On the Trinity 24
Summary: Heretics use Luke 1:35 to identify the man born of Mary with the Son of God; but its “also” shows that the Son of God is principally the Word who came down, and that the man he took up became Son of God by union with him.
Latin text · PL 3:960c–962c
Sed erroris istius haereticorum inde, ut opinor, nata materia est, quia inter Filium Dei et Filium hominis nihil arbitrantur interesse; ne facta distinctione, et Homo et Deus Jesus Christus facile comprobetur. Eumdem enim atque ipsum, id est hominem filium hominis, etiam Filium Dei volunt videri; ut homo et caro, et fragilis illa substantia eadem atque ipse Filius Dei esse dicatur. Ex quo, dum distinctio filii hominis et Filii Dei nulla secernitur, sed ipse filius hominis Dei Filius vindicatur: homo tantummodo Christus idem atque Filius Dei asseratur. Per quod nituntur excludere: Verbum caro factum est et habitavit in nobis; Et vocabitis nomen ejus Emmanuel, quod est interpretatum Nobiscum Deus. Proponunt enim atque illa praetendunt, quae in Evangelio Lucae relata sunt, ex quibus asserere conantur, non quod est, sed tantum illud quod volunt esse: Spiritus sanctus veniet in te, et virtus Altissimi obumbrabit tibi; propterea et quod ex te nascetur sanctum, vocabitur Filius Dei. Si ergo, inquiunt, Angelus Dei dicit ad Mariam, quod ex te nascetur sanctum, ex Maria est substantia carnis et corporis; hanc autem substantiam, id est sanctum hoc quod ex illa genitum est, Filium Dei esse proposuit: homo, inquiunt, ipse, et illa caro corporis, illud quod sanctum est dictum, ipsum est Filius Dei. Ut et cum dicit Scriptura sanctum, Christum filium hominis hominem intelligamus; et cum Filium Dei proponit, non hominem, sed Deum percipere debeamus. Sed enim Scriptura divina haereticorum et fraudes et furta facile convincit et detegit. Si enim sic esset tantummodo, Spiritus veniet in te, et virtus Altissimi obumbrabit tibi, propterea quod nascetur ex te sanctum, vocabitur Filius Dei; fortasse alio esset nobis genere adversus illos reluctandum, et alia nobis essent argumenta quaerenda et arma sumenda, quibus illorum et insidias et praestigias vinceremus: cum autem ipsa Scriptura coelesti abundans plenitudine sese haereticorum istorum calumniis exuat, facile ipso quod scriptum est nitimur, et errores istos sine ulla dubitatione superamus. Non enim dixit, ut jam expressimus, propterea quod ex te nascetur sanctum, sed adjecit conjunctionem: ait enim propterea et quod ex te nascetur sanctum; ut illud ostenderet, non principaliter hoc sanctum quod ex illa nascitur, id est istam carnis corporisque substantiam, Filium Dei esse, sed consequenter et in secundo loco: principaliter autem Filium Dei esse Verbum Dei incarnatum per illum Spiritum, de quo Angelus refert: Spiritus veniet in te, et virtus Altissimi obumbrabit tibi. Hic est enim legitimus Dei Filius qui ex ipso Deo est, qui dum sanctum istud assumit, et sibi Filium hominis adnectit, et illum ad se rapit atque transducit, connexione sua et permistione sociatum praestat, et Filium illum Dei facit, quod ille naturaliter non fuit; ut principalitas nominis istius Filius Dei in Spiritu sit Domini, qui descendit et venit; ut sequela nominis in Filio Dei et hominis sit, et merito consequenter hic Filius Dei factus sit, dum non principaliter Filius Dei est. Atque ideo dispositionem istam Angelus videns, et ordinem istum sacramenti expediens, non sic cuncta confundens ut nullum vestigium distinctionis collocarit, distinctionem posuit, dicendo: Propterea et quod nascetur ex te sanctum, vocabitur Filius Dei: ne si distributionem istam cum libramentis suis non dispensasset, sed in confuso permistam reliquisset, vere occasionem haereticis contulisset, ut hominis Filium, qua homo est, eumdem et Dei et hominis Filium pronuntiare deberent. Nunc autem particulatim exponens tam magni sacramenti ordinem atque rationem, evidenter expressit, ut diceret, et quod ex te nascetur sanctum, vocabitur Filius Dei; probans quoniam Filius Dei descendit: qui dum Filium hominis in se suscepit, consequenter illum Filium Dei fecit; quoniam illum Filius sibi Dei sociavit et junxit. Ut dum Filius hominis adhaeret in nativitatem Filio Dei, ipsa permistione feneratum et mutuatum teneret, quod ex natura propria possidere non posset. Ac sic facta est Angeli voce, quod nolunt haeretici, inter Filium Dei hominisque, cum sua tamen sociatione, distinctio; urgendo illos uti Christum, hominis Filium, hominem intelligant quoque Dei Filium, et hominem Dei Filium, id est Dei Verbum (sicut scriptum est) Deum accipiant: atque ideo Christum Jesum Dominum, ex utroque connexum (ut ita dixerim), ex utroque contextum atque concretum, et in eadem utriusque substantiae concordia mutui ad invicem foederis confibulatione sociatum, hominem et Deum, Scripturae hoc ipsum dicentis veritate, cognoscant.
English · Claude translation
But the material of this heretics' error has arisen, I think, from this: that they suppose there is no difference between the Son of God and the Son of man, lest, if a distinction were made, Jesus Christ should easily be proved both man and God. For they want the same one, that is, the man, the son of man, to be seen as also the Son of God, so that the man and flesh, that frail substance, may be said to be the same as the Son of God himself. Hence, since no distinction is drawn between the son of man and the Son of God, but the son of man himself is claimed as the Son of God, Christ, only a man, is asserted to be the same as the Son of God. By this they strive to shut out “The Word became flesh and dwelt in us” and “You will call his name Emmanuel, which is interpreted, God with us.” For they put forward and hold out the things reported in the Gospel of Luke, from which they try to assert not what is, but only what they wish to be: “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore also the holy thing that will be born of you will be called the Son of God.” If, then, they say, the angel of God says to Mary, “the holy thing that will be born of you,” the substance of flesh and body is from Mary; and he declared that this substance, that is, this holy thing that was begotten of her, is the Son of God: the man himself, they say, and that flesh of the body, which was called holy, is itself the Son of God. So that when Scripture says “holy thing,” we should understand Christ, the son of man, to be a man; and when it sets forth “Son of God,” we ought to perceive not a man but God.
But the divine Scripture easily convicts and uncovers the frauds and thefts of the heretics. For if it were only thus, “The Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the holy thing that will be born of you will be called the Son of God,” perhaps we would have to struggle against them in another way, and other arguments would have to be sought and other weapons taken up, by which to overcome their snares and tricks. But since Scripture itself, abounding in heavenly fullness, strips itself of the slanders of these heretics, we easily rest on what is written and overcome these errors without any hesitation. For it did not say, as we have already set out, “therefore the holy thing that will be born of you,” but added a conjunction: for it says, “therefore also the holy thing that will be born of you,” to show that it is not principally this holy thing that is born of her, that is, this substance of flesh and body, that is the Son of God, but consequently and in the second place; while principally the Son of God is the Word of God, incarnate through that Spirit of whom the angel says, “The Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you.” For this is the legitimate Son of God, who is from God himself; who, in taking up this holy thing, both joins the Son of man to himself and draws and carries him over to himself, and by his connection and mingling makes him united with himself and makes him the Son of God, which he was not by nature: so that the principal title to this name “Son of God” is in the Spirit of the Lord, who came down and came; and the consequence of the name is in the Son of God and man; and rightly, consequently, this one was made the Son of God, since he is not principally the Son of God.
And therefore the angel, seeing this arrangement and unfolding this order of the mystery, not confusing everything so as to leave no trace of distinction, set down a distinction, saying, “Therefore also the holy thing that will be born of you will be called the Son of God”: lest, if he had not dispensed this distribution with its due balances, but had left it mingled in confusion, he should truly have given the heretics occasion to declare that the Son of man, as man, is the same as the Son of God and of man. But as it is, setting out part by part the order and reasoning of so great a mystery, he plainly expressed it by saying, “and the holy thing that will be born of you will be called the Son of God,” proving that the Son of God came down, and that he, taking up the Son of man into himself, consequently made him Son of God, since the Son of God associated and joined him to himself; so that the Son of man, adhering in birth to the Son of God, might hold by that very mingling, as lent and borrowed, what he could not possess from his own nature. And so by the angel's voice a distinction was made, which the heretics do not want, between the Son of God and the Son of man, yet with their union; pressing them to understand Christ, the Son of man, as a man, and also to receive the Son of God, and the man as Son of God, that is, the Word of God (as it is written), as God: and therefore to acknowledge Christ Jesus the Lord, connected (so to speak) from both, woven and compounded from both, and united in the same concord of both substances by the fastening of a mutual covenant one to the other, as man and God, by the truth of the Scripture that says this very thing.
About this passage
Notes
Translation notes
- The quotations are John 1:14; Matt 1:23 (Isa 7:14); Luke 1:35 (“therefore also the holy thing that will be born of you”, in a Latin form with “ex te”). Novatian's exegesis of “also” (et) and his language of the man “made” Son of God by union with the Word are pre-Chalcedonian formulations, translated as written. “Makes him united with himself” reads “sociatum” for the digital text's damaged “sociat(??)” (see corrections).
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (OCR: e for c; OCR: l for t; OCR: l for t; stray dot; OCR: letter lost; OCR: o for u; OCR: uncertain character; OCR: uncertain characters): vocabilis nomen → vocabitis nomen; inquiun(??) → inquiunt; Ut et com dicit → Ut et cum dicit; delegit· → detegit.; Spiritus veniel in te, et virtus Altissimi obumbrabit tibi, propterea → Spiritus veniet in te, et virtus Altissimi obumbrabit tibi, propterea; refert: Spiritus veniel → refert: Spiritus veniet; sociat(??) praestat → sociatum praestat; saeramenti → sacramenti; soc atione → sociatione.
Cite this passage
Novatian, Trin. 24 (PL 3:960c–962c; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/novatian-trinitate/24/).
The SBL abbreviation for this work has not been checked yet.
Plain text
Novatian, Trin. 24 (PL 3:960c–962c; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/novatian-trinitate/24/).
Download citation:BibTeX ·RIS (Zotero, EndNote)
Whole work:BibTeX ·RIS ·Markdown text