ceeds to the two remaining questions which he proposed to discuss-Who the Son is, and how He exists. In 256 order to get rid of our author's conclusion respecting the distinction of Persons, Praxeas contended that, in the passages on which it was founded, the Son 237 meant the flesh, that is man, that is Jesus; the Father meant the Spirit, that is God, that is Christ. "Thus," observes Tertullian, "he contradicts himself: for if Jesus and Christ are different Persons, the Son and Father are different: since the Son is Jesus, and the Father Christ. Nor is this all: for he also divides the person of Christ." Here 258 our author undertakes to explain in what manner the Word was made flesh. He was not transfigured into flesh, but put on flesh. Transfiguration implies the destruction of that which before existed. Neither must we suppose that the Word was so confounded with the flesh as to produce a third substance, in the same manner in which gold mixed with silver produces what is called electrum. 239 Christ was both God and man:

236 c. 27.

237 From this statement Lardner argues that Praxeas was not a Patripassian; since he believed that the Son alone suffered. History of Heretics, c. 20. Sect. 7, 8.

238 See the passage, quoted in Chap. VI. note 138.

239 Sed hæc vox carnis et animæ, id est hominis, non Sermonis nec Spiritûs, id est non Dei, propterea emissa est ut impassibilem Deum ostenderet, qui sic filium dereliquit, M M 2

dum

the word and the flesh, that is, the divine and human natures, were united in his person, but were not confounded. Each displayed itself in its peculiar operations: in 240 the former he worked miracles; in the latter he hungered, thirsted, wept, was sorrowful even unto death, and died. 241 If," adds Tertullian, "we attend only to the meaning of the word Christus, we shall perceive the absurdity of supposing that the Father and Christ are one Person. Christus means one who is anointed-anointed consequently by another; but by whom could the Father be anointed?" 242 Tertullian concludes the Treatise with observing that the doctrine of the Trinity constituted the great difference between the faith of a Jew and a Christian. Praxeas, therefore, by confounding the Son and the Holy Ghost with the Father, carried the believer back to Judaism.

After the detailed account which has been given of the Tract against Praxeas, we need scarcely observe that Tertullian maintained a

dum hominem ipse tradidit in mortem, c. 30. The meaning seems to be, that, as man, Christ had a body and soul: as God, he had also the Spirit, which left him on the cross; and by the loss of which he became subject to death. Compare de Carne Christi, cc. 5. 17.

240 Compare c. 16.

AoYou Dei, &c.

1

Apology, c. 21. Ostendens se esse

real Trinity; or in the words of our first Article, that “in the unity of the Godhead there be three Persons of one substance, power, and eternity." 243 Semler in one of his notes affirms, that Tertullian was the earliest writer who used the words Trinitas and Persona, in speaking of the persons in the Godhead. He also asserts that Tertullian borrowed them from the Valentinians; but this assertion is unsupported by proof. There is undoubtedly a passage in the 244 Treatise de Animâ, in which he uses the word Trinitas to express the Valentinian distinction of men into three different species, spiritual, animal, and material : but it does not, therefore, follow that he borrowed the word from the Valentinians; for he has in 245 the very same Tract applied it to the Platonic division of the soul into λογικόν, Ovμikov, and ÉTIOνμηTIKÓν. We find also 246 in the

243

244

c. 8.

c. 21.

The word Trinitas occurs also in cc. 2. 11.

Ut adhuc Trinitas Valentiniana cædatur. See also de Præscriptione Hæreticorum, c. 7. Trinitas hominis. apud Valentinum.

245 c. 16. Ecce enim tota hæc Trinitas et in Domino: rationale indignativum-et concupiscentivum. See Chap. III. p. 199.

246 c. 28. There is a singular representation of the Trinity in the Tract de Pudicitiâ, c. 21. sub fine. Nam et Ecclesia proprie et principaliter ipse est Spiritus, in quo est Trinitas unius divinitatis, Pater et Filius et Spiritus Sanctus. Illam Ecclesiam congregat quam Dominus in tribus posuit. We have already on more than one occasion referred to

the

Tract de Resurrectione Carnis, the expression "Trina Virtus Dei;" but it is employed to denote the triple exercise of God's power, in rendering the devil subject to man-in raising the body of man from the grave—and in calling him to judgement hereafter.

Our analysis of the Treatise against Praxeas further proves that the opinions of Tertullian, respecting the Son and the Holy Ghost, essentially coincided with the doctrines of our Church. According to him "the Son, which is the 247 Word of the Father, begotten from everlasting of the Father, 248 the very, and eternal

the notion, adopted by Tertullian after he became a Montanist, that three persons constitute a Church,

247 Adv. Praxeam, c. 5.

Et

248 Apology, c. 21. Necesse est igitur pauca de Christo, ut Deo. Hunc (Tov Xóyov) ex Deo prolatum dicimus, et prolatione generatum, et idcirco Filium Dei et Deum dictum ex unitate substantiæ : nam et Deus Spiritus. quum radius ex sole porrigitur, portio ex summâ, sed sol exit in radio, quia solis est radius: nec separatur substantia, sed extenditur. Ita de Spiritu Spiritus, et de Deo Deus, ut lumen de lumine accensum-Iste igitur Dei radius, ut retro semper prædicabatur, delapsus in Virginem quandam, et in utero ejus caro figuratus, nascitur homo Deo mistus. Caro Spiritu instructa nutritur, adolescit, affatur, docet, operatur, et Christus est. Tertullian then proceeds to describe Christ's crucifixion, his resurrection on the third day, and ascension. Compare adv. Marcionem, L. iii. c. 12. De Spectaculis, c. 25. We learn incidentally from the passage in the Apology that the Jews expected a mere man in the Messiah.

251

God, of one substance with the Father, took man's nature in the womb of the Blessed Virgin, of her substance: so that 249 two whole and perfect natures, that is, the Godhead and manhood, were joined together in one person, 250 never to be divided; whereof is one Christ, very God and very man; who truly suffered, was dead and buried." According to him "Christ did truly rise again from death, and took again his body, with flesh, bones, and all things appertaining to the perfection of man's nature, wherewith he ascended into Heaven, and there sitteth until he return to judge all men at the last day." Lastly, according to him, "The Holy Ghost, proceeding 252 from the

249 Aliter non diceretur homo Christus sine carne; nec hominis filius sine aliquo parente homine; sicut nec Deus sine Spiritu Dei, nec Dei filius sine Deo patre. Ita utriusque substantiæ census hominem et Deum exhibuit: hinc natum, inde non natum; hinc carneum, inde spiritalem; hinc infirmum, inde præfortem; hinc morientem, inde viventem. De Carne Christi, c. 5.

250 I have observed nothing, in Tertullian's writings, which corresponds to the expression never to be divided.

251 Adv. Praxeam, c. 30. De Carne Christi, c. 24. Sed bene quod idem veniet de cœlis, qui est passus: idem omnibus apparebit, qui est resuscitatus; et videbunt, et agnoscent, qui eum confixerunt; utique ipsam carnem in quam sævierunt; sine quâ nec ipse esse poterit, nec agnosci. See particularly de Res. Carnis, c. 51.

252 Tertius enim est Spiritus a Deo et Filio, sicut tertius a radice fructus ex frutice, et tertius a fonte rivus ex flumine, et tertius a sole apex ex radio; nihil tamen a matrice alienatur, a quâ proprietates suas ducit. Adv. Praxeam, c. 8.

We