1103# “地上的列王与她行淫”表示对属于天堂和教会的真理的一切事物的歪曲。这可从前面对这些话的解释（参看AE1034节）清楚可知。
（关于《亚他那修信经》续）
被称为《亚他那修信经》的三位一体教义当被阅读时，会留下一个模糊的概念，即：神为一，这个概念如此模糊，以至于无法消除三神观，这一点可从这一事实清楚看出来：该教义通过一体而使三位神成为一位神，说“大公教会信仰即：我等敬拜一体三位，而三位一体之神，其位不紊，其体不分”，后来说：“由是如前所言，我等当敬拜一体三位，而三位一体之神。”说这句话是为了消除三神观，但对理解力产生的唯一效果是导致它以为有三个位格，尽管它们都有一个神性本质。此处的神性本质是指神；然而，本质，就像也被提到的神性、威严和荣耀一样，是某种述语，而神作为一个位格，是主体。因此，说本质是神，就等于说某种述语是主体。但本质不是神，而是属于神；同样，威严和荣耀不是神，而是属于神，就像述语不是主体，而是属于主体一样。这清楚表明，作为三个位格的三神观并没有以这种方式被消除。这一点可通过对比来说明。一个王国有三个权力相等的统治者，每一个都被称为王；在这种情况下，如果王是指权力和威严，那么即便下命令说，他们都可以被称为和宣布为王，但称他们为一位王仍是不容易的。由于当提到一个王时，所指的是一个人，所以即便下命令，三个王被视为一个王也是不可能的。因此，如果他们对你说“向我们自由地说出你的想法”，你肯定会说，诸位王，诸位陛下。如果你回答说，既然我被命令如此说，我也如此思想，那么你就被骗了，因为你要么在伪装，要么在强迫自己，如果你在强迫自己，那么你的思维就不是自由的，而是粘附于你的言语。
亚他那修也意识到了这一点；因此，他对前面这些话的解释如下：“依基督真道，我等不得不认每位独为神，独为主。依大公教，我等不得谓神有三，亦不得谓主有三。”这些话只能理解为，承认三位神和主是可以的，但提说三神和主是不可以的，或要思想，但不能说有三位神和主，因为这违背基督信仰；同样，因有三个位格而承认和思想三位无限、永恒、非受造、全能，是可以的，但提说三位无限、永恒、非受造、全能是不可以的，只能提说一位。亚他那修补充上述这些话，是因为任何人，甚至连他自己都不能持有不同的想法。然而，每个人都能说不同的话，并且也应该如此说，因为基督教的教导，也就是圣言的教导是这样：没有三位神，而是只有一位神。此外，被归于每个位格作为其特定属性的属性或功能，也就是说，被归于父的创造，被归于子的救赎，被归于圣灵的光照，因此不是三个位格中的同一个；然而，这些功能或属性却进入神性本质，因为创造是神性，救赎是神性，光照是神性。
此外，凡想将三神观改变为一神观的人，谁会认为要“敬拜一体三位，而三位一体之神。其位不紊，其体不分”？谁能通过超越理解的形而上学做到这一点呢？简单人完全不能这样做，而有学问的人匆匆忙忙跳过这个主题，对自己说，这是我对神的教义和信仰；除了有三个位格和一位神之外，他们没有通过任何模糊的观念将任何东西保留在记忆中，或保留在来自记忆的观念或思维中；每个人都以自己的方式从三位神中制造出一位神，但只有当他说话和写作时，才能制造出来，因为当他思考时，只能想到三位，只有出于三位的同等才能想到一位；而许多人甚至不能出于这种同等想到一位。但我的读者，请听我说，不要对自己说，所说反对普遍接受的关于三位一体神的信仰的这些话太过于严厉，或过于大胆，因为在接下来的内容中，你会看到，只要承认或相信一个位格，三位一体在这一个位格里面，不承认或相信三个位格，那么《亚他那修信经》的一切细节都与真理一致。
1103. And the kings of the earth have committed whoredom with her.- That this signifies the falsification of all things belonging to the truth of heaven and of the church, is evident from the explanation of similar words above (n. 1034).
Continuation concerning the Athanasian Creed.- That the doctrine of the Trinity, called the Athanasian Creed, leaves, when read, an obscure idea that God is one, and so obscure as not to remove the idea of three Gods, is clear from this fact, that the doctrine makes one God of three, by unity of essence, saying, that . . . "This is the Christian faith, that we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity, neither commingling the persons, nor separating the essence." . . . And afterwards, "Thus the Unity in Trinity, and the Trinity in Unity, is to be worshipped." This statement is made in order to remove the idea of three Gods, but the only effect upon the understanding is to lead to the supposition that there are three persons, yet one Divine essence to all. By Divine essence, then, is there meant God, when, nevertheless, essence as well as divinity, majesty, and glory, which are also mentioned, is the predicate, and God, as being a person, is the subject. To say, therefore, that essence is God would be equal to asserting that a predicate is the subject. Essence, however, is not God, but is of God; similarly majesty and glory are not God, but are of God, just as a predicate is not the subject, but belongs to the subject. It is consequently evident that the idea of three Gods as being three persons is not removed in this manner.
This may be illustrated by a comparison. Suppose there are three rulers in one kingdom of equal power, and that each one is called king; in this case, if power and majesty are meant by king, they may by command, be called and said to be king, still not easily one king; but the term king implying personality, it is impossible, even under a command for three kings to be thought of as one king. If therefore they should say to you, "Speak to us as freely as you think," you would, undoubtedly, thus reply: "Ye are kings indeed, ye are also majesties." If you should reply, "I think as I speak in obedience to a command," you are deceived, because you either make pretence or force yourself; if you force yourself, your thought is not free, but clings to your speech.
[2] Athanasius also perceived this, and therefore he explains the above words as follows: "As we are obliged by the Christian verity to acknowledge every person by himself to be God and Lord, so are we forbidden by the Christian faith to say that there are three Gods and three Lords." These words cannot be understood as implying any other meaning, than that it is allowable to acknowledge, but not to name three Gods and Lords, or to think of but not to say that there are three Gods and Lords, because it is contrary to the Christian faith; similarly, that it is allowable to acknowledge and think of three infinites, eternals, uncreates, and omnipotents, because there are three persons, but not to name three infinites, eternals, uncreates and omnipotents, but one only. Athanasius added the words quoted above, because of the impossibility of any one, even himself, thinking otherwise. Every one, however, can speak otherwise, and every one ought to do so, because it is the teaching of the Christian religion, that is of the Word, that there are not three Gods, but that there is one God. Besides the function ascribed to each person as his particular attribute, that is, creation to the Father, redemption to the Son, and enlightenment to the Holy Spirit, is consequently not one and the same in the three persons, and yet these functions enter into the Divine Essence, for creation is Divine, redemption is Divine, and enlightenment is Divine.
[3] Moreover, what man is there, that desires to connect the idea of three Gods with the idea of one God, who supposes that the Trinity in Unity and Unity in Trinity is to be worshipped, neither the persons being commingled, nor the essence separated? Who could do this, by means of metaphysics which transcends the apprehension! The simple are utterly unable; and the learned hurry over the subject, saying to themselves, this is my doctrine and faith concerning God, without retaining either in the memory from an obscure idea, or in their idea from the memory anything more than this, that there are three persons, and one God. And every man makes one out of three in his own way, but only when he speaks and writes, for when he thinks, he cannot think otherwise than of three, and of one from the co-ordination of the three, while many do not think of one even from that co-ordination. But consider, reader! Do not say to yourself, that these remarks are too harshly or too boldly made against the faith universally received concerning the triune God; for, in the following pages, you will see, that all the details of the Athanasian Creed, are in agreement with the truth, provided that, instead of three persons, one person in whom is a trinity, is acknowledged.
1103. And the kings of the earth have committed whoredom with her, signifies the falsification of all things of the truth of heaven and the church, as can be seen from the explanation of the same words above (n. 1034).
(Continuation respecting the Athanasian Faith.)
That the doctrine of the Trinity that is called the Athanasian Faith when it has been read leaves an obscure idea that God is one, and so obscure as not to remove the idea of three Gods, can be seen from this, that the doctrine makes one God out of three through a unity of essence, saying, "This is the Christian faith: That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity, neither confounding the Persons nor dividing the essence." And afterwards, "So that in all things the Unity in Trinity and the Trinity in Unity is to be worshipped." This was said to remove the idea of three Gods, but it enters the understanding in no other way than that there are three Persons, although they all have one Divine essence, that is, by Divine essence God is here meant; and yet essence, like divinity, majesty, and glory, which are also mentioned, is something predicated, and God because a Person is the subject; consequently to say that the essence is God would be like saying that something predicated is the subject. But the essence is not God, it belongs to God, as majesty and glory are not God but belong to God, just as what is predicated is not the subject, but belongs to the subject. This makes evident that the idea of three Gods as three Persons is not removed. This may be illustrated by a comparison. Suppose that there are in one kingdom three rulers of equal power, each called king; then if power and majesty are meant by king, these might, if it were so commanded, be called and declared king, although it would not be easy to call them one king. But as a person is meant when a king is mentioned, it is impossible from any command for three kings to be thought of as one king. If, therefore, they should say to you, Speak to us as freely as you think, you would certainly say, Ye kings and Your Majesties. If you answer, As I am commanded to speak so do I think, you are deceived, because either you are pretending or you are compelling yourself, and if you are compelling yourself, your thought is not left to itself, but inheres in your words.
[2] That this is so was seen by Athanasius; therefore he explains the above words by the following: "Like as we are compelled by Christian verity to acknowledge every person by Himself to be God and Lord, so we cannot by Christian faith name three Gods or three Lords." This can be understood only as meaning that it is allowable to acknowledge three Gods and Lords, but not to name them; or that it is allowable to think of three Gods and Lords, but not to speak of them, because it is contrary to the Christian faith; also that it is allowable to acknowledge and think of three infinites, eternals, uncreates, and Almighties, because there are three Persons, but not to name three infinites, eternals, uncreates, and Almighties, but only one. Athanasius added the above words to the others, because no one, not even himself, could think otherwise. But everyone can speak otherwise, and ought so to speak in all things, because it is taught by the Christian religion, that is, from the Word, that there is one God and not three Gods. Moreover, the properties assigned to each Person as his special attribute, as to the Father creation, to the Son redemption, and to the Holy Spirit enlightenment, is not thus one and the same in the three Persons, and yet they all enter into the Divine essence, for creation is Divine, redemption is Divine, and enlightenment is Divine.
[3] Furthermore, does any man who wishes to change the idea of three Gods into an idea of one God, think that the Trinity in Unity and the Unity in Trinity is to be worshiped, neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the essence? Who is able to do this even by metaphysical reasoning that transcends the comprehension? The simple are wholly unable to do it, while the learned hurry it over, saying to themselves, This is my doctrine and faith about God; nor do they retain therefrom in the memory by any obscure idea, or in thought from the memory, anything except that there are three Persons and one God, and each one makes one out of three in his own way; but only when he speaks and writes, for when he thinks he can think only of three, and of one only from the unanimity of the three; and some are unable to do even this. But listen, my reader, and do not say to yourself that this is too harshly or too boldly spoken against the faith universally accepted in respect to the triune God, for you will see in what follows that each and every thing that is written in the Athanasian Faith is in agreement with the truth, if only instead of three Persons one Person in whom is the Trinity is believed in.
1103. "Et reges terrae cum illa scortati sunt." - Quod significet falsificationem omnium veri caeli et ecclesiae, constat ex illis quae supra (n. 1034) explicata sunt, ubi similia verba.
(Continuatio de Fide Athanasiana.)
Quod Doctrina Trinitatis, quae Fides Athanasiana vocatur, dum perlecta relinquat idea obscuram quod Deus unus sit, et tam obscuram ut ideam trium Deorum non removeat, hoc constare potest ex eo, quod Doctrina unum Deum ex Tribus faciat per unitatem essentiae, dicendo, "Haec est fides Christiana, Quod colamus unum Deum in Trinitatem, et Trinitatem in Unitate; Neque commiscendo Personas, neque separando Essentiam": et postea, "Ita prorsus est, .... quod Unitas in Trinitate, ac Trinitas in Unitate, colenda sit." Haec dicta sunt ut removeatur idea trium Deorum; sed haec non cadunt in intellectum aliter quam quod tres Personae sint, sed una Divina essentia omnibus: ita per Divinam essentiam ibi intelligitur Deus; cum tamen essentia, sicut etiam divinitas, majestas et gloria, quae etiam dicuntur, est praedicatum, ac Deus, quia Persona, est subjectum: quare dicere quod essentia sit Deus, foret sicut dicere quod praedicatum sit subjectum; cum tamen essentia non est Deus sed est Dei, ut quoque majestas et gloria non sunt Deus, sed sunt Dei, sicut praedicatum non est subjectum sed est subjecti. Inde patet quod idea trium Deorum ut trium Personarum non removeatur. Hoc illustrari potest per comparationem. Sint tres in uno regno aequalis potestatis, et quisque nominetur rex; tunc si potestas et majestas intelligitur per regem, possunt ex mandato vocari ac dici rex, at non facile unus rex; sed quia persona est quae intelligitur per regem, non potest ex mandato de tribus regibus cogitari unus rex: quare si dixerint tibi, Loquere ad nos ita libere sicut cogitas, omnino loqueris, Vos Reges, immo etiam Vos Majestates; si responderis, Cogito sicut loquor ex mandato, fallis, quia vel simulas vel cogis te; si cogis te, cogitatio tua non sibi relicta est, sed inhaeret loquelae.
[2] Quod ita sit, vidit etiam Athanasius; quare explicat illa verba per haec: "..Sicut ex Christiana veritate obligati sumus agnoscere unamquamque Personam per Se esse Deum ac Dominum, Usque non possumus ex Christiana fide nominare tres Deos et tres Dominos." Hoc non alter potest intelligi quam quod liceat agnoscere tres Deos et Dominos, sed non nominare; seu quod liceat cogitare tres Deos et Dominos, sed non dicere, quia est contra Christianam fidem: similiter quod liceat agnoscere et cogitare tres infinitos, aeternos, increatos, omnipotentes, quia sunt tres Personae, at non nominare tres infinitos, aeternos, increatos et omnipotentes, sed unum. Quod Athanasius allata verba addiderit reliquis, est quia nullus aliter potest cogitare, ne quidem ipse; sed quisque potest aliter loqui, et quod omnino ita loquendum sit, quia ex Christiana Religione est, hoc est, ex Verbo, quod non tres Dii sint, sed quod unus Deus. Praeterea proprietas, quae cuivis Personae adjicitur, et ejus attributum speciale, sicut creatio Patri, redemptio Filio, et illustratio Spiritui Sancto, non ita apud tres Personas est una eadem, et tamen intrant Divinam essentiam; nam creatio est Divina, redemptio est Divina, ac illustratio est Divina.
[3] Insuper quis hominum cogitat quod "Trinitas in Unitate ac Unitas in Trinitate colenda sit, non commiscendo personas, nec separando essentiam", qui vult ideam trium Deorum convertere in ideam unius Dei? Quis hoc potest per metaphysicum quod transcendit captum Simplices hoc prorsus nequeunt. Docti autem percurrunt, dicentes secum, Hoc est doctrina ac fides mea de Deo; nec inde retinent aliud in memoria ex idea obscura, et inde in idea ex memoria, quam quod tres Personae sint, et unus Deus, et quisque ex tribus unum facit suo modo; sed solum cum loquitur et scribit; dum autem cogitat, non potest aliter quam cogitare de tribus, ac de uno ex trium unanimitate, et plures ne quidem ex illa. Sed audi, mi Lector! Ne dicas tibi quod haec nimis dure et audacter dicta sint contra Fidem universaliter receptam de Deo triuno; in sequentibus videbis quod omnia et singula quae in Athanasiana Fide scripta sunt cum veritate concordent, modo loco trium Personarum credatur una Persona, in qua Trinitas.