no appearance of 
having falsely withheld anything, or of having weakened its force with 
intention to deceive? "If in this life only," he says, "we have hope in 
Christ, we are of all men most miserable. But if Christ is risen from the 
dead, He is the first-fruits of them that sleep."(6) Ye see how he 
discusses the question of Christ's Resurrection.

    160. "' For since by one man,'" he says, "came death, by man came also 
the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ 
shall all be made alive. But each one in his own order: Christ the 
firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's, who have believed in His 
coming. Then cometh the end, when He shall have delivered up the kingdom to 
God,even the Father, when He shall have put down all rule and authority and 
power. For He must reign until He hath put all enemies under His feet. The 
last enemy that shall be destroyed is death; for He hath put all things 
under His feet. But when He saith, all things are put under Him, it is 
manifest that He is excepted Which did put all things under Him. But when 
all things shall be subdued unto Him, then shall the Son also Himself be 
subject unto Him, that put all things under Him, that God may be all in 
all."(1) Thus also the same Apostle said to the Hebrews: "But now we see 
not yet all things put under Him."(2) We have heard the whole of the 
Apostle's discourse.

    161. How, then, do we speak of His subjection? The Sabellians and 
Marcionites say that this subjection of Christ to God the Father will be in 
such wise that the Son will be re-absorbed into the Father. If, then, the 
subjection of the Word means that God the Word is to be absorbed into the 
Father; then whatsoever is made subject to the Father and the Son will be 
absorbed into the Father and the Son, that God may be all and in all His 
creatures. But it is foolish to say so. There is therefore no subjection 
through re-absorption. For there are other things which are made subject, 
those, that is to say, which are created, and there is Another, to Whom 
that subjection is made. Let the expounders of a cruel re-absorption keep 
silence.

    162. Would that they too were silent, who, as they cannot prove that 
the Word of God and Wisdom of God can be re-absorbed, attribute the 
weakness of subjection to His Godhead, saying that it is written: "But when 
all things shall be subdued unto Him, then shall the Son also Himself be 
subject unto Him."(3)

    163. We see, then, that the Scripture states that He is not yet made 
subject, but that this is to come: Therefore now the Son is not made 
subject to God the Father. In what, then, do ye say that the Son will be 
made subject? If in His Godhead, He is not disobedient, for He is not at 
variance with the Father; nor is He made subject, for He is not a servant, 
but the only Son of His own proper Father. Lastly, when He created heaven, 
and formed the earth, He exercised both power and love. There is therefore 
no subjection as that of a servant in the Godhead of Christ. But if there 
is no subjection then the will is free.

    164. But if they think of this as the subjection of the Son, namely, 
that the Father makes all things in union with His will, let them learn 
that this is really a proof of inseparable power. For the unity of Their 
will is one that began not in time, but ever existed. But where there is a 
constant unity of will, there can be no weakness of temporal subjection. 
For if He were made subject through His nature, He would always remain m 
subjection; but since He is said to be made subject in time, that 
subjection must be part of an assumed office and not of an everlasting 
weakness: especially as the eternal Power of God cannot change His state 
for a time, neither can the right of ruling fall to the Father in time. For 
if the Son ever will be changed in such wise as to be made subject in His 
Godhead, then also must God the Father, if ever He shall gain more power, 
and have the Son in subjection to Himself in His Godhead, be considered now 
in the meantime inferior according to your explanation.

    165. But what fault has the Son been guilty of, that we should believe 
that He could hereafter be made subject in His Godhead? Has he as man 
seized for Himself the right to sit at His Father's side, or has He claimed 
for Himself the prerogative of His Father's throne, against His Father's 
will? But He Himself says: "For I do always those things that please 
Him."(1) Therefore if the Son pleases the Father in all things, why should 
He be made subject, Who was not made subject before?

    166. Let us see then that there be not a subjection of the Godhead, but 
rather of us in the fear of Christ, a truth so full of grace, and so full 
of mystery. Wherefore, again, let us weigh the Apostle's words: "But when 
all things shall be subdued unto Him, then shall the Son also Himself be 
subject unto Him that put all things under Him: that God may be all in 
all." What then dost thou say? Are not all things now subject unto Him? Are 
not the choirs of the saints made subject? Are not the angels, who 
ministered to Him when on the earth."(2) Are not the archangels who were 
sent to Mary to foretell the coming of the Lord? Are not all the heavenly 
hosts? Are not the cherubim and seraphim, are not thrones and dominions and 
powers which worship and praise Him?

    167. How, then, will they be brought into subjection? In the way that 
the Lord Himself has said. "Take My yoke upon you."(3) It is not the fierce 
that bear the yoke, but the humble and the gentle. This clearly is no base 
subjection for men, but a glorious one: "that in the Name of Jesus every 
knee should bow, of things in heaven and things beneath; and that every 
tongue should confess that Jesus is Lord in the glory of God the 
Father."(1) But for this reason all things were not made subject before, 
for they had not yet received the wisdom of God, not yet did they wear the 
easy yoke of the Word on the neck as it were of their mind. "But as many as 
received Him," as it is written, "to them gave He power to become the sons 
of God."(2)

    168. Will any one say that Christ is now made subject, because many 
have believed? Certainly not. For Christ's subjection lies not in a few but 
in all. For just as I do not seem to be brought into subjection, if the 
flesh in me as yet lusts against the spirit, and the spirit against the 
flesh,(3) although I am in part subdued; so because the whole Church is the 
one body of Christ, we divide Christ as long as the human race disagrees. 
Therefore Christ is not yet made subject, for His members are not yet 
brought into subjection. But when we have become, not many members, but one 
spirit, then He also will become subject, in order that through His 
subjection "God may be all and in all."

    169. But as Christ is not yet made subject, so is the work of God not 
yet perfected; for the Son of God said: "My meat is to do the will of My 
Father that sent Me, and to finish His work."(4) What manner of doubt is 
there that the subjection of the Son in me iS still in the future, in whom 
the work of the Father is unfinished, because I myself am not yet perfect? 
I, who make the work of God to be unfinished, do I make the Son of God to 
be in subjection? But that is not a matter of wrong, it is a matter of 
grace. For in so far as we are made subject, it is to our profit, not to 
that of the Godhead, that we are made subject to the law, that we are made 
subject to grace. For formerly, as the Apostle himself has said, the wisdom 
of the flesh was at enmity with God, for "it was not made subject to the 
law,"(5) but now it is made subject through the Passion of Christ.

CHAPTER XIV.

He continues the discussion of the difficulty he has entered upon, and 
teaches that Christ is not subject but only according to the flesh. Christ, 
however, whilst in subjection in the Flesh, still gave proofs of His 
Godhead. He combats the idea that Christ is made subject in This. The 
humanity indeed, which He adopted, has been so far made subject in us, as 
ours has been raised in that very humanity of His. Lastly, we are taught, 
when that same subjection of Christ will take place.

    170. However, lest anyone should cavil, see what care Scripture takes 
under divine  inspiration. For it shows to us in what Christ is made 
subject to God, whilst it also teaches us in what He made the universe 
subject to Himself. And so it says: "Now we see not yet all things put 
under Him."(1) For we see Jesus made a little lower than the angels for the 
suffering of death.(2) It shows therefore that He was made lower in taking 
on Him our flesh. What then hinders Him from openly showing His subjection 
in taking on Him our flesh, through which He subjects all things to 
Himself, whilst He Himself is made subject in it to God the Father?

    171. Let us then think of His subjection. "Father," He says, "if Thou 
be willing, remove this cup from Me; nevertheless not My will but Thine be 
done."(3) Therefore that subjection will be according to the assumption of 
human nature; as we read: "Being found in fashion as a man, He humbled 
Himself, being made obedient unto death."(4) The subjection therefore is 
that of obedience; the obedience is that of death; the death is that of the 
assumed humanity; that subjection therefore will be the subjection of the 
assumed humanity. Thus in no wise is there a weakness in the Godhead, but 
there is such a discharge of pious duty as this.

    172. See how I do not fear their intentions. They allege that He must 
be subject to God the Father, I say He was subject to Mary His Mother. For 
it is written of Joseph and Mary: "He was subject unto them."(5) But if 
they think so, let them say how the Deity was made subject to men.

    173. Let not the fact that He is said to have been made subject work 
against Him, Who receives no hurt from the fact that He is called a 
servant, or is stated to have been crucified, or is spoken of as dead. For 
when He died He lived; when He was made subject He was reigning; when He 
was buried He revived again. He offered Himself in subjection to human 
power, yet at another time He declared He was the Lord of eternal glory. He 
was before the judge, yet claimed for Himself a throne at the right hand of 
God, as Judge forever. For thus it is written: "Hereafter ye shall see the 
Son of Man sitting on the right hand of the power of God, and coming in the 
clouds of heaven."(1) He was scourged by the Jews, and commanded the 
angels; He was born of Mary under the law;(2) He was before Abraham above 
the law. On the cross He was revered by nature; the sun fled; the earth 
trembled; the angels became silent. Could the elements see the Generation 
of Him Whose Passion they feared to see? And will they uphold the 
subjection of an adorable Nature in Him, in Whom they could not endure the 
subjection of the body?

    174. But since the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are of one 
Nature, the Father certainly will not be in subjection to Himself. And 
therefore the Son will not be in subjection in that in which He is one with 
the Father; test it should seem that through the unity of the Godhead the 
Father also is in subjection to the Son. Therefore, as upon that cross it 
was not the fulness of the Godhead, but our weakness that was brought into 
subjection, so also will the Son hereafter become subject to the Father in 
the participation of our nature, in order that when the lusts of the flesh 
are brought into subjection the heart may have no care for riches, or 
ambition, or pleasures; but that God may be all to us, if we live after His 
image and likeness, as far as we can attain to it, through all.

    175. The benefit has passed, then, from the individual to the 
community; for in His flesh He has tamed the nature of all human flesh. 
Thus, according to the Apostle: "As we have borne the image of the earthly, 
so also shall we bear the image of the heavenly."(3) This thing certainly 
cannot come to pass except in the inner man. Therefore, "laying aside all 
these," that is those things which we read of: "anger, malice, blasphemy, 
filthy communication;"(4) as he also says below: "Let us, having put off 
the old man with his deeds, put on the new man, which is renewed in 
knowledge after the image of Him that created Him."(5)

    176. And that thou mightest know that when he says: "That God may be 
all in all," he does not separate Christ from God the Father, he also says 
to the Colossians: "Where there is neither male nor female, Jew nor Greek, 
Barbarian nor Scythian, bond nor free, but Christ is all and in all."(6) So 
also saying to the Corinthians: "That God may be all and in all," he 
comprehended in that the unity and equality of Christ with God the Father, 
for the Son is not separated from the Father. And in like manner as the 
Father worketh all and in all, so also Christ worketh all in all. If, then, 
Christ also worketh all in all, He is not made subject in the glory of the 
Godhead, but in us. But how is He made subject in us, except in the way in 
which He was made lower than the angels, I mean in the sacrament of His 
body? For all things which served their Creator from their first beginning 
seemed not as yet to be made subject to Him in that.

    177. But if thou shouldst ask how He was made subject in us, He Himself 
shows us, saying: "I was in prison, and ye came unto Me; I was sick, and ye 
visited Me: Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these ye 
have done it unto Me."(1) Thou hearest of Him as sick and weak, and art not 
moved. Thou hearest of Him in subjection, and art moved, though He is sick 
and weak in Him in whom He is in subjection, in whom He was made sin and a 
curse for us.

    178. As, then, He was made sin and a curse not on His own account but 
on ours, so He became subject in us not for His own sake but for ours, 
being not in subjection in His eternal Nature, nor accursed in His eternal 
Nature. "For cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree."(2) Cursed He was, 
for He bore our curses; in subjection, also, for He took upon Him our 
subjection, but in the assumption of the form of a servant, not in the 
glory of God; so that whilst he makes Himself a partaker of our weakness in 
the flesh, He makes us partakers of the divine Nature in His power. But 
neither in one nor the other have we any natural fellowship with the 
heavenly Generation of Christ, nor is there any subjection of the Godhead 
in Christ. But as the Apostle has said that on Him through that flesh which 
is the pledge of our salvation, we sit in heavenly places,(3) though 
certainly not sitting ourselves, so also He is said to be subject in us 
through the assumption of our nature.

    179. For who is so mad as to think, as we have said already,(4) that a 
seat of honour is due to Him at the right hand of God the Father, when that 
is granted to Christ according to the flesh by the Father of His 
Generation, even a seat of a heavenly and equal power? The angels worship, 
and dost thou attempt to overthrow the throne of God with impious 
presumption?

    180. It is written, thou sayest, that "when we were dead in sins, He 
hath quickened us in Christ, by Whose grace ye are saved, and hath raised 
us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ 
Jesus. I acknowledge that it is so written; but it is not written that God 
suffers men to sit on His right hand, but only to sit there in the Person 
of Christ. For He is the foundation of all, and is the head of the 
Church,(2) in Whom our common nature according to the flesh has merited the 
right to the heavenly throne. For the flesh is honoured as having a share 
in Christ Who is God, and the nature of the whole human race is honoured as 
having a share in the flesh.

    181. As we then sit in Him by fellowship in our fleshly nature, so also 
He, Who through the assumption of our flesh was made a curse for us (seeing 
that a curse could not fall upon the blessed Son of God), so, I say, He 
through the obedience of all will become subject in us; when the Gentile 
has believed, and the Jew has acknowledged Him Whom he crucified; when the 
Manichaean has worshipped Him, Whom he has not believed to have come in the 
flesh; when the Arian has confessed Him to be Almighty, Whom he has denied; 
when, lastly, the wisdom of God, His justice, peace, love, resurrection, is 
in all. Through His own works and through the manifold forms of virtues 
Christ will be in us in subjection to the Father. And when, with vice 
renounced and crime at an end, one spirit in the heart of all peoples has 
begun to cleave to God in all things, then will God be all and in all.(3)

CHAPTER XV.

He briefly takes up again the same points of dispute, and shrewdly 
concludes from the unity of the divine power in the Father and the Son, 
that whatever is said of the subjection of the Son is to be referred to His 
humanity alone. He further confirms this on proof of the love, which exists 
alike in either.

    182. Let us then shortly sum up our conclusion on the whole matter. A 
unity of power puts aside all idea of a degrading subjection. His giving up 
of power, and His victory as conqueror won over death, have not lessened 
His power. Obedience works out subjection. Christ has taken obedience upon 
Himself, obedience even to taking on Him our flesh, the cross even to 
gaining our salvation. Thus where the work lies, there too is the Author of 
the work. When therefore, all things have become subject to Christ, through 
Christ's obedience, so that all bend their knees in His name, then He 
Himself will be all in all. For now, since all do not believe, all do not 
seem to be in subjection. But when all have believed and done the will of 
God, then Christ will be all and in all. And when Christ is all and in all, 
then will God be all and in all; for the Father abides ever in the Son. 
How, then, is He shown to be weak, Who redeemed the weak?

    183. And lest thou shouldst by chance attribute to the weakness of the 
Son, that it is written, that God hath put all things in subjection under 
Him; learn that He has Himself brought all things into subjection to 
Himself, for it is written: "Our conversation is in heaven, from whence 
also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus, Who shall change our vile 
body that it may be fashioned like unto His glorious body according to the 
working, whereby He is able to subdue all things unto Himself."(1) Thou has 
learnt, therefore, that He can subdue all things unto Himself according to 
the working of His Godhead.

    184. Learn now how He receives all things in subjection according to 
the flesh, as it is written: "Who wrought in Christ, raising Him from the 
dead, and setting Him at His own right hand in the heavenly places, above 
principality and power and might and dominion and every name that is named 
not only in this world, but also in that which is to come; and hath put all 
things under His feet."(2) According to the flesh then all things are given 
to Him in subjection; according to which also He was raised from the dead, 
both in His human soul and His rational subjection.

    185. Many nobly interpret that which is written: "Truly my soul will be 
in subjection to God;"(3) He said soul not Godhead, soul not glory. And 
that we might know that the Lord has spoken through the prophet of the 
adoption of our human nature, He added: "How long will ye cast yourselves 
upon a man?"(4) As also He says in the Gospel: "Why do ye seek to kill Me, 
a man?"(5) And He added again: "Nevertheless they desired to refuse My 
price, they ran in thirst, they blessed with their mouth, and cursed with 
their heart."(6) For the Jews, when Judas brought back the price,(7) would 
not receive it, running on in the thirst of madness, for they refused the 
grace of a spiritual draught.

    186. This is the reverent interpretation of subjection, for since this 
is the office of the Lord's Passion, He will be subject in us in that in 
which He suffered. Do we ask wherefore? That "neither angels, nor powers, 
nor height, nor depth, nor things present, nor things to come, nor any 
other creature may separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ 
Jesus."(1) we see then, from what has been said, that no creature is 
excepted; but that every one, of whatever kind it may be, is enumerated 
among those he mentioned above.

    187. At the same time, we must also think of the words which, after 
first saying "Who shall separate us from the love of Christ?"(2) he wrote 
next: "Neither death, nor life, nor any other creature can separate us from 
the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus." we see, then, that the love of 
God is the same as the love of Christ. Thus it was not without reason that 
he wrote of the love of God, "which is in Christ Jesus," lest otherwise 
thou mightest imagine that the love of God and of Christ was divided. But 
there is nothing that love divides, nothing that the eternal Godhead cannot 
do, nothing that is unknown to the Truth, or deceives Justice, or escapes 
the notice of Wisdom.

CHAPTER IV.

The Arians are condemned by the Holy Spirit through the mouth of David: for 
they dare to limit Christ s knowledge. The passage cited by them in proof 
of this is by no means free from suspicion of having been corrupted. But to 
set this right, we must mark the word "Son." For knowledge cannot fail 
Christ as Son of God, since He is Wisdom; nor the recognition of any part, 
for He created all things. It is not possible that He, who made the ages, 
cannot know the future, much less the day of judgment. Such knowledge, 
whether it concerns anything great or small, may not be denied to the Son, 
nor yet to the Holy Spirit. Lastly, various proofs are given from which we 
can gather that this knowledge exists in Christ.

    188. Wherefore we ought to know that they who make such statements are 
accursed and condemned by the Holy Spirit. For whom else but the Arians in 
chief does the prophet condemn, seeing that they say that the Son of God 
knows neither times nor years. For there is nothing which God is ignorant 
of; and Christ, yea the most high Christ, is God, for He is "God over 
all."(3)

    189. See how horrified holy David is at such men, in limiting the 
knowledge of the Son of God. For thus it is written: "They are not in the 
troubles of other men, neither will they be scourged with men; therefore 
their pride has laid hold on them; they are covered with their wickedness 
and blasphemy; their iniquity hath stood forth as it were with fatness; 
they have passed on to the thoughts of their heart. "(1) Truly he condemns 
those who think that divine things are to be regarded in the light of the 
thoughts of the heart. For God is not subject to arrangement or order; 
seeing that we do not perceive even those very things, which are common 
among men and often occur in the history of the human race, to turn out 
always after the arrangement of some stated rule, but often to happen 
suddenly in some secret and mysterious manner.

    190. "They have thought," he says, "and have spoken wickedness. They 
have spoken wickedness against the Most High. They have set their mouth 
against heaven."(2) We see then that he condemns, as guilty of wicked 
blasphemy, those who claim for themselves the fight to arrange the heavenly 
secrets after the semblance of our human nature.

    191. And they have said: "How hath God known? And is there knowledge in 
the Most High?"(3) Do not the Arians echo this daily, saying that all 
knowledge cannot exist in Christ? For He, they say, stated that He knew not 
the day nor hour. Do they not say, how did He know, while they maintain 
that He could not know anything but what He heard and saw, and apply by a 
blasphemous interpretation that which concerns the unity of the divine 
Nature to weaken His power?

    192. It is written, they say: "But of that day and that hour knoweth no 
man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the 
Father only."(4) First of all the ancient Greek manuscripts do not contain 
the words, "neither the Son." But it is not to be wondered at if they who 
have corrupted the sacred Scriptures, have also falsified this passage. The 
reason for which it seems to have been inserted is perfectly plain, so long 
as it is applied to unfold such blasphemy.

    193. Suppose however that the Evangelist wrote thus. The name of "Son" 
embraces both natures. For He is also called Son of Man, so that in the 
ignorance attached to the assumption of our nature, He seems not to have 
known the day of the judgment to come. For how could the Son of God be 
ignorant of the day, seeing that the treasures of the wisdom and knowledge 
of God are hidden in Him?(1)

    194. I ask then, whether He had this knowledge by reason of His Being, 
or by chance? For all knowledge comes to us either through nature, or by 
learning. It is supplied by nature, as for instance to a horse to enable it 
to run, or to a fish to enable it to swim. For they do this without 
learning. On the other hand, it is by learning that a man is enabled to 
swim. For he could not do so unless he had learnt. Since therefore nature 
enables dumb animals to do and to know what they have not learnt, why 
shouldst thou give an opinion on the Son of God, and say whether He has 
knowledge by instruction or by nature? If by instruction, then He was not 
begotten as Wisdom, and gradually began to be perfect, but was not always 
so. But if He has knowledge by nature, then He was perfect in the 
beginning, He came forth perfect from the Father; and so needed no 
foreknowledge of the future.

    195. He therefore was not ignorant of the days; for it does not fall to 
the lot of the Wisdom of God to know in part and in part to be ignorant. 
For how can He who made all things be ignorant of a part, since it is a 
less thing to know than to make. For we know many things which we cannot 
make, neither do we all know things in the same way but we know them in 
part. For a countryman knows the force of the wind and the courses of the 
stars in one way--the inhabitant of a city knows them in another way--and a 
pilot in yet a third way. But although all do not know all things, they are 
said to know them; but He alone knows all things in full, Who made all 
things. The pilot knows for how many watches Arcturus continues, what sort 
of a rising of Orion he will discover, but he knows nothing of the 
connection of the Vergiliae and of the other stars, or of their number or 
names, as does He "Who numbers the multitude of stars, and calleth them all 
by their names;"(2) Whom indeed the power of His work cannot escape.

    196. How then do you wish the Son of God to have made these things? 
Like a signet ring which does not feel the impression it makes? But the 
Father made all things in wisdom,(3) that is, He made all things through 
the Son, who is the Virtue and Wisdom of God.(4) But it befits such Wisdom 
as that to know both the powers and the causes of His own works. Thus the 
Creator of all things could not be ignorant of what He did--or be without 
knowledge of what He had Himself given. Therefore He knew the day which He 
made.

    197. But thou sayest that He knows the present and does not know the 
future. Though this is a foolish suggestion, yet that I may satisfy thee on 
Scriptural grounds, learn that He made not only what is past, but also what 
is future, as it is written: "Who made things to come."(1) Elsewhere too 
Scripture says: "By whom also He made the ages, who is the brightness of 
His glory and the express Image of His Person."(2) Now the ages are past 
and present and future  How then were those made which are future, unless 
it is that His active power and knowledge contains within itself the number 
of all the ages? For just as He calls the things that are not as though 
they were, s so has He made things future as though they were. It cannot 
come to pass that they should not be. Those things which He has directed to 
be, necessarily will be. Therefore He who has made the things that are to 
be, knows them in the way in which they will be.

    198. If we are to believe this about the ages, much more must we 
believe it about the day of judgment, on the ground that the Son of God has 
knowledge of it, as being already made by Him. For it is written: 
"According to Thine ordinance the day will continue."(4) He did not merely 
say "the day continues," but even "will continue," so that the things which 
are to come might be governed by His ordinance  Does He not know what He 
ordered? "He who planted the ear, shall He not hear? He that formed the eye 
shall He not see?"(5)

    199. Let us however see if by chance there may be some great thing, 
which could be beyond the knowledge of its Creator; or at least let them 
choose whether they will think of something great and superior to other 
things, or something very little and mean. If it is very little and mean, 
it is no loss, to speak after our fashion, to know nothing of worthless and 
petty things. For as it is a sign of power to know the greatest things, it 
seems rather to be a sign of inferior work to look upon what is worth less. 
Thus He is freed from fastidiousness, yet is not deprived of His power.

    200. But if they think it a great and important thing to know the day 
of judgment: Let them say what is greater or better than God the Father. He 
knows God the Father, as He Himself says: "No man knoweth the Father but 
the Son and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal Him."(1) I say, does He 
know the Father and yet not know the day? So then ye believe that He 
reveals the Father, and yet cannot reveal the day?

    201. Next because you make certain grades, so as to put the Father 
before the on, and the Son before the Holy Spirit, tell me whether the Holy 
Spirit knew the day of judgment For no thing is written of Him in this 
place. You deny it entirely. But what if I show you He knew it? For it is 
written: "But God hath revealed them to us by His Spirit, for the Spirit 
searcheth all things, yea the deep things of God."(2) Wherefore, because He 
searches the deep things of God, since God knows the day of judgment, the 
Spirit also knows it. For He knows all that God knows, as also the Apostle 
states, saying: "For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit 
of man which is in him, even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the 
Spirit of God."(3) Take heed therefore lest either by denying that the Holy 
Spirit knows, you should deny that the Father knows; (For the things of 
God, the Spirit of God also knows, but the things which the Spirit of God 
does not know, are not the things of God). Or by confessing that the Spirit 
of God knows, what you deny that the Son of God knows, you should put the 
Spirit before the Son in opposition to your own declaration. But to 
hesitate on this point is not only blasphemous but also foolish.

    202. Now consider how knowledge is acquired, and let us show that the 
Son Himself proved that He knew the day. For what we know we make clear 
either by mention of time or place or signs or persons, or by giving their 
order. How then did He not know the day of judgment Who described both the 
hour and the place of judgment, and the signs and the cases?

    203. And so thou hast it: "In that hour he which shall be on the 
housetop let him not come down to take his goods out of his house, and he 
that is in the field, let him likewise not return back."(4) To such a point 
in the future did He know the issues of dangers, that He even showed the 
means of safety to those in danger.

   204. Could the Lord be ignorant of a day Who Himself said of Himself 
that the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath?(1)

    205. He has also elsewhere marked out a place, when He said to His 
disciples who were showing Him the building of the temple, "Do ye see all 
these things? Verily I say unto you, there shall not be left one stone upon 
another which shall not be thrown down."(2)

    206. When questioned also about a sign by His disciples, He answered: 
"Take heed that ye be not deceived. For many shall come in My name, saying 
I am Christ;"(3) and further on He says: "and great earthquakes shall be in 
divers places, and famines, and pestilences, and terrors from heaven, and 
there shall be great signs."(4) Thus He has described both persons and 
signs.

    207. In what manner He tells that the armies will surround Jerusalem, 
or that the times of the Gentiles are to be fulfilled, and in what order,--
all this is disclosed to us by the witness of the Gospel words. Therefore 
He knew all things.

CHAPTER XVII.

Christ acted for our advantage in being unwilling to reveal the day of 
judgment. This is made plain by other words of our Lord and by a not 
dissimilar passage from Paul's writings. Other passages in  which the same 
ignorance seems to be attributed to the Father are brought forward to meet 
those who are anxious to know why Christ answered His disciples, as though 
He did not know. From these Ambrose argues against them that if they admit 
ignorance and inability in the Father, they must admit that the same 
Substance exists in the Son as in the Father; unless they prefer to accuse 
the Son of falsehood; since it belongs neither to Him nor to the Father to 
deceive, but the unity of both is pointed out in the passage named.

    208. But we ask for what reason He was unwilling to state the time. If 
we ask it, we shall not find it is owing to ignorance, but to wisdom. For 
it was not to our advantage to know; in order that we being ignorant of the 
actual moments of judgment to come, might ever be as it were on guard, and 
set on the watch-tower of virtue, and so avoid the habits of sin; lest the 
day of the Lord should come upon us in the midst of our wickedness. For it 
is not to our advantage to know but rather to fear the future; for it is 
written: "Be not high-minded but fear."(5)

    209. For if He had distinctly stated the day, he would seem to have 
laid down a rule of life for that one age which was nearest to the 
judgment, and the just man in the earlier times would be more negligent, 
and the sinner more free from care. For the adulterer cannot cease from the 
desire of committing adultery unless he fears punishment day by day, nor 
can the robber forsake the hiding places in the woods where he dwells, 
unless he knows punishment is hanging over him day by day. For impurity 
generally spurs them on, but fear is irksome to the end.

    210. Therefore I have said that it was not to our advantage to know; 
nay, it is to our advantage to be ignorant, that through ignorance we might 
fear, through watchfulness be corrected, as He Himself said: "Be ye ready, 
for ye know not at what hour the Son of Man cometh."(1) For the soldier 
does not know how to watch in the camp unless he knows that war is at hand.

    211. Wherefore at another time also the Lord Himself when asked by his 
Apostles (Yes, for they did not understand it as Arius did, but believed 
that the Son of God knew the future. For unless they had believed this, 
they would never have asked the question.)--the Lord, I say, when asked 
when He would restore the kingdom to Israel, did not say that He did not 
know, but says: "It is not for you to know the times or years, which the 
Father hath put in His own power."(2) Mark what He said: It is not for you 
to know! Read again, "It is not for you.' "For you,' He said, not "for Me," 
for now He spoke not according to His own perfection but as was profitable 
to the human body and our soul. "For you therefore He said, not "for Me."

    212. Which example the Apostle also followed: "But of the times and 
seasons, brethren," he says, "ye have no need that I write unto you."(3) 
Thus not even the Apostle himself, the servant of Christ, said that he knew 
not the seasons, but that there was no need for the people to be taught; 
for they ought ever to be armed with spiritual armour, that the virtue of 
Christ may stand forth in each one. But when the Lord says: "Of the times 
which the Father hath put in His own power, "(4) He certainly cannot be 
without a share in His Father's knowledge, in whose power He is by no means 
without a share. For power grows out of wisdom and virtue; and Christ is 
both of these.

   213. But you ask, why did He not refuse His disciples as one who knew, 
but would not say; and, why did He state instead that neither the angels 
nor the Son knew?' I too will ask you why God says in Genesis: "I will go 
down now, and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry 
that is come unto Me. And if not, that I may know."(2) Why does Scripture 
also say of God: "And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower, 
which the sons of men builded."(3) Why also does the prophet say in the 
Book of the Psalms: "The Lord looked down upon the children of men, to see 
if there were any that did understand, and that did seek God"?(4) Just as 
though in one place, if God had not descended, and in the other, if He had 
not looked down, He would have been ignorant either of men's work or of 
their merits.

    214. But in the Gospel of Luke also thou hast the same, for the Father 
says: "What shall I do? I will send My beloved Son; it may be that they 
will reverence Him."(5) In Matthew and in Mark thou hast: "But He sent His 
only Son, saying: they will reverence My Son;"(6) In one book He says: "It 
may be that they will reverence My Son; "(7) and is in doubt as though He 
does not know; for this is the language of one in doubt. But in the two 
other books He says: "They will reverence My Son;" that is, He declares 
that reverence will be shown.

    215. But God can neither be in doubt, nor can He be deceived. For he 
only is in doubt, who is ignorant of the future; and he is deceived, who 
has predicted one thing, whilst another has happened. Yet what is plainer 
than the fact that Scripture states the Father to have said one thing of 
the Son, and that the same Scripture proves another think to have taken 
place? The Son was beaten, He was mocked, was crucified, and died.(8) He 
suffered much worse things in the flesh than those servants who had been 
appointed before. Was the Father deceived, or was He ignorant of it, or was 
He unable to give help? But He that is true cannot make a mistake; for it 
is written: "God is faithful Who doth not lie."(9). How was He ignorant, 
Who knows all? What could He not do, Who could do all?

    216. Yet if either He was ignorant, or had not power (for you would 
sooner agree to say that the Father did not know than own that the Son 
knows), you see from this very fact that the Son is of one Substance with 
the Father; seeing that the Son like the Father (to speak in accordance 
with your foolish ideas) does not know all things, and cannot do all 
things. For I am not so eager or rash in giving praise to the Son as to 
dare to say that the Son can do more than the Father; for I make no 
distinction of power between the Father and the Son.

    217. But perhaps you say that the Father did not say so, but that the 
Son erred about the Father. So now you convict the Son not only of 
weakness, but also of blasphemy and lying. However if you do not believe 
the Son with regard to the Father, neither may you believe Him with regard 
to that. For if He wished to deceive us in saying that the Father was in 
doubt as though He knew not what would take place, He wished also to 
deceive us about Himself in saying that He did not know the future. It 
would be far more endurable for Him to stretch the veil of ignorance in 
front of that which He does of His own accord, than that He should seem to 
be deluded by a result contrary to what He had foretold in the things He 
had declared of His Father.

    218. But neither is the Father deceived not does the Son deceive. It is 
the custom of the holy Scriptures to speak thus, as the examples I have 
already given, and many others testify, so that God feigns not to know what 
He does know. In this then a unity of Godhead, and a unity of character is 
proved to exist in the Father and in the Son; seeing that, as God the 
Father hides what is known to Him, so also the Son, Who is the image of God 
in this respect, hides what is known to Him.

CHAPTER XVIII.

Wishing to give a reason for the Lord's answer to the apostles, he assigns 
the one received to Christ's tenderness. Then when another reason is 
supplied by others he confesses that it is true; for the Lord spoke it by 
reason of His human feelings. Hence he gathers that the knowledge of the 
Father and the Son is equal, and that the Son is not inferior to the 
Father. After having set beside the text, in which He is said to be 
inferior, another whereby He is declared to be equal, he censures the 
rashness of the Arians in judging about the Son, and shows that whilst they 
wickedly make Him to be inferior, He is rightly called a Stone by Himself.

    219. We have been taught therefore that the Son of God is not ignorant 
of the future. If they confess this, I too--that I may now answer why He 
declared that neither angels, nor the Son, but only the Father knows--call 
to mind His wonted love for His disciples also in this passage, and His 
grace, which by its very frequency ought to have been known to all. For the 
Lord, filled with deep love for His disciples, when they asked from Him 
what He thought unprofitable for them to know, prefers to seem ignorant of 
what He knows, rather than to refuse an answer. He loves rather to provide 
what is useful for us, than to show His own power.

    220. There are, however, some not so faint-hearted as I. For I would 
rather fear the deep things of God, than be wise. There are some, however, 
relying on the words: "And Jesus increased in age and in wisdom and in 
favour with God and man,"(1) who boldly say, that according to His Godhead 
indeed He could not be ignorant of the future, but that in His assumption 
of our human state He said that He as Son of Man was in ignorance before 
His crucifixion. For when He speaks of the Son, He does not speak as it 
were of another; for He Himself is our Lord the Son of God and the Son of a 
Virgin. But by a word which embraces both, He guides our mind, so that He 
as Son of Man according to His adoption of our ignorance and growth of 
knowledge, might be believed as yet not fully to have known all things. For 
it is not for us to know the future. Thus He seems to be ignorant in that 
state in which He makes progress. For how does He progress according to His 
Godhead, in Whom the fulness of the Godhead dwells?(2) Or what is there 
which the Son of God does not know, Who said: "Why think ye evil in your 
hearts?"(3) How does He not know, of Whom Scripture says: "But Jesus knew 
their thoughts"?(4)

    221. This is what others say, but I--to return to my former point, 
where I stated it was written of the Father: "It may be they will reverence 
My Sen,"--I think indeed this was written in order that the Father, as He 
was speaking of men, might also seem to have spoken with human feelings. 
But still more am I inclined to think that the Son Who went about with men, 
and lived the life of man, and took upon Him our flesh, assumed also our 
feelings; so that after our ignorance He might say He knew not, though 
there was not anything He did not know. For though He seemed to be a man in 
the reality of His body, yet was He Life, and Light, and virtue came out of 
Him,(5) to heal the wounds of the injured by the power of His Majesty.

    222. Ye see then that this matter has been solved for you, since the 
saying of the Son is referred to the assumption of our state in its 
fulness, and it was thus written concerning the Father, in order that you 
might cease to cavil at the Son.

    223. There was nothing then of which the Son of God was ignorant, for 
there was nothing of which the Father was ignorant. But if the Son was 
ignorant of nothing, as we now conclude, let them say in what respect they 
wish Him to seem to be inferior. If God has begotten a Son inferior to 
Himself, He has granted Him less. If He has granted Him less, He either 
wished to give less, or could only give less. But the Father is neither 
weak nor envious, seeing that there was neither will nor power before the 
Son. For wherein is He inferior, Who has all things even as the Father has 
them? He has received all things from the Father by right of His 
Generation,(1) and has shown forth the Father wholly by the glory of His 
Majesty.

    224. It is written, they say: "For the Father is greater than I."(2) It 
is also written: "He thought it not robbery to be equal with God"(3) It is 
written again that the Jews wished to kill Him, because He said He was the 
Son of God, making Himself equal with God.(4) It is written: "I and My 
Father are one."(5) They read "one" they do not read "many." Can He then be 
both inferior and equal in the same Nature? Nay, the one refers to His 
Godhead, the other to His flesh.

    225. They say He is inferior: I ask who has measured it, who is of so 
overweening a heart, as to place the Father and the Son before his judgment 
seat to decide upon which is the greater? "My heart is not haughty nor are 
mine eyes raised unto vanity,"(6) says David. King David feared to raise 
his heart in pride in human affairs, but we raise ours even in opposition 
to the divine secrets. Who shall decide about the Son of God? Thrones, 
dominions, angels, powers? But archangels give attendance and serve Him, 
cherubim and seraphim minister to Him and praise Him. Who then decides 
about the Son of God, on reading that the Father Himself knows the Son, but 
will not judge Him. "For no man knoweth the Son, but the Father."(7) 
"Knoweth" it says, not "judgeth." It is one thing to know, another to 
judge. The Father has knowledge in Himself. The Son has no power superior 
to Himself. And again: "No man knoweth the Father, but the Son;" and He 
Himself knows the Father, as the Father knows Him.

    226. But thou sayest that He said He was inferior, He said also He was 
a Stone. Thou sayest more and yet dost impiously attack Him. I say less and 
with reverence add to His honour. Thou sayest He is inferior and confessest 
Him to be above the angels. I say He is less than the angels, yet do not 
take from His honour; for I do not refute His Godhead, but I do proclaim 
His pity.

CHAPTER XIX.

The Saint having turned to God the Father, explains why he does not deride 
that the Son is inferior to the Father, then he declares it is not for him 
to measure the Son of God, since it was given to an angel--nay, perhaps 
even to Christ as man--to measure merely Jerusalem. Arius, he says, has 
shown himself to be an imitator of Satan. It is a rash thing to hold 
discussions on the divine Generation. Since so great a sign of human 
generation has been given by Isaiah, we ought not to make comparisons in 
divine things. Lastly he shows how carefully we ought to avoid the pride of 
Arius, by putting before us various examples of Scriptures.

    227. To Thee now, Almighty Father, do I direct my words with tears. I 
indeed have readily called Thee inapproachable, incomprehensible, 
inestimable; but I dared not say Thy Son was inferior to Thyself. For when 
I read that He is the Brightness of Thy glory, and the Image of Thy 
Person,(1) I fear lest, in saying that the Image of Thy Person is inferior, 
I should seem to say that Thy Person is inferior, of which the Son is the 
Image; for the fulness of Thy Godhead is wholly in the Son. I have often 
read, I freely believe, that Thou and Thy Son and the Holy Spirit are 
boundless, unmeasurable, inestimable, ineffable. And therefore I cannot 
appraise Thee so as to weigh Thee.

    228. But be it so, that I desired with a daring and rash spirit to 
measure Thee? From whence, I ask, shall I measure Thee, The prophet saw a 
line of flax with which the angel measured Jerusalem. An angel was 
measuring, not Arius. And he was measuring Jerusalem, not God. And 
perchance even an angel could not measure Jerusalem, for it was a man. Thus 
it is written: "I raised mine eyes and saw and beheld a man, and in his 
hand there was a line of flax."(1) He was a man, for a type of the body 
that was to be assumed was thus shown. He was a man, of whom it was said: 
"There cometh a man after me, Whose shoe's latchet I am not worthy to 
unloose."(2) Therefore Christ in a type measures Jerusalem. Arius measures 
God.

    229. Even Satan transforms himself into an angel of light;(3) what 
wonder then if Arius imitates his Author in taking upon himself what is 
forbidden? Though his father the devil did it not in his own case, that man 
with intolerable blasphemy assumes to himself the knowledge of divine 
secrets and the mysteries of the heavenly Generation. For the devil 
confessed the true Son of God, Arius denies Him.

    230. If, then, I cannot measure Thee, Almighty Father, can I without 
blasphemy discuss the secrets of Thy Generation? Can I say there is 
anything more or less between Thee and Thy Son when He Himself Who was 
begotten of Thee, says: "All things which the Father hath are Mine."(4) Who 
has made Me a judge and a divider of human affairs? This the Son says,(5) 
and do we claim to make a division and to give judgment between the Father 
and the Son? A right feeling of duty avoids arbiters even in the division 
of an inheritance. And shall we become arbiters, to divide between Thee and 
Thy Son the glory of the uncreated Substance?

    231. "This generation," it says, "is an evil generation. It seeketh a 
sign, and there shall no sign be given it, but the sign of Jonas the 
prophet."(6) A sign of the Godhead then is not given, but only of the 
Incarnation. Thus when about to speak of the Incarnation the prophet says: 
"Ask thee a sign." And when the king had said: "I will not ask, neither 
will I tempt the Lord," the answer was: "Behold a Virgin shall 
conceive."(7) Therefore we cannot see a sign of the Godhead, and do we seek 
a measure of it? Alas! woe is me! we impiously dare to discuss Him, to Whom 
we cannot worthily pray!

    232. Let the Arians see to what they do. I have unlawfully compared 
Thee, O Father, with Thy works in saying that Thou art greater than all. If 
greater than Thy Son, as Arius maintains, I have judged wickedly. 
Concerning Thee first will that judgment be. For no choice can be made 
except by comparison, nor can anyone be put before another without a 
decision being first given on Himself.

    233. It is not lawful for us to swear by heaven, but it is lawful to 
judge about God. Yet Thou hast given to Thy Son alone judgment over all.

    234. John feared to baptize the flesh of the Lord, John forbade Him, 
saying: "I have need to be baptized of Thee, and comest Thou to me?"(1) And 
shall I bring Christ under my judgment.?

    235. Moses excuses himself from the Priesthood, Peter is for avoiding 
the obedience demanded in the Ministry; and does Arius examine even the 
deep things of God? But Arius is not the Holy Spirit. Nay, it was said even 
to Arius and to all men: "Seek not that which is too deep for thee."

    236. Moses is prevented from seeing the face of God;(3) Arius merited 
to see it in secret. Moses and Aaron among His Priests. Moses who appeared 
with the Lord in glory, that Moses then saw only the back parts of God in 
appearance; Arius beholds God wholly face to face! But" no one," it says, 
"can see My face and live."(4)

    237. Paul also speaks of inferior beings: "We know in part and we 
prophesy in part."(5) Arius says: "I know God altogether and not in part." 
Thus Paul is inferior to Arius, and the vessel of election knows in part, 
but the vessel of perdition knows wholly. "I know," he says, "a man, 
whether in the body or out of the body, I cannot tell, God knoweth, how he 
was caught up into Paradise and heard unspeakable words."(6) Paul carried 
up to the third heaven, knew not himself; Arius rolling in filth, knows 
God. Paul says of himself: "God knows;" Arius says of God: "I know."

    238. But Arius was not caught up to heaven, although he followed him 
who with accursed boastfulness presumed on what was divine, saying: "I will 
set my throne upon the clouds; I will be like the Most High."(7) For as he 
said: "I will be like the Most High," so too Arius wishes the Most High Son 
of God to seem like himself, Whom he does not worship in the eternal glory 
of His Godhead, but measures by the weakness of the flesh.