Opening the library…

Search the Bible

Against Praxeas

Tertullian

Chapter 25

About this work

A polemical Latin treatise opposing a modalist account of God and articulating distinctions among Father, Son, and Spirit while insisting on divine unity and the reality of Christ’s incarnation.

Author: Tertullian
Date: Early 3rd century
Origin: Carthage, North Africa
Genre: Theological Treatise

Chapter XXV.—The Paraclete, or Holy Ghost. He is Distinct from the Father and the Son as to Their Personal Existence. One and Inseparable from Them as to Their Divine Nature. Other Quotations Out of St. John’s Gospel.

What follows Philip’s question, and the Lord’s whole

‹ Chapter 24 Chapter 26 ›

treatment

of

it

,

to

the

end

of

John’s

Gospel

,

continues

to

furnish

us

with

statements

of

the

same

kind

,

distinguishing

the

Father

and

the

Son

,

with

the

properties

of

each

.

Then

there

is

the

Paraclete

or

Comforter

,

also

,

which

He

promises

to

pray

for

to

the

Father

,

and

to

send

from

heaven

after

He

had

ascended

to

the

Father

.

He

is

called

“

another

Comforter

,

”

indeed

;

but

in

what

way

He

is

another

we

have

already

shown

,

“

He

shall

receive

of

mine

,

”

says

Christ

,

just

as

Christ

Himself

received

of

the

Father’s

.

Thus

the

connection

of

the

Father

in

the

Son

,

and

of

the

Son

in

the

Paraclete

,

produces

three

coherent

Persons

,

who

are

yet

distinct

One

from

Another

.

These

Three

are

one

essence

,

not

one

Person

,

as

it

is

said

,

“

I

and

my

Father

are

One

,

”

in

respect

of

unity

of

substance

not

singularity

of

number

.

Run

through

the

whole

Gospel

,

and

you

will

find

that

He

whom

you

believe

to

be

the

Father

(

described

as

acting

for

the

Father

,

although

you

,

for

your

part

,

forsooth

,

suppose

that

“

the

Father

,

being

the

husbandman

,

”

must

surely

have

been

on

earth

)

is

once

more

recognised

by

the

Son

as

in

heaven

,

when

,

“

lifting

up

His

eyes

thereto

,

”

He

commended

His

disciples

to

the

safe

-

keeping

of

the

Father

.

We

have

,

moreover

,

in

that

other

Gospel

a

clear

revelation

,

i

.

e

.

of

the

Son’s

distinction

from

the

Father

,

“

My

God

,

why

hast

Thou

forsaken

me

?

”

and

again

,

(

in

the

third

Gospel

,

)

“

Father

,

into

Thy

hands

I

commend

my

spirit

.

”

But

even

if

(

we

had

not

these

passages

,

we

meet

with

satisfactory

evidence

)

after

His

resurrection

and

glorious

victory

over

death

.

Now

that

all

the

restraint

of

His

humiliation

is

taken

away

,

He

might

,

if

possible

,

have

shown

Himself

as

the

Father

to

so

faithful

a

woman

(

as

Mary

Magdalene

)

when

she

approached

to

touch

Him

,

out

of

love

,

not

from

curiosity

,

nor

with

Thomas

’

incredulity

.

But

not

so

;

Jesus

saith

unto

her

,

“

Touch

me

not

,

for

I

am

not

yet

ascended

to

my

Father

;

but

go

to

my

brethren

”

(

and

even

in

this

He

proves

Himself

to

be

the

Son

;

for

if

He

had

been

the

Father

,

He

would

have

called

them

His

children

,

(

instead

of

His

brethren

)

,

“

and

say

unto

them

,

I

ascend

unto

my

Father

and

your

Father

,

and

to

my

God

and

your

God

.

”

Now

,

does

this

mean

,

I

ascend

as

the

Father

to

the

Father

,

and

as

God

to

God

?

Or

as

the

Son

to

the

Father

,

and

as

the

Word

to

God

?

Wherefore

also

does

this

Gospel

,

at

its

very

termination

,

intimate

that

these

things

were

ever

written

,

if

it

be

not

,

to

use

its

own

words

,

“

that

ye

might

believe

that

Jesus

Christ

is

the

Son

of

God

?

”

Whenever

,

therefore

,

you

take

any

of

the

statements

of

this

Gospel

,

and

apply

them

to

demonstrate

the

identity

of

the

Father

and

the

Son

,

supposing

that

they

serve

your

views

therein

,

you

are

contending

against

the

definite

purpose

of

the

Gospel

.

For

these

things

certainly

are

not

written

that

you

may

believe

that

Jesus

Christ

is

the

Father

,

but

the

Son

.

Notes

1
John xiv. 16.
2
See above ch. xiii.
3
John xvi. 14.
4
Unum. [On this famous passage see Elucidation III.]
5
Unus.
6
John x. 30.
7
John xv. 1.
8
John xvii. 1.
9
John xvii. 11.
10
Matt. xxvii. 46.
11
Luke xxiii. 46.
12
John xx. 17.
13
John xx. 31.
14
[A curious anecdote is given by Carlyle in his Life of Frederick (Book xx. cap. 6), touching the text of “the Three Witnesses.” Gottsched satisfied the king that it was not in the Vienna ms. save in an interpolation of the margin “in Melanchthon’s hand.” Luther’s Version lacks this text.]