Vigilius of Thapsus

Works 5

Latin original · 349 verses · some words can be tapped for a gloss

5:1

LIBRI TRES. PRÆFATIO. 357 Dudum, dilectisimi fratres, in Neapoli, urbe Campaniæ constitutus, cujusdam Varimadi Arianæ sectæ diaconi propositionibns, a quodam Studioso ac re ligiosi simo viro mihi oblatis, rustico quidem sermone respondens, in uno corpore simul de unitate Trini tatis libellos d gessi.

THREE BOOKS. PREFACE. Some while ago, dearly beloved brethren, while established at Naples, a city of Campania, replying in rustic speech to the propositions of a certain Varimadus, a deacon of the Arian sect, which had been laid before me by a certain zealous and most religious man, I composed in one volume, all together, little books on the unity of the Trinity.

三卷書。序言。親愛的弟兄們，不久之前，我寄居在坎帕尼亞的城邑那不勒斯時，有一位熱心而極其虔誠的人，將某位亞流派執事瓦里馬都斯的論點呈交於我，我便以鄉野粗淺之言作答，將論三位一體合一的數篇小書，全部彙集於一卷之中。

5:2

Sed quia nunc comperimus, eos n hil velle sibi privatis verbis opponi, sed magis pro positiones suas desiderant testimoniorum virtutibus oppugnari, mediocribus et ingenii tardioribus con sulentes, ita sancto nos Spiritu adjuvante, respon sionem nostram universis eorum objectionibus testi monialiter coaptavimus, ut is qui legerit, non nudis, ut solent objicere, verbis, sed legalibus valeat refel lere documentis; ut omni ex parte convicti confin dantur, et ad nihilum redigantur qui super funda mentum prophetarum et apos olorum dogmata, talia figmenta construere moliuntur. Quod ædificium, quia non auro et argento, neque lapidibus pretiosis, sed ligno fcnoquc et stipulæ comparatur ?

But since we have now learned that they wish nothing to be opposed to them by private words, but rather desire that their propositions be assailed by the force of testimonies, then—taking counsel for the lowly and those slower of wit, and so with the Holy Spirit helping us—we have fitted our answer testimonially to all their objections, so that he who reads it may be able to refute them not with bare words, as they are wont to object, but with lawful documents; so that, convicted on every side, they may be confounded and reduced to nothing, who strive to construct such fictions upon the foundation of the prophets and the apostles. Which building, since it is compared not to gold and silver, nor to precious stones, but to wood and hay and stubble—

但既然我們如今得知他們不願有人以一己之言來反駁他們，反倒願其論點受見證之力的攻擊，於是——為照顧那卑微的、智思較遲鈍的人，並靠聖靈的幫助——我們將我們的回答，以見證的方式配合他們一切的反對，使讀者得以不僅用空言（如他們慣常反駁那般），乃能用合法的文獻來駁倒他們；好叫那些竭力要在先知與使徒的根基上建造這等虛構之物的人，從各方面被駁倒、被羞辱、歸於虛無。這建造既不是比作金、銀、寶石，乃是比作草木、禾稭——

5:3

Cum juxta Apostoli dictum (/ Cor. ut, 13) in 358 ultimo die fuerit igne consumptum, necesse est ut in suo pa tiantur opere detrimentum : quia difficilius possunt bu;usmoli a pravi dogmatis cursu averti et meliora sectari : quoniam tantum sibi de spiritu auxerunt p æsumptionis audaciam, ut ad veritatem fidei nun-. quam omnino perveniant. Possunt enim caritatem fraternitatis assequi, et fidem cum catholicis tenere perfectam, si de solius Dei potentia, et non de infide lium regum sibi gloriarentur superbia.

since, according to the saying of the Apostle (1 Cor. 3:13), on the last day it shall be consumed by fire, it is necessary that they suffer loss in their work: because such men can only with greater difficulty be turned aside from the course of a depraved dogma and follow better things; since they have so increased for themselves out of the spirit the audacity of presumption, that they may never at all attain to the truth of the faith. For they could attain the charity of brotherhood, and hold the perfect faith together with catholics, if they would glory in the power of God alone, and not in the pride of unbelieving kings.

既然照使徒所言（林前三13），在末日它必被火焚燒，他們就必在自己的工程上受虧損：因為這等人極難被人從敗壞教義的途徑上轉回，去追隨更美之事；既然他們在心靈中如此增長了僭妄的膽量，便永遠絕不能達到信仰的真理。因為他們本可獲得弟兄之愛，並與大公教徒同持守完全的信仰，只要他們單以神的大能為誇耀，而不以不信之君王的驕傲為誇耀。

5:4

lis igitur cum a defensoribus catholicae fidei cœperint jure constringi, et nullum sibi subterfugiendi locum viderint suffra gari, versutias quasdam inanium verborum solita temeritate non desinunt callida subtilitate contexcre ; dicentes quod ea quæ Dominus Salvator noster in Evaugeliis de sua divinitate locutus est, divinarum relicto tramite licterarum ; quibusdam interpretatio nibus universa ad caruis substantiam referunt; dum ipsi potius in eo ipso quod dixit: Pater major me est (Joan. xiv, 28). Et, Ipse me misit. Et, Non veni fa cere volunta ew meam, sed voluntatem ejus qui me misit (Joan. VI, 38). Et, Transeat a me calix isse; non sicut ego volo, sed sicut tu (Luc. XXII, 42);

When these men, therefore, begin to be rightly constrained by the defenders of the catholic faith, and see no place of escape to favor them, they do not cease, with their accustomed rashness and cunning subtlety, to weave certain crafty tricks of empty words; saying that the things which the Lord our Savior spoke in the Gospels concerning his divinity—having forsaken the path of the divine letters—they refer wholly, by certain interpretations, to the substance of the flesh; whereas it is rather in that very thing which he said: The Father is greater than I (John 14:28). And, He sent me. And, I came not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me (John 6:38). And, Let this cup pass from me; yet not as I will, but as you will (Luke 22:42);

故此這些人一旦開始被大公信仰的辯護者依理駁倒，又見無處可逃以助己時，便不停止以他們慣有的鹵莽和狡詐的細巧，編織空言的某些詭計；他們說，我們救主在福音書中論到自己神性所說的話——他們離棄了神聖典籍的正道——便用某些解釋將之全然歸於肉體的本質；其實倒不如說，正是在祂所說的這些話裏：「父是比我大的」（約十四28）。並「祂差了我來」。並「我來不是要按自己的意思行，乃是要按那差我來者的意思行」（約六38）。並「叫這杯離開我；然而不要照我的意思，只要照你的意思」（路二十二42）；

5:5

non in forma servi in qua homo est, astruunt eum Patri æquari non posse, sed in natura qua Deus est; infe noris ab eodem judicant esse substantiæ. Quod uti que non dicerent, si eumdem Filium, Deum verum, de Deo vero genitum catholice credidissent. Natura igitur Dei nec augetur, singularis in unitate manendo; nec minuitur de se Filium generando; et manens ju giter in semetipsa perfecta divinitas, idemque erit etiam in perpetuum, quod ab initio erat, antequam cœlum et terram, et omnia elementa legimus acce pisse principium.

they assert that not in the form of a servant, in which he is man, but in the nature in which he is God, he cannot be made equal to the Father; they judge him to be of an inferior substance to the same. Which assuredly they would not say, if they had catholicly believed the same Son to be true God, begotten of true God. The nature of God, therefore, is neither increased—remaining singular in unity—nor diminished by generating the Son of himself; and the perfect divinity, remaining perpetually in itself, will be the same even forever, which it was from the beginning, before we read that heaven and earth and all the elements received their beginning.

他們斷言：祂不能與父同等，並非在祂為人的「奴僕的形像」中如此，乃是在祂為神的「本性」中如此；他們判定祂在這本性上比父有較低的本質。倘若他們曾依大公信仰相信那同一位聖子乃是由真神所生的真神，他們斷不會說這話。故此，神的本性既不增添——因祂在合一中保持獨一——也不因從自己生出聖子而減損；那完全的神性恆久存於自身，直到永遠仍是它從起初所是的，就是在我們所讀到天地及一切元素得了開端之先所是的。

5:6

Nunc itaque omissis superfluis et inconditis verbis, quæ ab eis in subversionem fidelium proferuntur, ad ea nunc refellenda pergamus, quæ ex illorum infidelitatis industria, in necem innocen tium animarum posita esse cognoscimus. Illorum igitur jam dicta ponenda sunt, quæ ipst adversus nni tatem Trinitatis audacter ac temere posucrunt ut testimoniis testimonia consequenter adhibita, perfi dorum tandem superbia comprimatur. Potens est autem ineffabilis 359 Trinitas, ut illa quæ ad sui venerationis cultum pertinent testimonia, cultoribus suis non solum de Veteri , sed etiam de Novo procuret Testamento, quibus vcritas catholicæ fidei compro betur, et Arianorum falsitas destruatur.

Now therefore, the superfluous and disordered words which are brought forth by them for the subversion of the faithful being set aside, let us now proceed to refute those things which we know to have been set down, by the industry of their unbelief, for the destruction of innocent souls. Therefore their already spoken sayings must now be set down, which they themselves have boldly and rashly put forward against the unity of the Trinity, so that, testimonies being consequently applied to testimonies, the pride of the faithless may at length be repressed. For the ineffable Trinity is powerful to procure for its worshipers those testimonies which pertain to the cult of its veneration, not only from the Old, but also from the New Testament, by which the truth of the catholic faith may be proved and the falsehood of the Arians destroyed.

故此如今，將他們為傾覆信徒所提出的那些多餘而雜亂的話撇在一旁，讓我們進而駁倒那些——我們知道是出於他們不信的處心積慮、為要殘害無辜靈魂而設立的——言論。所以他們已說過的那些話如今必須列出，就是他們自己膽大鹵莽地提出來抵擋三位一體之合一的話，好叫見證接連加於見證之上，使那悖逆者的驕傲終得壓制。因為那不可言喻的三位一體大有能力，能為敬拜祂的人謀取那些關乎敬奉祂之事的見證，不僅出於舊約，也出於新約，藉以證明大公信仰的真理，並摧毀亞流派的虛謊。

5:7

Te quoque lector admoneo ut omnia documenta, qua; adversum hanc hæresim ex divinis congesta sunt Scripturis. sagaci mente perquiras; illa præcipue quae de Patre, et Filio et Spiritu sancto, trifaria conjunctione in fine hujus operis sunt posita, sobrie et vigilanter inspi cias : et iis proculdubio Patris, et Filii et Spiritus sancti, unam eamdemque inseparabilem, et perpe tuam doceberis esse substantiam. QUOD FILIUS SIT UNUS DEUS CUM PATRE. CAPUT PRIMUM. De Trinitate. Si dixerint : quæ unitas Trinitatis divinis lectioni bus poterit edoeeri, cum reque tres unum, neque vous in tribus possit proprie approbari ? Responsio.

You too, reader, I admonish that you investigate with sagacious mind all the documents which have been gathered out of the divine Scriptures against this heresy; and especially those which concerning the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, in a threefold conjunction, are placed at the end of this work—inspect them soberly and vigilantly: and from them, beyond all doubt, you shall be taught that of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit there is one and the same inseparable and perpetual substance. THAT THE SON IS ONE GOD WITH THE FATHER. CHAPTER ONE. Concerning the Trinity. If they should say: What unity of the Trinity can be taught from the divine readings, since neither can three be properly approved as one, nor one as in three? Reply.

讀者啊，我也勸你以敏銳的心思，查考一切從神聖經卷中為駁斥此異端而彙集的文獻；尤要清醒儆醒地細察那些論到父、子、聖靈，以三重聯合置於本書末尾的文獻：你必從中毫無疑問地受教，知道父、子、聖靈乃是同一不可分、且永恆的本質。論子與父原為一神。第一章。論三位一體。倘若他們說：既然三既不能恰當地被認可為一，一也不能恰當地被認可為在三之中，那麼三位一體之合一怎能從神聖的讀經中得以教導呢？回答。

5:8

Audi itaque, et ex iis testimoniis uni tatem Trinitatis agnosce, et desine Arianorum pra vitatem sequi, ut ab eadem possis peccatorum indul gentiam promereri, Isaia propheta dicenie :Vidi Uominum Sabaoth sedentem super tbronum excel SUm, et Seraphim stabant in circuitu ejus : sex alae uni et sex alæ altiri : duabus velabant faciem, dua bus a tem velabant pedes, et duabus volabant, et cla mabant alterutrum dicentes : Sanctus, sanctus, san ctus Dominus i eus 360 Sabaoth (lsai. VI). bi Tri nitas Dun est, quare tertio sanctus dixerunt? Aut si unitas non est, quare sub trina repetitione unum Denm ac Dominum intimarunt ? Si Trinitas non est, cur in Geneseos dicitur :

Hear, then, and from these testimonies acknowledge the unity of the Trinity, and cease to follow the depravity of the Arians, that from the same you may be able to deserve the pardon of sins—the prophet Isaiah saying: I saw the Lord of Sabaoth sitting upon a throne high and lifted up, and the Seraphim stood round about him: six wings to the one and six wings to the other; with two they veiled the face, with two they veiled the feet, and with two they flew; and they cried one to another, saying: Holy, holy, holy is the Lord God of Sabaoth (Isa. 6). If the Trinity is not, why did they say "holy" three times? Or if there is not unity, why under a threefold repetition did they intimate one God and Lord? If there is not a Trinity, why in Genesis is it said:

那麼你要聽，並從這些見證認識三位一體的合一，不再隨從亞流派的敗壞，好叫你能從祂得蒙罪的赦免——先知以賽亞說：「我見主坐在高高的寶座上，撒拉弗侍立在祂周圍；各有六個翅膀：用兩個翅膀遮臉，兩個翅膀遮腳，兩個翅膀飛翔；彼此呼喊說：聖哉！聖哉！聖哉！萬軍之耶和華」（賽六）。若沒有三位一體，他們為何三次說「聖哉」？又若沒有合一，他們為何在三重的重複之下，表明一位神與主呢？若沒有三位一體，為何在創世記中說：

5:9

Dixit D 'us, fecit Deus, be nedixit Deus (Gen. I) ? Si unitas non esi, quare tertio Dens dixit, et non deoa plurali numero comuenda vit ? Si Trinitas non est, quare in Exodo dictum est tertio, Domine, Domine Deus miserator et misericors (Exod. XXXIV, b) ? Si unitas non est, quare dum ter Domine diceret, postea misericors singulariter dicit et non miseratores, ut plures ostenderet, intimavit ? Si Trinitas non est, cur Abraham ad ilicem Mambre aperte sedenti tribus occurrens, uni Domine dicit, et non ut viderat tribus salutationis obsequium red didit (Gen. XVIII) ?

God said, God made, God blessed (Gen. 1)? If there is not unity, why did he say "God" three times, and not commend it by the plural number, "gods"? If there is not a Trinity, why in Exodus is it said three times, Lord, Lord God, compassionate and merciful (Exod. 34:6)? If there is not unity, why, while he said "Lord" thrice, did he afterward say "merciful" in the singular and intimate it, and not "merciful ones," so as to show many? If there is not a Trinity, why does Abraham, running to meet the three openly sitting at the oak of Mamre, say "Lord" to one, and not, as he had seen three, render the homage of salutation to three (Gen. 18)?

「神說，神造，神賜福」（創一）？若沒有合一，祂為何三次說「神」，而不用複數「眾神」來表述？若沒有三位一體，為何在出埃及記中三次說：「主，主神，有憐憫，有恩典」（出三十四6）？若沒有合一，祂既三次說「主」，為何隨後用單數說「有恩典的」，而非「眾有恩典者」，以表明多位呢？若沒有三位一體，為何亞伯拉罕跑去迎接那明明坐在幔利橡樹那裏的三位時，卻對一位稱「主」，而不像他所見的那樣，向三位獻上問安的禮敬呢（創十八）？