📜 Verbum
Scripture and the Fathers, read aloud in the original
中EN
🎬 Videos📜 Read the text🔍 SearchAbout

← All books · Latin Fathers › Works

Vigilius of Thapsus

Works 7 part 5/12

Latin original · 37 verses · some words can be tapped for a gloss · long chapter, split into parts; this part covers 7:148–7:184 (440 verses in all)

← ch. 6
← prev partnext part →
7:148
Athanasius. Et cur præjudicas ei? Utique si 243 nuper genuit, sempiternus esse non potest. Elige tibi alterum de duobus; aut una est eorum sempiterni­ tas aut una posteritas. Postremo quid tantum Filio imputas, quasi aliquando non fuerit ? cum hoc magis debeatur Patri deputari; quem tu Patrem aliquando secundum professionem tuam non fuisse testaris. Utique revera si Filium nativitas impedivit ne sem­ piternus esset, quem tarde aut sero natum fuisse asseris, necesse est ut et genitori nativitas Filii sui impedimentum attulerit, ne sempiternus sit si nuper genuit. Non tibi videtur quia utrumque eos a serm- piternitate impugnat? Cur ergo jam non est hæc talis professio vestra :
Athanasius: And why do you prejudge against him? Surely, if he begot recently, he cannot be everlasting. Choose for yourself one of the two: either their everlastingness is one, or their posteriority is one. Lastly, why do you impute so much to the Son, as though at some time he was not?—when this ought rather to be reckoned to the Father, whom you, according to your profession, attest not to have been Father at some time. Surely indeed, if nativity hindered the Son from being everlasting, whom you assert to have been born late or tardily, it is necessary that the nativity of his Son also brought hindrance to the begetter, that he should not be everlasting if he begot recently. Does it not seem to you that this assails both of them from everlastingness? Why then is not this rather your profession:
亞他那修：你為何對他預先論斷呢？誠然，若他是新近才生子的，他就不能是永恆的。你自己從這兩者中擇其一：要麼他們的永恆是同一的，要麼他們的後出是同一的。末了，你為何把如此多的歸咎於子，彷彿他曾有一時不存在呢？——其實這倒當歸於父，因你按你的宣認，見證他曾有一時不是父。誠然，若生育攔阻子使他不能是永恆的——你既主張他是遲遲、緩緩才被生的——那麼他兒子的生育也必然對生他者帶來攔阻，使他若是新近才生子的，便不能是永恆的。你豈不覺得這從永恆兩方面都攻擊了他們嗎？那麼你們的宣認為何不乾脆是這樣：
7:149
novus Pater, novus et Filius ? in­ cipit Pater, incipit et Filius ? Et excluso Patre et Filio ab una sempiternitate, quaero a vobis cui Deo hanc sempiternitatem ascribatis ? quia Patrem dici­ tis tarde et sero genuisse, et Filium nuper natum fuisse. Ergo ambo a sempiternitate exclusi esse vi­ dentur. Considera ergo non posse dici sempiternom Patrem sine Filio, dum magis sempiternus sit Pater cum suo Filio : quia non potest tantum hic Pater dici sine suo Filio. Hæreticus. Quod sensisti, de sensu tuo attulisti, et nihil de auctoritate sacræ Scripturae mihi satis- fecisti:
a new Father, and a new Son? the Father begins, the Son also begins? And having excluded both Father and Son from one everlastingness, I ask of you: to which God do you ascribe this everlastingness? since you say that the Father begot late and tardily, and that the Son was recently born. Therefore both seem to be excluded from everlastingness. Consider then that the Father cannot be called everlasting without the Son, since rather the Father is more everlasting with his Son; because this one cannot be called Father at all without his Son. Heretic: What you have concluded, you have brought forth from your own reasoning, and you have satisfied me with nothing from the authority of holy Scripture.
新的父，又新的子嗎？父有開始，子也有開始嗎？既把父與子都排除於同一永恆之外，我問你：你把這永恆歸給哪一位神呢？既然你說父是遲遲緩緩才生子的，子是新近才被生的。那麼兩者似乎都被排除於永恆之外了。那麼請思想：父若沒有子便不能稱為永恆的，因為父與他的子同在反倒更是永恆的；因為這一位若沒有他的子，根本不能稱為父。異端者：你所推斷的，是出於你自己的推理而提出的，你並沒有用聖經的權威使我信服分毫：
7:150
Unde vel unum tantummodo proferas pro multis pertinens ad hoc exemplum postulo, ut su­ periora dicta tua possint jure legitimo confirmari. Athanasius. Audi psalmographum sanctum David dixisse, imo Filium Dei per David ad Patris perso­ nam retulissc: Et ego semper tecum, tenuisti manum dexteram meam (Ps. LXXII, 23), etc. Vel ipsum Pa­ trem ad legisatorem Moysen audi dicentem de sern­ piterno unito nomine Trinitatis : Ego Dominus Deus, hoc est nomen meum, memoriale sempiternum in gene­ rationes et generationes (Exod. III, 15). Quod alio in loco idem ipse Filio suo dictum ostendit, id est, Nomen meum est in illo (Exod. XXIII, 21). Vel dictum accipe :
Wherefore I demand that you bring forth even but one out of many pertaining to this example, that your foregoing words may be confirmed by lawful right. Athanasius: Hear the holy psalmist David saying—nay rather, the Son of God through David referring to the person of the Father: 'And I am always with thee; thou hast holden my right hand' (Ps. 72:23), and so forth. Or hear the Father himself saying to Moses the lawgiver concerning the everlasting united name of the Trinity: 'I am the Lord God; this is my name, an everlasting memorial unto generations and generations' (Exod. 3:15). And this same one shows in another place to have been said to his Son, that is: 'My name is in him' (Exod. 23:21). Or receive this saying:
因此我要求你從眾多有關此例的話中，哪怕只提出一句，好使你前面的話可憑合法的權柄得以確證。亞他那修：請聽聖詩人大衛所說的——不，乃是神子藉大衛向父的位格所說的：「我常與你同在，你攙著我的右手」（詩七十二23）等等。或聽父自己對立法者摩西論到三位一體永恆合一之名所說的：「我是耶和華神，這是我的名，直到世世代代，作我永遠的記念」（出三15）。這同一位在別處顯明此話也曾對他的子說，即：「我的名在他裡面」（出二十三21）。或領受這話：
7:151
Ego Dominus Deus, qui voco nomen tuum, Deus Israel (Isai. XLV, 3). Sed, et ipse attestatus est: I Ego veni in nomine Patris meit et me non recepistis (Joan. v, 43). Nam et David clamat dicens : Benedi­ ctus qui venit in nomine Domini (Psal. CIVII, 29). Denique de hoc ipso audi loquentem Dominum supra corpus Lazari : Pater, sciebam quia semper me audis (Joan. XI, 14). Qui si semper in Patre aut 244 cum Patre non fuisset, quemadmodum eum semper au­ disset, si cum Deo Patre sempter uniter non fuisset? Unde quia semper apud Patrem fuit, et nunquam sine eo fuit, semper eum Pater audivit.
'I am the Lord God, who call thee by thy name, the God of Israel' (Isa. 45:3). But he himself also testified: 'I am come in my Father's name, and ye received me not' (John 5:43). For David also cries out, saying: 'Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord' (Ps. 117:26). Finally, concerning this very thing, hear the Lord speaking over the body of Lazarus: 'Father, I knew that thou always hearest me' (John 11:42). And if he had not always been in the Father or with the Father, how would he always have heard him, unless he had always been united with God the Father? Whence, because he was always with the Father, and was never without him, the Father always heard him.
「我是耶和華神，以色列的神，按你的名召你」（賽四十五3）。但他自己也見證說：「我奉我父的名來，你們並不接待我」（約五43）。大衛也呼喊說：「奉耶和華名來的是應當稱頌的」（詩一一七26）。最後，論到這同一件事，請聽主在拉撒路的身體旁所說的：「父啊，我知道你常聽我」（約十一42）。他若不是常在父裡面或與父同在，他怎能常被父聽見呢，除非他常與父神合一同在？因此，正因他常與父同在，從未離開過他，父便常聽他。
7:152
Vides uni­ tum nomen esse sempiternum, quod in virtute sa­ pientiæ uniter consistit, ut quod nomen Patris est in natura divinitatis, sapientiae et virtutis, idem ipsum sit in natura nomen et Filii. Vel Apostolum audi ad hæc dicentem : Et sempiterna ejus virtus et divinitas (Rom. I, 20). Quæ sempiternitas sive divinitas Filius ejus est. Quod alio in loco ipse tam evidenter ab­ solvit, Christum Dei virtutem et Dei sapientiam, Nuuquidnam Pater fuit aliquando sine virlute et sapientia sua, hæretice, ut sine Filio suo a vobis esse dicatur? Absit a nobis, dum ubique Scriptura tibi apertissime declarat, semper fuisse Patrem cum Filio, Filium cum Patre.
You see that the united name is everlasting, which consists as one in the power of wisdom, so that what is the name of the Father in the nature of divinity, of wisdom and of power, the very same is also in nature the name of the Son. Or hear the Apostle saying to this effect: 'And his everlasting power and divinity' (Rom. 1:20). And this everlastingness, or this divinity, is his Son. Which in another place he himself so evidently resolves, calling Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God (1 Cor. 1:24). Was the Father then at any time without his power and wisdom, O heretic, that he should be said by you to be without his Son? Far be it from us, since everywhere Scripture most clearly declares to you that the Father was always with the Son, the Son with the Father.
你看，那合一的名是永恆的，它作為「一」存於智慧的能力之中，以致那在神性、智慧與能力之本性中是父之名的，這同一個在本性中也是子之名。或聽使徒就此所說的：「他永恆的能力與神性」（羅一20）。而這永恆、或這神性，就是他的子。這事他自己在別處說得如此明顯，稱基督是神的能力、神的智慧（林前一24）。異端者啊，父豈曾有一時沒有他的能力與智慧，以致被你說成是沒有他的子嗎？這在我們是斷不可有的，因為聖經處處最明白地向你宣示，父常與子同在，子常與父同在。
7:153
Cur non expertus es, san­ ctum David eduxisse in pugna gladium Goliæ (1 Reg. XVII, 51) ? cujus nos usi veritatis exemplo, placuit ut de vestro in vos gladio triumphemus, sicut ipse testatus est : Gladius eorum intret in cor ipsorum (Psal. XXXVI. 15). Ignoras, quia quod derogas Filio, hoc ipsum adimis et Patri? itaque cum in prima congressione ab una sempiternitate Patris et Filii , exclusi fuissent, et compellerentur ab ipsa censura veritatis, visum est illis ut in medium proferrent, qua: prius occulte blasphemabant dicentes : Erat Pater aliquando sine Filio. Si enim fuisset Pater aliquando sine Filio, nunquam prorsus præsumens indicasset per prophetam : Et ego semper tecum (Ps. LXXII, 23).
Why have you not learned by experience that holy David drew forth in battle the sword of Goliath (1 Sam. 17:51)? By whose true example we have made use, so that it has pleased us to triumph over you with your own sword, as he himself testified: 'Let their sword enter into their own heart' (Ps. 36:15). Are you ignorant that what you take away from the Son, this very thing you take away also from the Father? And so, when in the first encounter they had been excluded from the one everlastingness of the Father and the Son, and were being compelled by the very judgement of truth, it seemed good to them to bring forth into the open what before they were secretly blaspheming, saying: 'There was once a Father without the Son.' For if there had ever been a Father without the Son, he would never at all have presumed to declare through the prophet: 'And I am always with thee' (Ps. 72:23).
你豈未曾領教，聖大衛在戰場上拔出了歌利亞的刀（撒上十七51）嗎？我們既用了他真實的榜樣，便樂意用你們自己的刀勝過你們，正如他自己所見證的：「願他們的刀刺入自己的心」（詩三十六15）。你豈不知，你從子身上奪去的，這同一事你也從父身上奪去了嗎？因此，當他們在第一回合中被排除於父與子合一的永恆之外，並被真理的判斷所逼迫時，他們便覺得好把先前暗中所褻瀆的公開提出來，說：「曾有一時，父沒有子。」因為父若曾有一時沒有子，他絕不至於膽敢藉先知宣告：「我常與你同在」（詩七十二23）。
7:154
Sed ad hæc piscator evangelista Joannes, dilectus a Deo testatus est: In Principio erat Verbum, et Verbum erat apud Deum, et Deus erat Verbum. Hoc erat in principio apud Deum. Omnia per ipsum facia sunt, et sine ipso factum est nihil (Joan. I, 1). Consi­ dera quia semper erat apud Deum Patrem Deus Fi­ lius, per quem omne omnino principium factum est. Unde jam oportuit nos paulisper ad stulta dicta stulte respondere, ut vel sic de sua stultitia revicti atque confusi erubescerent. Utique si erat Pater antequam generaret Filium, sine dubio non erat Pater, si non habebat Filium. Sed ne vel hoc præsumant blasphe­ mantes;
But to these things the fisherman, the evangelist John, beloved of God, testified: 'In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him, and without him was nothing made that was made' (John 1:1). Consider that God the Son, by whom every beginning whatsoever was made, was always with God the Father. Whence now it behoved us for a little while to answer foolishly to foolish sayings, that thus at least, refuted and confounded of their own folly, they might blush. Surely, if the Father was before he begot the Son, without doubt he was not Father, if he had not the Son. But lest the blasphemers presume even this:
但對於這些事，那漁夫、神所愛的福音作者約翰見證說：「太初有道，道與神同在，道就是神。這道太初與神同在。萬物是藉著他造的；凡被造的，沒有一樣不是藉著他造的」（約一1）。請思想：那藉以造成一切起初的神子，常與父神同在。因此，如今我們需要稍微以愚拙的話回應愚拙的言論，好叫他們至少這樣因自己的愚拙被駁倒、被羞辱而臉紅。誠然，父若在生子之先就已存在，他若沒有子，就無疑不是父。但免得褻瀆者連這個也膽敢主張：
7:155
erat Filius antequam nasceretur, qui si 245 natus non fuerat, evidenter non erat Filius. Stulte, quid ergo oportet dicere? Elige tibi unum de duobus quid fonfuse designes. Ante Filium, Pa­ irem esse pronuntias. Aut si erat Pater antequam generaret Filium, aut erat Pater qui jam vere ge­ nuerat Fi!ium. Vel hoc significas : Si erat Filius antequam nasceretur, aut erat natus Filius, quia jam vere natus fuerat de Patre, sicut scriptum est: Qui erat, et qui eat, et qui venturus est (Apoc. I, 4). Vel hoc: In principio erat Verbum (Joan. i, I). Vides quia semper fuit Filius cum Patre, qui est, et qui erat, et qui venturus est. Qui ideo non intelligis I hoc, Ariane, quia tota falsa introducis :
the Son existed before he was born—who, if he had not been born, was evidently not the Son. O fool, what then must be said? Choose for yourself one of the two, what you would confusedly designate. Before the Son, you pronounce the Father to exist. Either he was Father before he begot the Son, or he was the Father who had already truly begotten the Son. Or you mean this: if the Son existed before he was born, either he was a Son already born, because he had already truly been born of the Father, as it is written: 'Who is, and who was, and who is to come' (Rev. 1:4). Or this: 'In the beginning was the Word' (John 1:1). You see that the Son was always with the Father, who is, and who was, and who is to come. You who therefore do not understand this, O Arian, because you bring in everything false:
子在出生之先就已存在——他若不曾出生，顯然就不是子。愚人哪，那麼當怎麼說呢？你自己從兩者中擇其一，看你要混淆地指明哪一個。你宣稱在子之先，父就已存在。要麼他在生子之先就是父，要麼他是那已真實生了子的父。或者你的意思是這個：子若在出生之先就已存在，要麼他是已出生的子，因為他已真實地由父所生，正如經上所記：「那昔在、今在、以後永在的」（啟一4）。或者這話：「太初有道」（約一1）。你看，子常與父同在，他是那昔在、今在、以後永在的。亞流派的人哪，你之所以不明白這事，是因你引進的盡是虛假之說：
7:156
ut dicas Patrem qui non genuerat, et nomines Filium, qui necdum fuerat namus. Rogo si Pater erat, ut asseve­ ras, qui non genuerat, ct Filius crat, qui non fuerat natus de Patre, quæro a te quid tunc fuerint? Ne forte dicas, ambo ingeniti, quod absit. Vere adver­ sus dogma iniquitatis vestræ, pro hac sententia, Spi­ ritus principalis per sanctum Moysem recte denotans comparavit, dicens ; Inimici autem nostri insensati. De vinea enim Sudomorum vitis eorum , et propago eorum ex Gomorrha. Uva eorum uva fellis, et botrus eorum bo­ trus amaritudinis: ira draconum vinum eorum et furor aspidum insanabilis(Deut. XXXII, 31).
so that you speak of a Father who had not begotten, and name a Son who had not yet been born. I ask: if there was a Father, as you assert, who had not begotten, and there was a Son who had not been born of the Father, I ask of you what they then were? Lest perchance you say they were both unbegotten—which God forbid. Truly, against the dogma of your iniquity, on behalf of this sentence, the principal Spirit through holy Moses, rightly marking it out, made comparison, saying: 'But our enemies are senseless. For their vine is of the vine of Sodom, and their offspring of Gomorrah. Their grape is a grape of gall, and their cluster a cluster of bitterness: their wine is the rage of dragons, and the incurable fury of asps' (Deut. 32:31-33).
以致你說有一位不曾生子的父，又稱有一位尚未出生的子。我問：你既主張有一位不曾生子的父，又有一位不曾由父所生的子，我問你，那時他們是甚麼呢？只怕你說他們二者都是非受生的——這是斷不可有的。誠然，那本原之靈藉聖摩西，恰恰標明出來，針對你們罪惡的教條，為這判語作了比較，說：「但我們的仇敵是糊塗的。他們的葡萄樹是所多瑪的葡萄樹，是蛾摩拉的出產；他們的葡萄是苦膽的葡萄，他們的葡萄串是苦的；他們的酒是大蛇的烈怒，是虺蛇無可救治的猛毒」（申三十二31-33）。
7:157
Unde quia mani- feste verum Patrem sempiternum, verus Filius de­ claret sempiternus, qui de conatus fuerat: et verum Filium sempiternum, verus Pater demonstrat sempi­ ternus, qui eum genuerat; ac per hoc (ut dixi) sicut verus Pater, qui de semetipso genuerat Filium, una cum eo crat semper ante omnia anterior, sic et ve­ rus Filius, qui jam inenarrabilter natus fuerat de Patre, una cum co fuit semper ante omnia anterior. Hæc est, inquam, in his anterior sempiternitas, quæ ante omne otnnino principium fuit et erat. Ideo nun­ quam Pater sine Filio, quia semper Filius fuit cum Patre, dum nullo modo potest Pater hic dici sine Filio.
Whence, because the true everlasting Son, who had been begotten of him, manifestly declares the true Father to be everlasting; and the true everlasting Father demonstrates the true Son to be everlasting, whom he had begotten; and through this (as I said), just as the true Father, who of himself had begotten the Son, was always together with him, prior before all things, so also the true Son, who had already ineffably been born of the Father, was always together with him, prior before all things. This is, I say, the everlastingness in these prior to all, which was and existed before every beginning whatsoever. Therefore never was the Father without the Son, because the Son was always with the Father, since this one can in no way be called Father without the Son.
因此，那真實永恆的子，就是由他所生的，明顯地宣示真實的父是永恆的；那真實永恆的父也顯明那他所生的真實的子是永恆的；藉此（正如我所說），正如那從自己生了子的真實的父，總是與他同在、在萬物之先為先，照樣那已不可言喻地由父所生的真實的子，也總是與他同在、在萬物之先為先。我說，這就是他們之中那在一切之先的永恆，是在一切起初之先就已存在並存有的。所以父從未沒有子，因為子常與父同在，既然這一位絕不能被稱為沒有子的父。
7:158
Super hanc tantam veritatis probationem adhuc adjecit iniquitas eorum dicendo : Antequam genera- ret non cral Pater, sel cral omnipotens Deus. Proh nefas! hæc vos tam temere de Deo Patre sentire : ergo sine dubio, ut dicis, si omnipotenti Deo de 246 recenti honor Patris accessit, prius imperfectos fuisse detegitur. Et si omnipotenti, tanquam homini egenti per ordinem dignitas crevit, prius jam omni­ potens non fuisse cognoscitur : quia cui honor acce­ dit,dum usque ad summum gradum pervenerit, adhuc inferior ab eo esse videbit; et si pervenerit, melior incipit esse iN novissimo, quam fuerat in primo, dum de humilitate usque ad summum fastigii culmen ac­ cedat.
Upon so great a proof of the truth their iniquity yet added, saying: 'Before he begot, he was not Father, but he was omnipotent God.' O wickedness! that you should think these things so rashly concerning God the Father: therefore without doubt, as you say, if to omnipotent God the honour of Fatherhood was added recently, he is detected to have been previously imperfect. And if to the Omnipotent, as to a needy man, dignity grew up by stages, he is recognized previously not to have been omnipotent: because he to whom honour accrues, while he attains to the highest grade, is seen to have been hitherto inferior to it; and if he attains it, he begins to be better in his latter state than he had been in his first, while from lowliness he ascends up to the topmost summit of the pinnacle.
在如此重大的真理證據之上，他們的罪惡竟還加添，說：「父在生子之先不是父，乃是全能的神。」哦，何等的邪惡！你們竟如此草率地對父神這樣設想：那麼，照你所說，全能的神若是新近才獲得了父的尊榮，無疑就顯出他先前是不完全的。全能者若像有所缺乏之人，尊嚴是逐步增長的，就顯出他先前並非全能：因為那獲得尊榮的，當他達到最高的等級時，便顯出此前低於那等級；他若達到了，就開始在末後的境況比在起初的境況更佳，因他從卑微上升到頂峰的至高巔頂。
7:159
Sed haec ut erubescas, secundum tua dicta referimus; dum magis omnipotens Pater esse inve­ niatur, cui illa tanta censura omnipotentix sese prius submiserit, ut honorem nnper per hunc gradum pa- terni nominis assumeret. Porro longum est tam diu cæcas eorum in unum replicare caligines. Audiant itaque nostram veram et immobilem vocem confes­ sionis. Quem ignorando omnipotentem Deum testati estis, nos ipsum Patrem esse defendimus : et cur omnipotentem Patrem esse praedicamus ostendimus ; quia omnipotentem Deum, qualis ipse est in natura, talem genuit Filium, sicut in Scripturis cautum in­ venimus : Qui est, et qui fuit, et qui venturus est om­ nipotens Deus (Apoc. i, 4).
But that you may blush, we report these things according to your own words; for the Father is rather found to be omnipotent, to whom that so great power of omnipotence first submitted itself, that he might recently take on honour through this grade of the paternal name. Moreover, it is tedious to fold up again into one their blind darknesses for so long. Let them therefore hear our true and immovable voice of confession. Him whom, in your ignorance, you have attested to be omnipotent God, we maintain to be the Father himself: and we show why we proclaim the Father to be omnipotent; because omnipotent God begot a Son such as he himself is in nature, as we find safeguarded in the Scriptures: 'Who is, and who was, and who is to come, the omnipotent God' (Rev. 1:4).
但為叫你臉紅，我們就照你自己的話來陳述；因為父反倒被發現是全能的，那全能的如此重大的權能先向他自己降服，叫他得以藉父名這一等級新近承受尊榮。再者，要把他們瞎眼的昏昧如此久地一再纏繞成一團，未免太冗長。所以願他們聽我們宣認那真實不可動搖的聲音。你們在無知中所見證為全能神的那一位，我們堅持說他就是父自己：我們也顯明為何我們宣告父是全能的；因為全能的神生了一位本性與他自己一樣的子，正如我們在聖經中所見、得蒙保守的：「那昔在、今在、以後永在的全能神」（啟一4、8）。
7:160
Vides omnipotenlem esse Dei Filium in natura, sicut et Patrem. Ideo nihil nuper accessit, in unita divinitate sempiternae omni­ potentiae, Patri et Filio. Sane nec omnipotenti Deo sancto Spiritui aliqnid accessisse cognoscitur, qno­ niam de unita omnipotentæ substantia est; quia haec unita natura nec augmentum aliquod, nec detrimeni­ tum patitur. Disce ita quemadmodum debeat tos error absolvi. Utique sempiternitas Patris Filius ejus est,quia de ipso inenarrabiliter ante omne omnino principium natus est : et sempiternitas Filii Pater ejus est, qu a ipse cum ante cuncta saecula sæculorum incomparabiliter genuit:
You see that the Son of God is omnipotent in nature, just as the Father also. Therefore nothing accrued recently, in the united divinity of everlasting omnipotence, to the Father and the Son. Indeed, neither is it recognized that anything accrued to the omnipotent God the Holy Spirit, since he is of the united substance of omnipotence; because this united nature suffers neither any increase nor any loss. Learn thus how your error ought to be dissolved. Surely the everlastingness of the Father is his Son, because of him he was ineffably born before every beginning whatsoever: and the everlastingness of the Son is his Father, since he himself incomparably begot him before all the ages of ages:
你看，神子在本性上是全能的，正如父也是全能的。所以在永恆全能的合一神性中，父與子並未新近獲得任何東西。誠然，也不見得全能的神聖靈獲得了任何東西，因為他是出於那全能合一的本質；因為這合一的本性既不承受任何增添，也不承受任何虧損。如此學習你的錯謬該怎樣被消解。誠然，父的永恆就是他的子，因為子在一切起初之先不可言喻地由他所生：而子的永恆就是他的父，因為父在萬世萬代之先無可比擬地生了他：
7:161
sive sempiterni­ tas Spiritus paracleti, unita deitas ejus est cum Pa­ tre et Filio, quiT facta non f'SI, sicut Filius testatus est de co : A Patre procedit (Joan. xv, 26), et de meo accipiet (Joan. xvi, 14). Sed et Pater hæc dicta com­ probat per prophetam, dicens ; Spiritus a me pro­ cedit (Isai. LVII, 16). Et alio in loco: Effundam de Spiritu meo IMper omnem carnem (Joel, II,28). Quod in Pentecoste in apostolos factum fuisse, Scriptura divina testatur. Nam sicut Pater declarat Filium suum in dei ale sua, 247 quoniam Deus verus est ita et Filius demonstrat Patrem in substantia sua, quoniam Deus verus est:
or the everlastingness of the Spirit the Paraclete, his united deity is with the Father and the Son, which was not made, as the Son testified concerning him: 'He proceeds from the Father' (John 15:26), and 'he shall receive of mine' (John 16:14). But the Father too confirms these sayings through the prophet, saying: 'The Spirit proceeds from me' (Isa. 57:16). And in another place: 'I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh' (Joel 2:28). Which divine Scripture testifies to have come to pass upon the apostles at Pentecost. For just as the Father declares his Son in his deity, since he is true God, so also the Son demonstrates the Father in his substance, since he is true God:
或論那保惠師之靈的永恆，他與父和子合一的神性，乃是非受造的，正如子論到他所見證的：「他從父出來」（約十五26），又「他要將受於我的告訴你們」（約十六14）。但父也藉先知確證這些話，說：「靈是從我而出的」（賽五十七16）。又在別處：「我要將我的靈澆灌凡有血氣的」（珥二28）。聖經見證這事在五旬節臨到了眾使徒身上。因為正如父在他的神性中宣示他的子，既然子是真神，照樣子也在他的本質中顯明父，既然父是真神：
7:162
sic et Spiritus sanctus re­ velat Patrem ct Filium, in unita natura sua æterna quoniam Deus verus est. Hæc est, inquam, unita omnipotens sempiterna Trinitas, cui de recenti in deitate uulla accessit dignitas. Hæreticus. Interrogo te, responde milii : Non ergo mutabilis , vel convertibilis est hæc unita substantia Trinitatis ? Athanasius. Audi itaquc. Scriptum est : Ego sum Deus, et non sum mutalus (Malach. III, 6). Vel pro phetam ad hæc dicentem : Mutabis eos et mutabuntur, tu autem idem ipse est et anni tui non deficient (Psal. CI, 28). Sive tale dictum accipe : Ego sum Deus, et non demutor (Malach. III, 6).
so also the Holy Spirit reveals the Father and the Son, in his united eternal nature, since he is true God. This is, I say, the united, omnipotent, everlasting Trinity, to which no dignity in deity accrued recently. Heretic: I question you; answer me: Is then this united substance of the Trinity not mutable or convertible? Athanasius: Hear then. It is written: 'I am God, and am not changed' (Mal. 3:6). Or the prophet saying to this effect: 'Thou shalt change them, and they shall be changed; but thou art the selfsame, and thy years shall not fail' (Ps. 101:28). Or receive such a saying as this: 'I am God, and I am not altered' (Mal. 3:6).
照樣聖靈也在他合一永恆的本性中啟示父與子，既然他是真神。我說，這就是那合一、全能、永恆的三位一體，在神性上未曾新近獲得任何尊嚴。異端者：我問你，請回答我：那麼三位一體這合一的本質豈不是可變或可轉化的嗎？亞他那修：那麼請聽。經上記著：「我耶和華是不改變的」（瑪三6）。或先知就此所說的：「你要將天地更換，天地就改變了；惟有你永不改變，你的年數沒有窮盡」（詩一○二27）。或領受這樣的話：「我是神，並不改變」（瑪三6）。
7:163
Vere manifeste ipsi a di abolo immutati sunt, qui hanc divinitatem sempi­ lernae Trinitatis in confessione, mutare conantur : sicut Apostolus indicat : Qui immutaverunt veritatem Dei in mendacium, et servierunt creaturæ potius quam Creatori, qui est Deus benedictus in sæcula (Rom. i, 25). Intellige itque nec incrementum, nec delrimentum ullum posse sustinere hanc immutabilem unitam plenitudinem substantiæ Trinitatis. Hæreticus. Rogo, si unita est substantia divinitatis Patris, et Filii, et sancti Spiritus, de auctoritate Scri­ pturaarum mihi indica. Athanasius. Audi Spiritnm sanctum per Jereniiam prophetam testantem, vcl imo hæreticos per hæc auctoritatis jura increpantem :
Truly those are manifestly changed by the devil, who attempt to change in their confession this divinity of the everlasting Trinity: as the Apostle indicates: 'Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is God blessed unto the ages' (Rom. 1:25). Understand therefore that this immutable, united fulness of the substance of the Trinity can sustain neither any increase nor any loss. Heretic: I beg, if the substance of the divinity of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit is united, show it to me from the authority of the Scriptures. Athanasius: Hear the Holy Spirit testifying through Jeremiah the prophet—nay rather, rebuking heretics through these rights of authority:
誠然，那些在宣認中企圖更改這永恆三位一體之神性的人，明顯是被魔鬼所改變了，正如使徒所指明的：「他們將神的真實變為虛謊，去敬拜事奉受造之物，不敬奉那造物的主——主乃是可稱頌的，直到永遠」（羅一25）。所以要明白：三位一體這不變、合一、豐滿的本質，既不承受任何增添，也不承受任何虧損。異端者：我求你，父、子、聖靈神性的本質若是合一的，就從聖經的權威指示給我看。亞他那修：請聽聖靈藉先知耶利米所見證的——不，乃是藉這權威的法度斥責異端者所說的：
7:164
Super montes accip te planctum, et super semitas dcserti lucturum, quia de­ fecerun , eo quod non sinl homines, non audierunt vo­ cem sut stuntiæ. A volatibus cæli usque ad pecora (Jer. IX, 10). Et sic prosecutus est : Quis homo sapiens et intelligens hæc (Ibid., ,12)? Hic, ut intelligi datur, montes et colles in superbia elati, potestates sunt hujus mundi. Et semitae deserti, Judæi sunt, qui semper errantes Christum Deum verum, de substan­ tia Patris ante cuncta sæcula Datum, non cognove­ ruut.
'Take up a lamentation upon the mountains, and a wailing upon the paths of the desert, because they have failed, in that there are no men; they have not heard the voice of his substance; from the fowls of heaven even to the cattle' (Jer. 9:10). And so he proceeds: 'Who is the man so wise and intelligent as to understand these things?' (Jer. 9:12). Here, as it is given to understand, the mountains and hills lifted up in pride are the powers of this world. And the paths of the desert are the Jews, who, always erring, did not recognize Christ the true God, given of the substance of the Father before all ages.
「你們要為山嶺發起哀哭，為曠野的路徑舉哀，因為它們都衰敗了，以致沒有人經過；人也聽不見他本質的聲音；從空中的飛鳥直到走獸」（耶九10）。他接著說：「誰是智慧人，可以明白這些事呢？」（耶九12）此處，照所領會的，那因驕傲高舉的山嶺與岡陵，乃是這世界的權勢。曠野的路徑，乃是猶太人，他們常常迷失，不認識那在萬世之先由父之本質所賜下的真神基督。
7:165
Volatilia autem coeli hæretici sunt, qui omni vento doctrinæ huc atque illuc, sicut aves circumfe­ runtur, et unitam jussionis vocem, atque unam sub- stantiam Patris, et Filii, et sancti Spiritus esse non confitentur. Pecora adæque gentiles sunt, qui Deum factorem suum non cognoverunt. Vere nemo ex his arbitrandus est sapiens , qui non intelligunt 248 hanc unitam esse usiæ substantiam Trinitatis. Vel ad hæc intellige prophetam clamantem : Quis stabit in substantia Domini, et videbit Verbum ejus (Jerem. XXIII, 18)? Plane quis hominum potuit stare in sub­ stantia Domini et videre Verbum, id est Filium ejus? sicut ipse dicit : Nemo vidit Patrem nisi Filius, et nemo scit Filium, nisi Pater (Luc.
But the fowls of heaven are the heretics, who are carried about hither and thither by every wind of doctrine, like birds, and do not confess that the voice of command is united, and that the substance of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit is one. The cattle likewise are the Gentiles, who did not recognize God their Maker. Truly none of these is to be deemed wise, who do not understand that the substance of the essence of the Trinity is united. Or understand to this effect the prophet crying out: 'Who shall stand in the substance of the Lord, and shall see his Word?' (Jer. 23:18). Plainly, what man could stand in the substance of the Lord and see the Word, that is, his Son? as he himself says: 'No man knoweth the Father but the Son, and no man knoweth the Son but the Father' (Luke
但空中的飛鳥乃是異端者，他們像飛鳥一樣，被各樣異端的風飄來飄去，不承認那命令的聲音是合一的，也不承認父、子、聖靈的本質是同一個。走獸照樣是外邦人，他們不認識造他們的神。誠然，這些人中沒有一個可算為智慧的，因他們不明白三位一體本質的實體乃是合一的。或就此明白先知所呼喊的：「誰曾站在主的本質中，看見他的道呢？」（耶二十三18）顯然，哪一個人能站在主的本質中而看見那道，就是他的子呢？正如他自己所說：「除了子，沒有人認識父；除了父，沒有人認識子」（路
7:166
x , 22). Vel tale dictum accipe : Qui me videt, videt et Patrem meum (Joan. XIV, 9). Nom de persona Paracliti, idem ipse effatus est : Spiritus ubi vult aspirat, et vocem ejus audis, et nescis unde veniat, aut quo vadat: sic eat omnis qui natus est cx aqua et Spiritu sancto (Joan. III, 8). Considera unam esse invisibilem substantiam Trinitatis. Sed ad hæc adject : Si stetissent in sub­ stantia mea, avertissem eos a studiis toTum pessimis (Jer. XXIII, 22). Vel hoc : Substantia mea , dulcedo mea est (Sap. XVI, 21). Necnon : Qui est splendor glorie, et imago substantiæ ejus (Hebr. i, 5). Sed et hoc, quod secundum auctoritatem jure optimo cen­ setur :
10:22). Or receive such a saying as this: 'He that seeth me seeth my Father also' (John 14:9). For concerning the person of the Paraclete, he himself uttered the same: 'The Spirit breatheth where he will, and thou hearest his voice, but knowest not whence he cometh, or whither he goeth: so is every one that is born of water and the Holy Spirit' (John 3:8). Consider that the substance of the Trinity is one and invisible. But to these things he added: 'If they had stood in my substance, I would have turned them away from their most wicked pursuits' (Jer. 23:22). Or this: 'My substance is my sweetness' (Wisd. 16:21). Likewise: 'Who is the brightness of glory, and the image of his substance' (Heb. 1:3). And also this, which according to authority is reckoned by the best right:
十22）或領受這樣的話：「人看見了我，就是看見了父」（約十四9）。因為論到保惠師的位格，他自己也說了同樣的話：「風隨著意思吹，你聽見風的響聲，卻不曉得從哪裡來，往哪裡去；凡從水和聖靈生的，也是如此」（約三8）。請思想：三位一體的本質是同一的、不可見的。但他對這些事還加上：「他們若是站在我的本質中，我必使他們轉離他們極惡的行徑」（耶二十三22）。或這話：「我的本質就是我的甘甜」（智十六21）。同樣：「他是神榮耀所發的光輝，是神本質的真像」（來一3）。還有這話，按權威以最佳之理被論及的：
7:167
Candor est enim lucis æternæ, et speculum sine macula Dei majestatis,et imago bonitatis ipsius, Deus Filius (Sap. VII , 26). Vides unam esse invisibilem imaginem substantiæ gloriae bonitatis. Denique Pau­ lum apostolum pro mecrepatione haereticorum audi loquentem, et hanc imaginem declarantem : Sed si opertum est Evangelium nostrum, in his qui percunt eat opertum, in quibus Deus sæculi hujus excæcavit mentes infidelium, ut non fulgeat illuminatio Evangelii gloriæ Christi (II Cor. IV, 3). Hæreticus. Quæ est imago Dei invisibilis Patris, et Filii, de auctoritate mihi indica. Athanasius.
'For he is the brightness of eternal light, and the unspotted mirror of God's majesty, and the image of his goodness'—God the Son (Wisd. 7:26). You see that the image of the substance of the glory of goodness is one. Finally, hear the apostle Paul speaking for the rebuke of heretics, and declaring this image: 'But if our Gospel is hidden, it is hidden to them that perish, in whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of the unbelieving, that the illumination of the Gospel of the glory of Christ should not shine forth' (2 Cor. 4:3-4). Heretic: Show me from authority what is the image of the invisible God, of the Father and of the Son. Athanasius:
「他是永恆之光的光輝，是神威嚴無瑕的明鏡，是他良善的真像」——就是神子（智七26）。你看，那良善之榮耀的本質之真像乃是同一的。最後，請聽使徒保羅為斥責異端者所說的話，並宣示這真像：「我們的福音若被遮蔽，就是在那滅亡的人身上遮蔽；此等不信之人被這世界的神弄瞎了心眼，不叫基督榮耀福音的光照著他們」（林後四3-4）。異端者：請從權威指示給我看，那不可見之神——父與子——的真像是甚麼。亞他那修：
7:168
Scio quia difficilis exitus est hic igno­ rantibus in absolvendo , sed nos oportet semper ad coruscantis Pauli eloquium intento corde aspicere, dicentis : Nos omnes revelata facie gloriam Domini speculantes in canidem imaginem reformamur a gloria in gloriam, sicut a Domini Spiritu (II Cor. III, 18). Considera in una imagine quemadmodum unnm glo­ riam ter designavit, id est gloriam Domini, a gloria, in gloriam , sicut a Domini Spiritu. Nonne ut est imago Dei Patris in gloria , sic eadem ipsa talis imago est gloriae Filii ? sicut sancti Spiritus imago gloriae eadem ipsa et tanta vel talis est. Hæreticus.
I know that this is a difficult exit for the ignorant in resolving it, but it behoves us always to look with intent heart upon the coruscating eloquence of Paul, saying: 'But we all, with open face beholding the glory of the Lord, are transformed into the same image, from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord' (2 Cor. 3:18). Consider how in one image he thrice designated one glory, that is, the glory of the Lord, from glory, into glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord. Is it not that, as the image of God the Father is in glory, so this same image is the glory of the Son? as likewise the image of the Holy Spirit's glory is the very same and just as great or such. Heretic:
我知道，對無知的人而言，要解明這事是條難出的路，但我們應當總是專心定睛於保羅閃耀的雄辯，他說：「我們眾人既然敞著臉得以看見主的榮光，好像從鏡子裡返照，就變成主的形狀，榮上加榮，如同從主的靈變成的」（林後三18）。請思想：他怎樣在一個真像中三次指明同一個榮耀，就是主的榮耀、從榮耀、進入榮耀，如同從主的靈而來。豈不是：正如父神的真像在榮耀中，照樣這同一個真像也是子的榮耀嗎？聖靈榮耀的真像照樣也是這同一個、同樣偉大、同樣的真像。異端者：
7:169
Dedara mihi , si divisa est hæc una , atque eadem ipsa substantia Patris, Filii et Spiritus sancti, an indivisa, aut sic extensa est in invicem. Athanasius. 249 0 experientia hominis , qui seipsum non intelligit! Utique ubi indicasti unitatis plenitudinem, substantiae nomen indivisum in eodem demonstrasti nomine ? Adæque rursus in repetendo quod distinxisti, proprietatem earumdem singulis personis inesse demonstrasti. Memento quia inenar­ rahilia sunt quæ dicimus, quæ omnino credenda sunt. Non tamen facultas data est ut ad liquidnm sint h:cc a nobis discutienda : quoniam ipsa sacrosancta Tr­ pitas sciri se tantum voluit; non tamen permisit de divinitate sua proprie diffiuiri :
Declare to me whether this one and selfsame substance of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit is divided, or undivided, or thus extended one into another. Athanasius: O the inexperience of a man who does not understand himself! Surely, where you have indicated the fulness of unity, you have demonstrated the name of substance undivided in the same name? Likewise again, in repeating what you have distinguished, you have demonstrated the property to be present in the several persons. Remember that the things we say are ineffable, which are altogether to be believed. Yet the faculty has not been given that these things should be examined by us to clarity: since the most holy Trinity willed only to be known, yet did not permit itself to be properly defined concerning its divinity:
請向我宣明，父、子、聖靈這同一的本質是被分割的，還是不可分割的，或是如此彼此互相延展的。亞他那修：哦，一個不認識自己的人的無知啊！誠然，你既指明了合一的豐滿，豈不是在同一個名稱中顯明了本質之名是不可分割的嗎？同樣，當你重述你所區分的，又顯明了各別的屬性存於各別的位格中。要記得，我們所說的事乃是不可言喻的，是必當全然相信的。然而我們並未蒙賜能力可將這些事察驗到通透：因為那至聖的三位一體只願被認識，卻不容許自己的神性被妥當地界定：
7:170
unde non'est divina substantia divisa, aut extensa, vel protensa in aliquo, vel excisa in partibus, sed nec derivationi alicujus rei comparatur: quia liquor ncn est in hac natura plane, sed nec defluxio quaedam, quia nullus detri­ mentum, vel augmen uni sustinet, præsertim cum inenarrabilis sit hæc plenitudo substantiae indivisæ Ttinitatis, sicut ipse Deus Dei Filius indicat: Ego in Patre, et Pater in me (Joan. XIV, 11). Sed et Spiritus sanctus in Patre, et in Filio, et in se consistens est; sicut Joannes evangelista in Epistola sua tam abso- Inte testatur: Et tres unum sunt (I Joan. v, 7). Porro utquid unum dicitur, si aliquid de eo in partes divi­ ditur?
whence the divine substance is not divided, or extended, or stretched out in anything, or cut up into parts, nor yet is it compared to the derivation of any thing: because there is plainly no liquid in this nature, nor any outflowing, since it sustains no loss or increase, especially since this fulness of the undivided substance of the Trinity is ineffable, as God the Son himself indicates: 'I am in the Father, and the Father in me' (John 14:11). But the Holy Spirit too is subsisting in the Father, and in the Son, and in himself; as John the evangelist so absolutely testifies in his Epistle: 'And these three are one' (1 John 5:7). Furthermore, why is it called one, if anything of it is divided into parts?
因此神的本質不被分割，也不在任何方面被延展或伸張，或被切割成多部分，更不能比作任何事物的衍生：因為在這本性中顯然沒有液體，也沒有任何流溢，既然它不承受任何虧損或增添，何況三位一體那不可分割之本質的豐滿乃是不可言喻的，正如神子自己所指明的：「我在父裡面，父在我裡面」（約十四11）。但聖靈也存在於父裡面、子裡面、並他自己裡面；正如福音作者約翰在他的書信中如此絕對地見證：「這三樣乃是一」（約壹五7）。再者，若其中有任何部分被分割，為何稱為「一」呢？
7:171
et utquid unum dicitur si diverse quid senti- tur de eo? et quomodo, o hæretice, tres unum sunt, si divisa vel excisa in his substantia est? aut quo­ modo unum sunt, si alter alteri praeponitur ? aut quo­ modo tres unum sunt, si diversae in his divinitates sunt? quomodo unum sunt, si non est in his unita sempiterna plenitudo divinitatis? Præterea dum una plenitudo nullam omnino habeat in parte aliqua divi­ sionem, duin unita plenitudo divinitatis in parte Ini­ nor vel major dici non possit? Similiter et Apostolus indicat: Quis enim scit hominum quæ in ipso sunt, nisi spiritus qui in ipso est? Ita et quæ in Deo sunt nemo cognovit, nisi Spiritus Dei.
and why is it called one if something diverse is thought concerning it? and how, O heretic, are three one, if the substance in these is divided or cut up? or how are they one, if one is set before another? or how are the three one, if there are diverse divinities in them? how are they one, if there is not in them a united, everlasting fulness of divinity? Moreover, since the one fulness has no division at all in any part, since the united fulness of divinity cannot in any part be called lesser or greater? Likewise the Apostle indicates: 'For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? So also the things that are in God no one knoweth, but the Spirit of God.
若對它思想出甚麼相異之處，又為何稱為「一」呢？異端者啊，這些之中的本質若是被分割或切割的，那麼三樣怎麼是一呢？若一樣被置於另一樣之先，它們怎麼是一呢？這些之中若有相異的神性，那麼三樣怎麼是一呢？這些之中若沒有合一、永恆、豐滿的神性，它們怎麼是一呢？再者，那合一的豐滿既在任何部分都全無分割，那合一豐滿的神性既在任何部分都不能稱為較小或較大？使徒同樣指明：「除了在人裡頭的靈，誰知道人的事？像這樣，除了神的靈，也沒有人知道神的事。
7:172
Nos autem non spiritum hujus mundi accepimus, sed Spiritum qui ex Deo est, ut sciamus quæ a Deo dunata sunt nubis, quæ et loqui- mur (I Cor. It, 11). Scito propriae veritat s argumen­ tum indiscretum esse positum per hoc restimonium de homine et spiritu qui in ipso est, ct de Deo et Spiritu qui de ipso est. Sicut idem ipse magister gen­ tium, 250 et fide et veritate nobis testatus est, di­ cens: Spiritus enim Dei omnia scrutatur, etiam altitu­ dines Dei (ICor. II, 10). Qui si altera natura a Deo esset Spiritus sanctus, quemadmodum divinitatem altitudinis Dei poterat scrutans penetrare, vel inuniri?
Now we have received, not the spirit of this world, but the Spirit which is of God, that we might know the things that are given to us of God; which things also we speak' (1 Cor. 2:11-13). Know that the argument of true reality is set down as indiscriminate through this testimony concerning man and the spirit which is in him, and concerning God and the Spirit which is of him. As the same teacher of the Gentiles testified to us in both faith and truth, saying: 'For the Spirit of God searcheth all things, even the deep things of God' (1 Cor. 2:10). But if the Holy Spirit were of another nature than God, how could he, searching, penetrate the divinity of the deep things of God, or be united to it?
我們所領受的，並不是世上的靈，乃是從神來的靈，叫我們能知道神開恩賜給我們的事；這些事我們也講說」（林前二11-13）。要知道，藉這論及人與在人裡頭之靈、並論及神與出於他之靈的見證，真實之真理的論證乃是不加分別地擺明的。正如這位外邦人的教師在信實與真理中向我們所見證的，說：「因為聖靈參透萬事，就是神深奧的事也參透了」（林前二10）。但聖靈若與神是不同的本性，他怎能參透、洞悉神深奧之事的神性，或與之合一呢？
7:173
aut quomodo in ea esset et in sese esset, dum natura Dei diversa naturæ propriæ non posset uniri, et alti­ tudines ejus scrutans penetrare, ut dixi; et in ipsa esse aut in se esse, vel uniri in sese naturaliter, hoc est dealiter in invicem consistere, nisi quia de ipsa unita natura divinitatis est? nam et hoc Apostoli est dictum : Qui autem se conjungit Deo, unus spiritus est (1 Cor. vi, 17). Vides indiscretam esse hanc plenitu­ dinem divinae Trinitatis, sed et ubique præsentem esse hanc plenitudinem divinae Trinitatis, quæ omnia implet interius et exterius, a summitate coelorum usque ad profundum inferorum, sicut ipse Dominus per prophetam testatur:
or how would he be in it and be in himself, since the nature of God could not be united to a nature foreign to its own, and searching, penetrate his deep things, as I said; and be in him, or be in himself, or be naturally united in himself—that is, divinely subsist one in another—unless because he is of the very united nature of divinity? For this too is the Apostle's saying: 'But he that is joined to God is one spirit' (1 Cor. 6:17). You see that this fulness of the divine Trinity is undivided, but also that this fulness of the divine Trinity is everywhere present, which fills all things within and without, from the summit of the heavens to the depth of the lower regions, as the Lord himself testifies through the prophet:
或者他怎能在它裡面、又在自己裡面呢，既然神的本性不能與一個與自己相異的本性合一，又怎能照我所說，參透、洞悉他深奧的事；並在他裡面、或在自己裡面、或在自己裡面本性地合一——就是神聖地彼此互相存立——除非因為他正是出於那合一的神性本性？因為這也是使徒的話：「但與主聯合的，便是與主成為一靈」（林前六17）。你看，這神聖三位一體的豐滿是不可分割的，並且這神聖三位一體的豐滿是無所不在的，它充滿萬有，內外皆然，從諸天的至高處直到陰間的深處，正如主自己藉先知所見證的：
7:174
Ego sum Dominus Deus, qui impleo cælum et terram, et omnia quæ in eis sunt (Isai. JLIV, 24). Similiter et sanctus Jeremias de eo una cum prophetis indicat: Si abscondat se homo in abs­ consis, nonne ego videbo eum? Nunquid non ego coe­ lum et terram impleo? dicit Dominus (Jerem. XIIII,24). Vel hoc uniter in Trinitate dictum accipe: Quo ibo a Spiritu tuo, aut quo a facie tua fugiam? Si ascen­ duo in cœlum, tu illic es, et si descendero in infernum, tu ades illic. Si assumpsero pennas meas ante lucem, et habitavero in extremis maris: etenim inde manus tua deducet me, et tenebit me dextera tua (Psal. CXXXVIII, 7). Itaque quod dixit: Quo ibo a Spiritu tuo, aut quo a facie tua fugiam?
'I am the Lord God, who fill heaven and earth, and all things that are in them' (Isa. 44:24). Likewise holy Jeremiah, together with the prophets, indicates concerning him: 'If a man hide himself in secret places, shall I not see him? Do not I fill heaven and earth? saith the Lord' (Jer. 23:24). Or receive this saying, spoken as one concerning the Trinity: 'Whither shall I go from thy Spirit, or whither shall I flee from thy face? If I ascend into heaven, thou art there; and if I descend into hell, thou art present there. If I take my wings before the dawn, and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea: even there shall thy hand lead me, and thy right hand shall hold me' (Ps. 138:7-10). And so, when he said: 'Whither shall I go from thy Spirit, or whither shall I flee from thy face?'
「我是耶和華神，充滿天地、並其中的萬有」（賽四十四24）。聖耶利米同眾先知照樣論到他指明：「人豈能在隱密處藏身，使我看不見他呢？耶和華說，我豈不充滿天地嗎？」（耶二十三24）或領受這話，是論三位一體作為「一」而說的：「我往哪裡去躲避你的靈？我往哪裡逃躲避你的面？我若升到天上，你在那裡；我若在陰間下榻，你也在那裡。我若展開清晨的翅膀，飛到海極居住，就是在那裡，你的手必引導我，你的右手也必扶持我」（詩一三九7-10）。因此，當他說：「我往哪裡去躲避你的靈？我往哪裡逃躲避你的面？」
7:175
Psalmographus Sp ritum princi­ palem, qui a Patre procedit, declaravit. Faciem au­ tem ipsius Patris Filium demonstravit manifeste. Quis potest ante unitam deitatem Trinitatis in cœlo aut in inferno se occultare vel fugere? cui omnis or- bis terrarum, velut stillicidium deputatum est, aut sicut spuma gracilis, aut ros quod ante lucanum de coelo descendit, sicut scriptum est: Qui continet cir­ cuitum terræ, et eos qui habitant in ea sicut locustæ (Isai. XL, 22). Necnon : Qui mensus est manu aquam et coelum palma, et universam terram clausa manu (Ibid., 12). Et rursus: Cælum mihi thronus est, terra autem scabellum pedum meorum (Isai. LXVI, 1).
the Psalmist declared the principal Spirit, who proceeds from the Father. But the face of the Father himself he manifestly demonstrated to be the Son. Who can hide himself or flee, before the united deity of the Trinity, in heaven or in hell? to whom the whole circle of the earth is reckoned but as a drop, or as a thin foam, or as the dew that descends from heaven before the dawn, as it is written: 'Who holdeth the circuit of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as locusts' (Isa. 40:22). Likewise: 'Who hath measured the waters with his hand, and the heaven with his palm, and the whole earth with a closed hand' (Isa. 40:12). And again: 'Heaven is my throne, and the earth my footstool' (Isa. 66:1).
詩人便宣示了那從父而出的本原之靈。但父自己的面，他明顯地顯明為子。在三位一體合一的神性面前，誰能在天上或陰間藏身或逃躲呢？在他面前，全地不過算為一滴水，或像微薄的浮沫，或像清晨之前從天而降的甘露，正如經上所記：「他坐在地球大圈之上，地上的居民好像蝗蟲」（賽四十22）。同樣：「誰曾用手心量諸水，用手虎口量蒼天，用拳頭把全地的塵土包起」（賽四十12）。又：「天是我的座位，地是我的腳凳」（賽六十六1）。
7:176
Con­ sidera incomprehensibilem esse unitae divinitatis 251 virtutem, ut cælum, quod palmo continetur, idem et thronus ejus sit: et terra, quæ pugillo con­ cluditur, rursus scabellum pedum ejus sit, dum uni­ versitas coeli palmo detinetur, et universa terra pu­ gillo concluditur; quod et thronus, et scabellum pedum ejus sit : sicut et scriptum est: Cui omnis or- bis terrarum tanquam momentum staterae æstimatus est (Sap. XI, 23). Ac per hoc universa implet, et om­ n'a continet interius et exterius, ut ubique præsens est hæc indiscreta sempiterna Trinitas, cui est invi. sibilis plenitudo divinitatis.
Consider that the power of the united Godhead is incomprehensible, so that heaven, which is held within a hand's breadth, is at the same time His throne; and the earth, which is enclosed within a fist, is in turn the footstool of His feet — since the whole expanse of heaven is contained within a hand's breadth, and the whole earth is enclosed within a fist; and this same is both His throne and the footstool of His feet, as it is also written: 'Before Him the whole circle of the lands is reckoned as a turn of the balance' (Wisdom 11:23). And through this He fills all things and contains all things, within and without, so that this undivided and everlasting Trinity is everywhere present, to which belongs the invisible fullness of the Godhead.
你要思想那合一神性的能力是不可測度的，以致那僅在一掌之間所容的諸天，同時就是祂的寶座；而那握於一拳之中的大地，又轉而成為祂腳下的腳凳——因為整個諸天的廣袤被持守於一掌之間，整個大地被圈圍於一拳之中；這同一者既是祂的寶座，又是祂腳下的腳凳，正如所記：「在祂面前，全地有如天平上一轉的塵埃」（智慧書十一23）。藉此祂充滿萬有，包羅萬有，無論在內在外，以致這不可分割、永恆的三位一體無處不在，神性那不可見的豐盛全歸屬於祂。
7:177
Unde ne malus interpres, de superioribus dictis materiam accipiat calumniandi, ideo ipsa breviter reserabo: eo quod frequenter indi­ cavi unam snbstantiam, vel unitam divinitatem, unius Dei naturam, aut unitatis naturam : sive hoc, unum deitatis nomen, et unius divinitatis nomen, unius naturae nomen, et unitum divinitatis substantiæ no men. Hæc universa, ut certus sis qui legis, ad uni tum plenitudinis divinitatis nomen Patris, et Filii, et sancti Spiritus, et solius divinæ Trinitatis nomen, et solum hoc omnipotentis substantiæ unitum nomen, necnon et unum bonum divinitatis nomen.
Therefore, lest some evil interpreter take from the things said above occasion for slander, I will briefly explain them: namely, that I have often spoken of one substance, or the united Godhead, or the nature of the one God, or the nature of the unity; and likewise of the one name of deity, and the name of the one Godhead, the name of the one nature, and the united name of the substance of the Godhead. All these things — that you who read may be certain — refer to the united name of the fullness of the Godhead of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, and to the name of the divine Trinity alone, and to this one united name of the almighty substance, and likewise to the one good name of the Godhead.
因此，免得有惡意的解釋者從上述所言取得毀謗的把柄，我要簡略地加以闡明：就是說，我屢次提到一個本體，或合一的神性，或獨一神的本性，或那合一的本性；又同樣提到神性的獨一之名，獨一神性的名，獨一本性的名，以及神性本體那合一之名。這一切——好叫你這讀者得以確知——都是指著父、子、聖靈神性豐盛那合一之名，並單指神聖三位一體之名，並這全能本體那合一的獨一之名，也指神性那美善的獨一之名。
7:178
Nonne haec superius dicta ad enuntiatam divinitatem nhitatis usiæ Patris, et Filii, et sancti Spirilus manifesta video? Hæc retuli ne aliter quam dicta sunt accipe­ res, et simplicem sensum in ambiguo retorqueres : dum omne dictum, ad sensum dicentis requirendum, et non ad stultam voluntatem uniuscujusque hæretici investigandum sit. De Beatitudine fidei. et de Proscriptione tectae pessimæ. 252 Hæreticus. Posco a te, de unito deitatis no­ mine multifarie dictum ut identidem repetas, et sic de nominibus personarum in prosequendo distinguas. Responsio. Disce prius in ambiguo esse positam hanc tuam secundam interrogationem.
Do I not see these things said above to be manifest, as referring to the declared Godhead of the unity of the being of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit? I have related these things so that you might not receive them otherwise than as they were spoken, nor twist their simple sense into ambiguity — since every saying must be measured by the meaning of the one who speaks, and not searched out according to the foolish will of any individual heretic. On the Blessedness of the Faith, and on the Proscription of the worst sect. Heretic: I ask of you that you repeat over and over what has been said in manifold ways about the united name of deity, and that thus, in proceeding, you distinguish concerning the names of the persons. Reply: Learn first that this second question of yours is set in ambiguity.
我所看見上述這些話豈不明顯，乃是指著父、子、聖靈本質合一所宣告的神性嗎？我陳述這些，是免得你不照所說的意思領受，也免得你把這質樸的含義扭曲為含糊不清——因為每一句話都當按說話者的本意來衡量，而不可照任何一個愚妄異端者的私意去探究。論信德的福樂，並論那最邪惡教派之被禁絕。異端者：我求你把那關於神性合一之名以多種方式所說過的，一再重述；並且在往下說時，將諸位格之名加以區分。答：你要先曉得，你這第二個問題是含糊不清的。
7:179
Nonne unitas nullo modo patitur unionis personam in confessionem introduci? dum unitatis naturae nomen in tribus his personis sit: et tres hæ personae in nominibus tan­ tum distinctae sint : unde non potest unitas ostend; sive personis. Nec ut dixi, hæ personæ sine deitatis unitate. Nunquid potestis Deum tantum sicut gentes confuse nominare, quae et in hoc ignorant cui pro­ priam personam debeant assignare? Qui genitor est nunquid oportet hunc Deum tantum putare indicari ? Nisi in hoc cognoscas unitam personam ejus distin­ guere in Filium qui natus sit. Nunquid sic confuse Deum tantum convenit profiteri?
Does not the unity in no way allow a person of union to be introduced into the confession? — since the name of the nature of the unity is in these three persons, and these three persons are distinguished in name only; whence the unity cannot be shown apart from the persons. Nor, as I have said, can these persons exist without the unity of deity. Can you, like the Gentiles, name God only confusedly — they who in this very matter are ignorant to whom they ought to assign a proper person? He who is the Begetter — is it right to suppose that this is signified as God only? Unless in this you recognize how to distinguish His united person into the Son who was born. Is it fitting thus confusedly to profess God only?
那合一豈不是斷然不容把一個聯合的位格引進信仰的告白中嗎？——因為那合一本性之名在這三個位格之中，而這三個位格僅在名上彼此分別；故此合一不能離開諸位格而顯明。我也說過，這些位格不能離開神性的合一而存在。你們豈能像外邦人那樣混亂地僅僅稱呼神——他們正是在此事上無知，不知該將固有的位格歸於誰呢？那位是「生者」的，難道僅當以「神」來指明祂嗎？除非你在此認識到要把祂合一的位格區分為那受生的子。如此混亂地只承認「神」是合宜的嗎？
7:180
nisi prius credatur et is qui de unita natura sit, et in hoc persona ejus distinguatur, qui nec Pater, nec Filius, est hic Spi­ ritus sanctus? Quapropter duplex est hujus mysterii intellectus, Deus Pater, Deus et Filius, Deus et san­ ctISs Spiritus. Vides unitatis indicium in tribus esse personis, et tres has personas nominibus tantum esse discretas : unde nec unitas potest ostendi sine 253 personis, nec hæ personæ sine unito nomine deitatis. Ecce jam habes positos ante oculos tuos thesauros lucis, et thesauros tenebrarum. Ubiuhi placet, porrige manum tuam.
— unless it first be believed both that He who is of the united nature exists, and that in this His person is distinguished, He who is neither Father nor Son, this Holy Spirit? Wherefore the understanding of this mystery is twofold: God the Father, God also the Son, God also the Holy Spirit. You see that the indication of the unity is in three persons, and that these three persons are distinguished by names only; whence neither can the unity be shown without the persons, nor these persons without the united name of deity. Behold, you now have set before your eyes the treasures of light and the treasures of darkness. Wherever you please, stretch out your hand.
——除非先信那合一本性者確實存在，並信祂的位格在此得以區分，就是那位既非父、亦非子的這聖靈嗎？故此這奧祕的理解是雙重的：神乃是父，神也是子，神也是聖靈。你看，合一的表記在於三個位格，而這三個位格僅以名彼此分別；故此合一不能離開諸位格而顯明，這些位格也不能離開神性合一之名而存在。看哪，你眼前如今擺著光明的寶藏與黑暗的寶藏。隨你喜歡哪一邊，就伸出你的手罷。
7:181
Unde necesse est nos jarn terminum immobilem, secundum evangelicæ regulæ æquitatem,contra hostes figere, et per libran­ tem sapientiam limitem justiliae ubique adversus omnes hæreses pcragrantes custodire, ut cœlitus hæc statuta veritas mox viam lucis a tenebris dividat. Haec est, inquam, via lucis cujus in confessione ape­ ritur ostium salutis : itoque qui hanc professionem ingrediuntur, beatitudinem ejus adipiscuntur. Reati­ ludo ei qui confitetur unum Deum Patrem et Filium et sanctum Spiritum. Beatitudo ei qui confitetur so­ tum Deum Patrern, et Filium, et Spiritum sanctum. Beatitudo ei qui confitetur unum omnipotentem Deum Patrem, et Filium, et sanctum Spiritum.
Hence it is necessary that we now fix an immovable boundary, according to the equity of the evangelical rule, against the enemies, and by the balancing wisdom everywhere guard the boundary-line of justice against all heresies that range abroad, so that this truth, established from heaven, may straightway divide the way of light from the darkness. This, I say, is the way of light, in the confession of which the door of salvation is opened; and so those who enter upon this profession obtain its blessedness. Blessed is he who confesses one God, Father and Son and Holy Spirit. Blessed is he who confesses God alone, the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Blessed is he who confesses one almighty God, the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
故此我們必須照著福音準則的公正，向眾仇敵立定一個不可移動的界限，並以那衡平的智慧，到處抵擋一切流竄的異端，守護公義的界線，使這從天而立的真理立即把光明之路與黑暗分開。我說，這就是光明之路，在對它的告白中，救恩之門被開啟；凡踏入這告白的人，便得著它的福樂。承認獨一神——父、子、聖靈的人，是有福的。承認獨一的神——父、子、聖靈的人，是有福的。承認獨一全能之神——父、子、聖靈的人，是有福的。
7:182
Beatitudo ei qui confitetur unum verum Deum Patrem, et Fi­ lum, ct sanctum Spiritum. Beatitudo ei qui confite­ tur unum Deum summum Patrem, et Filium, et san­ ctum Spiritum. Beatitudo ei qui confitetur unum Deum bonum Patrem, et Filium, et Spiritum sanctum sem­ pitemum esse. Beatitudo ei qui confitetur indivisam esse substantiam Patris, et Filii, et sancti Spiritus. Beatitudo ei qui nihil addiderit vel diminuerit in confessione unitae naturae deitatis Patris, et Filii, et sancti Spiritus. Beatitudo ei qui confitetur omnia bona facta fuisse a Patre, et Filio, et sancto Spiritu.
Blessed is he who confesses one true God, the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Blessed is he who confesses one most high God, the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Blessed is he who confesses one good God, the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, to be everlasting. Blessed is he who confesses the substance of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit to be undivided. Blessed is he who has neither added nor diminished anything in the confession of the united nature of the Godhead of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Blessed is he who confesses that all good things were made by the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
承認獨一真神——父、子、聖靈的人，是有福的。承認至高獨一神——父、子、聖靈的人，是有福的。承認那獨一美善之神——父、子、聖靈乃是永恆的人，是有福的。承認父、子、聖靈的本體不可分割的人，是有福的。凡在告白父、子、聖靈神性那合一本性時，既不增添也不減少絲毫的人，是有福的。承認一切美善之物都是由父、子、聖靈所造的人，是有福的。
7:183
Beatitudo ei qui confitetur unam æqualitatem in sem­ piterna plenitudine deitatis esse Patris, et Filii, et sancti Spiritus. Beatitudo ei qui secundum singula nomina Trinitatis, id est Patris, et Filii, et sancti Spiritus, proprias his tantum personas distinctas esse confitetur. Itaque ideam ipse replico, quia vehementer timeo ne aliquod offendiculum minus intelligentibus posucrim, adeo per apertiores sermones hæc ipsa dicta paucis exponere desidero. Ego unum Deum ubi memini, unitam deitatem Patris, et Filii, et sancti Spiritus declaravi. Item omnipotentem Deum ad om-I nipotentis substantiam Trinitatis propalavi. Item so­ tum Deum, a soliuS natura 254 suprascriptae Tri­ nitatis indicavi.
Blessed is he who confesses one equality to be in the everlasting fullness of the Godhead of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Blessed is he who, according to the several names of the Trinity, that is of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, confesses these persons alone to be distinct as proper. And so I repeat the same point, because I greatly fear that I may have placed some stumbling-block before the less intelligent; and therefore I desire, through more open words, to set forth these very things briefly to a few. Whenever I have made mention of one God, I have declared the united Godhead of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Likewise the almighty God, I have proclaimed with respect to the almighty substance of the Trinity. Likewise God alone, I have indicated from the nature alone of the above-written Trinity.
承認在神性永恆的豐盛中——父、子、聖靈裡——有獨一同等性的人，是有福的。凡照三位一體各自的名，即父的名、子的名、聖靈的名，承認唯有這些位格各以其固有之分而彼此分別的人，是有福的。因此我重複同一要點，因我極其懼怕在那些較不明白的人面前設下某種絆腳石；故此我願以更明白的言詞，向少數人簡略陳述這些事。每當我提到獨一神時，我所宣告的乃是父、子、聖靈那合一的神性。同樣，提到全能之神時，我是就三位一體那全能的本體而宣揚。同樣，提到唯一之神時，我是就上述三位一體那唯一的本性而指明。
7:184
Identidem unum verum Deum, ad unam veram naturam divinitatis Patris, et Filii, et sancti Spiritus haec dicta retuli. Aut in quo summum Deum, ad summitatem deitatis Patris, et Filii, et sancti Spiritus assignavi. Sive unum bonum Deum, ad unam bonitatem naturae Trinitatis demonstravi, et unum Deum ad unitam dominationem deitatis re­ velavi. Seu in quo indivisam Trinitatem memoratus sum, ad unitam substantiam plenitudinis eorum hæc praefatus sum. Et haec omnia quæ superius singula indicavi, ad indivisam deitatis sempiternitatem Pa­ tris, et Filii, et sancti Spiritus manifestavi.
Likewise, one true God — these sayings I have referred to the one true nature of the Godhead of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Or wherein I have spoken of the most high God, I assigned it to the supreme height of the Godhead of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Or one good God, I have demonstrated with respect to the one goodness of the nature of the Trinity; and one God, I have revealed with respect to the united dominion of the Godhead. Or wherein I have made mention of the undivided Trinity, I have spoken these things beforehand with respect to the united substance of their fullness. And all these things which above I indicated severally, I have made manifest with respect to the undivided everlastingness of the Godhead of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.
同樣，「獨一真神」這些話，我是指著父、子、聖靈神性那獨一真實的本性而說的。又在我提到「至高之神」之處，我是將其歸於父、子、聖靈神性的至高之巔。或說「獨一美善之神」，我是就三位一體本性那獨一的善而證明；又說「獨一之神」，我是就神性那合一的主權而啟示。又在我提到「不可分割的三位一體」之處，我是預先就他們豐盛那合一的本體而言。凡我在上面所一一指出的這一切，我都是就父、子、聖靈神性那不可分割的永恆性而顯明的。
← prev partnext part →
← ch. 6
1234567