Tertullian, Adversus Praxeas, ch. 2-3
In the course of time, then, the Father forsooth was born, and the Father suffered,
God Himself, the Lord Almighty, whom in their preaching they declare to be
Jesus Christ. We, however, as we indeed always have done (and more especially since we have been better instructed by the Paraclete, who leads menindeed into all
truth),
believe that there is one only
God, but under the following dispensation, or οἰκονομία, as it is called, that this one only God has also a Son, His Word, who proceeded from Himself, by whom all things were made, and without whom nothing was made. Him
we believe to have been sent by the Father into the Virgin, and to have been born of her— being both Man and
God, the
Son of Man and the
Son of God, and to have been called by the name of
Jesus Christ;
we believe Him to have suffered, died, and been buried, according to the
Scriptures, and, after He had been raised again by the Father and taken back to heaven, to be sitting at the right hand of the
Father,
and that He will come to judge the quick and the dead; who sent also from heaven from the
Father, according to His own promise, the
Holy Ghost, the Paraclete, the sanctifierof the
faith of those who
believe in the
Father, and in the
Son, and in the
Holy Ghost.
That this rule of
faith has come down to us from the beginning of the gospel, even before any of the older
heretics, much more before Praxeas,
a pretender of yesterday, will be apparent both from the lateness of date which marks all
heresies, and also from the absolutely novel character of our new-fangled Praxeas. In this principle also we must henceforth find a presumption of equal force against all
heresies whatsoever— that whatever is first is
true, whereas that is spurious which is later in date. But keeping this prescriptive rule inviolate, still some opportunity must be given for reviewing (the statements of
heretics), with a view to the instruction and protection of various
persons; were it only that it may not seem that each perversion
of the truth is condemned without examination, and simply prejudged; especially in the case of this
heresy, which supposes itself to possess the pure
truth, in thinking that one cannot
believe in One Only God in any other way than by saying that the
Father, the
Son, and the
Holy Ghost are the very selfsame Person.
As if in this way also one were not All, in that All are of One, by unity (that is) of substance; while the
mystery of the dispensation is still guarded, which distributes the Unity into a Trinity, placing in their order the three
Persons— the
Father, the
Son, and the
Holy Ghost: three, however, not in condition, but in degree; not in substance, but in form; not in power, but in aspect; yet of one substance, and of one condition, and of one power, inasmuch as He is
one God, from whom these degrees and forms and aspects are reckoned, under the name of the
Father, and of the
Son, and of the
Holy Ghost. How they are susceptible of number without division, will be shown as our treatise proceeds.
Chapter 3. Sundry Popular Fears and Prejudices. The Doctrine of the Trinity in Unity Rescued from These Misapprehensions
The simple, indeed, (I will not call them unwise and unlearned,) who always constitute the majority of
believers, are startled at the dispensation (of the Three in One), on the ground that their very rule of
faith withdraws them from the world's plurality of gods to the one only
true God; not understanding that, although He is the one only
God, He must yet be
believed in with His own οἰκονομία . The numerical order and distribution of the Trinity they assume to be a division of the Unity; whereas the Unity which derives the Trinity out of its own self is so far from being destroyed, that it is actually supported by it. They are constantly throwing out against us that we are preachers of two gods and three gods, while they take to themselves pre-eminently the credit of being worshippers of the One
God; just as if the Unity itself with irrational deductionsdid not produce
heresy, and the Trinity rationally considered constitute the
truth. We, say they, maintain the
Monarchy (or,
sole government of God). And so, as far as the sound goes, do even Latins (and
ignorant ones too) pronounce the word in such a way that you would suppose their understanding of the μοναρχία ( or
Monarchy) was as complete as their pronunciation of the term. Well, then Latinstake pains to pronounce the μοναρχία (or
Monarchy), while Greeks actually refuse to understand the οἰκονομία, or
Dispensation (
of the Three in One).
As for myself, however, if I have gleaned any
knowledge of either language, I am sure that μοναρχία (or
Monarchy) has no other meaning than single and individual rule; but for all that, this monarchy does not, because it is the government of one, preclude him whose government it is, either from having a son, or from having made himself actually a son to himself, or from ministering his own monarchy by whatever agents he will. Nay more, I contend that no dominion so belongs to one only, as his own, or is in such a sense singular, or is in such a sense a monarchy, as not also to be administered through other
persons most closely connected with it, and whom it has itself provided as officials to itself. If, moreover, there be a son belonging to him whose monarchy it is, it does not immediately become divided and cease to be a monarchy, if the son also be taken as a sharer in it; but it is as to its origin equally his, by whom it is communicated to the son; and being his, it is quite as much a monarchy (or
sole empire), since it is held together by two who are so inseparable.
Therefore, inasmuch as the Divine Monarchy also is administered by so many legions and hosts of
angels, according as it is written, Thousand thousands ministered unto Him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before Him;
Daniel 7:10 and since it has not from this circumstance ceased to be the rule of one (so as no longer to be a monarchy), because it is administered by so many thousands of powers; how comes it to pass that
Godshould be thought to suffer division and severance in the Son and in the
Holy Ghost, who have the second and the third places assigned to them, and who are so closely joined with the Father in His substance, when He suffers no such (division and severance) in the multitude of so many
angels? Do you really suppose that Those, who are naturally members of the Father's own substance, pledges of His
love, instruments of His might, nay, His power itself and the entire system of His monarchy, are the overthrow and destruction thereof?
You are not right in so thinking. I prefer your exercising yourself on the meaning of the thing rather than on the sound of the word. Now you must understand the overthrow of a monarchy to be
this, when another dominion, which has a framework and a state peculiar to itself (and is therefore a rival), is brought in over and above it: when,
e.g., some other god is introduced in opposition to the Creator, as in the opinions of
Marcion; or when many gods are introduced, according to your Valentinuses and your Prodicuses. Then it amounts to an overthrow of the Monarchy, since it involves the destruction of the Creator.