ACC ~ John 10 v30
CHRISTāS UNITY WITH GOD
ORIGEN: Our Savior and Lord in his relation to the Father and God of the universe is not one flesh or one spirit but something higher than flesh and spirit, namely, one God. The appropriate word when human beings are joined to one another is flesh. The appropriate word when a righteous person is joined to Christ is spirit. But the word when Christ is united to the Father is not flesh or spirit but more honorable than theseāGod. This then is the sense in which we should understand āI and the Father are one.ā DIALOGUE WITH HERACLIDES 3-4. [1]
[1] DECT 25; SC 67:60.
ONE WITH THE FATHER
NOVATIAN: This word can be true of no human being, āI and the Father are one.ā Christ alone declared this word out of the consciousness of his divinity. ON THE TRINITY 13. [1]
[1] ANF 5:622.
PERSONS DISTINGUISHED, UNITY MAINTAINED
NOVATIAN: But since they [1] frequently urge on us the passage where it is said, āI and the Father are one,ā in this also we shall overcome them with equal facility. For if, as the heretics think, Christ were the Father, he ought to have said, āI, the Father, am one.ā But when he says I and afterwards introduces the Father by saying, āI and the Father,ā he severs and distinguishes the peculiarity of his, that is, the Sonās person, from the paternal authority, not only in respect of the sound of the name but moreover in respect of the order of the distribution of power, since he might have said, āI the Father,ā if he had had it in mind that he himself was the Father. And since he said āoneā thing, let the heretics understand that he did not say āoneā person. For āone,ā placed in the neuter, intimates association, not personal unity. He is said to be one neuter, not one masculine, because the expression is not referred to the number, but it is declared with reference to the association of another. Finally, he adds, and says, āWe are,ā not āI am,ā so as to show, by the fact of his saying āI and the Father are,ā that they are two persons. Moreover, that he says one, has reference to the agreement, and to the identity of judgment and to the loving association itself, as reasonably the Father and Son are one in agreement, in love and in affection. And because he is of the Father, whatsoever he is, he is the Son. The distinction, however, remains that he is not the Father who is the Son, because he is not the Son who is the Father. For he would not have added āwe areā if he had had it in mind that he, the only and sole Father, had become the Son. ON THE TRINITY 27. [2]
āARE ONEā VERSUS āAM ONEā
HIPPOLYTUS: And if he [i.e., Noetus] were to say, āJesus himself said, āI and the Father are one,āā let him [Noetus] apply his mind to the matter and learn that Jesus did not say, āI and the Father am oneā but āare one.ā āWe areā is not said with reference to one but with reference to two. He revealed two persons but a single Power. AGAINST NOETUS 7.1. [3]
āONEā AND āAREā
AUGUSTINE: Mark both of those words, one [4] and are, [5] and you will be delivered from Charybdis and from Scylla. [6] In these two words, in that he said one, he delivers you from Arius; [7] in that he said are, he delivers you from Sabellius; [8] ā¦ there are both Father and Sonā¦. And if one, then there is no difference of persons between them. TRACTATES ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 36.9. [9]
[1] The Patripassians, who taught that the Father suffered on the cross.
[2] ANF 5:637.
[3] HM 2:60.
[4] Lat unum.
[5] Lat sumus.
[6] In Greek mythology, Scylla was a sea monster who lived under a dangerous rock at one side of the Strait of Messia, opposite the whirlpool Charybdis.
[7] Arius made the Son into a creature and did not consider him God.
[8] Sabellius said the Son was just another mode of the Fatherās existence, thus having no existence as a separate person in the Trinity.
[9] NPNF 1 7:212*.
UNITY OF GODHEAD, UNITY OF CHURCH
CYPRIAN: The Lord says, āI and the Father are one.ā And again of the Father and Son and the Holy Spirit it is written, āAnd these three are one.ā [1] Does anyone believe that this unity that comes from divine strength, which is closely connected with the divine sacraments, can be broken asunder in the church and be separated by the division of colliding wills? THE UNITY OF THE CHURCH 6. [2]
[1] 1 Jn 5:7 (KJV). Cyprian seems to be quoting the so-called Comma Johanneum text of 1 Jn 5:7 that has an explicit reference to the Trinity. See Michael Maynard, A History of the Debate over 1 John 5:7-8 (Tempe, Ariz.: Comma Publications, 1995), 38, although Daniel Wallace disagrees with Maynardās conclusions. See his article on the web, The Comma Johanneum and Cyprian.
[2] FC 36:101.
NOT SINGULARITY OF NUMBER BUT UNITY OF ESSENCE
TERTULLIAN: ā[W]e are one thing,ā [1] not āone person.ā [2] For if he had said āone person,ā he might have rendered some assistance to their opinion. Unus, no doubt, indicates the singular number; but [here we have a case where] ātwoā are still the subject in the masculine gender. He accordingly says unum, a neuter term, which does not imply singularity of number but unity of essence, likeness, conjunction, affection on the Fatherās part, who loves the Son, and submission on the Sonās part, who obeys the Fatherās will. AGAINST PRAXEAS 22. [3]
[1] Lat unum.
[2] Lat unus.
[3] ANF 3:618.
FATHER, SON AND SPIRIT ARE ONE
AUGUSTINE: And when God was feeding them, the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit was feeding them. Now he is raised up and becomes like a second shepherd. But he is not a second one. Not a second one in the form of God, because in the form of God he and the Father are one God. But in the form of a servant he is raised up to feed them like a second one, because the Father is greater. Listen to one feeding them, and Christ feeding them: āI and the Father are one.ā SERMON 47.20. [1]
[1] WSA 3 2:314.
DIVINE EQUALITY, INCARNATE SUBJECTION
AUGUSTINE: In his divinity he is equal to the Father; by his incarnation he is subject to the Father. SERMON 371.2. [1]
[1] WSA 3 10:313.
FATHER AND SON SHARE ONE ESSENCE
CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA: We say the Son and the Father āare one,ā not to blend their individuality by the use of that number, as some do who say that the Father and the Son are the same [person]. Rather, we believe that the Father and the Son are two unique persons, and we regard the two together in one identical essence, knowing that they possess one might, so that this divine essence is seen without variation in both. COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 7.1. [1]
[1] LF 48:102**.
ONE IN ESSENCE, NOT RELATION
AUGUSTINE: [We must understand] that the Father is not anything in respect to his own substance. We must also understand that what is said about himāthat he is the Father and his very existence as Fatherāis all said in relation to the Son. How then can the Son be of the same essence as the Father, seeing that the Fatherāin respect to himselfāis neither his own essence, nor does he exist at all in respect to himself? Rather, even his very essence exists in relation to the Son. But this establishes even more the fact that [the Son] is of one and the same essence [with the Father], since the Father and Son must be of one and the same essence, seeing that the Father has being itselfānot in respect to himself, but to the Son. This is the essence he begot, and the essence by which he is whatever he is. Therefore neither [person] exists in respect to himself alone. And both exist in relationship to one another. ON THE TRINITY 7.1.2. [1]
[1] NPNF 1 3:105**.
ONE ACCORDING TO OUSIA
THEODORE OF HERACLEA: One, he says of himself, with the Father according to ousia, not according to hypostasis, and he is equal with the Father in all things. For he is to be counted as two according to hypostases, both himself and the Father, who, he said is greater than he. FRAGMENTS IN JOHN 126. [1]
[1] JKGK 99.
UNITY IS THE GROUND OF UNANIMITY
HILARY OF POITIERS: Now seeing that the heretics cannot get around these words because they are so clearly stated and understood, they nevertheless try to explain them away. They maintain that the words āI and the Father are oneā refer to a mere union of unanimity only; a unity of will, not of nature, that is, that the two are one not by essence of being but by identity of will. [1] ā¦ They make use of the example of our own union with God, as though we were united to the Son and through the Son to the Father by mere obedience and a devout will and not through the true communion of our nature [with his] that is promised to us through the sacrament of the body and bloodā¦.
But it is not through any mysterious appointment of God that they are one, but through the birth of the nature, for God loses nothing in begetting the Son from himself. They are one, for the sheep not plucked out of the Sonās hand are not plucked out of the hand of the Fatherā¦. The Father works in the Sonās works, for the Son himself is in the Father and the Father is in him. [2] This proceeds from no creation but from birth. It is not brought about by will but by power. It is not an agreement of mind that speaks but nature that does so. For to be created and to be born are not one and the same any more than to will and to be able are the same; neither is it the same thing to agree and to abide.
Thus we do not deny the unanimity between the Father and the Sonāfor heretics falsely say that since we do not accept the concord by itself as the bond of unity we declare the Father and the Son to be in disagreement. We do not deny such a unanimity, [but the unanimity results from the unity]. [3] The Father and the Son are one in nature, honor, power, and the same nature cannot will contrary things. ON THE TRINITY 8.5, 17-19. [4]
[1] The heretics, according to Hilary, cite Acts 4:32; 1 Cor 3:8.
[2] See Jn 14:7-12.
[3] See Hilaryās argument, On the Trinity 8.9-12.
[4] NPNF 2 9:139, 142**.