172.（4）永恒的或创世前存在的神性位格的三一观暗含多神的三一；这种思想无法通过口头承认信一位神而被抹掉。永恒的神性位格的三一就是多神的三一，这从《亚他尼修信经》的下列信条清楚可知：“父一位，子一位，圣灵亦一位。父是神和主，子是神和主，圣灵亦是神和主；然而，非三神，乃一神，非三主，乃一主。因为正如基督的真理迫使我等承认每一个位格独自为神和主，天主教也禁止我等说三神或三主。”该信经被整个基督教会所接受，成了普世的或全球通用的，并且是当今对神的一切认识和承认的源头。凡睁开双眼阅读它的人都会发现，生出所谓《亚他尼修信经》这个遗腹子的尼西亚会议成员将三位一体理解成了多神的三位一体。事实上，不仅他们将三位一体理解成多神的三位一体，整个基督教界也是这样理解的。因为整个基督教界关于神的一切认识皆源于这个信经，每个人都赞成信经上的话所指示的信仰。
如果有人质疑基督教界当今的信仰是多神的三位一体，就让我呼求任意一位证人，无论平信徒还是神职人员，我呼求大学的教师和博士，以及神圣的主教和大主教，着紫袍的红衣主教，甚至罗马教皇本人。让他们各自都思考这个问题，然后说出他们脑海浮现出的想法。若我们顺着对于普遍所接受的神之教义的这些话追寻下去，这一点岂不像水晶杯里的水那样清晰而透明吗？例如，它声称有三个位格，其中每一位都为神和主；按照基督真理，他们应该承认每一个位格都单独为神和主，但天主教或基督教，或信仰禁止说出或命名三神和主。所以，真理与宗教，或真理与信仰不是一，而是两个相互对立的东西。该信经还有一个附加条款，即非三神和主，乃一神和主。加上这一条是为了防止信经的炮制者们在全世界面前遭人耻笑，因为谁都会嘲笑三个神的观念。谁看不出附加条款中的矛盾呢？
然而，要是他们说，父有一个神性本质，子有一个神性本质，圣灵亦有一个神性本质，但并非三个神性本质，而是一个不可分割的神性本质，那么这个秘密就能解释清楚了。我们可以将父理解为源头的神性，子是来自这一源头的神性人，圣灵是从这二者所发出的神性，因为这三者皆属于一位神。或者，若我们将父的神性理解为类似人的灵魂之物，将神性人理解为类似属灵魂的身体之物，将圣灵理解为类似从这二者所发出的活动之物，那么，这三个本质就容易理解了，因为它们属于同一个位格，从而构成一个不可分割的本质。
172. (4)在概念層面, 自永遠(意思指創世之先)就有三個神性位格的三一, 意味著思想三位上帝的三一; 這種想法不可能僅因著口頭承認一位上帝而被消除。
從以下引自『亞他尼修信經』的文字, 可非常明顯地看出, 自永遠而有的三個神性位格之三一, 就是三位上帝的三一(即三位一體):父是一位, 子是另一位, 聖靈是另一位。父是上帝和主, 子是上帝和主, 聖靈是上帝和主。然而並非三位上帝和主, 只有一位上帝和主。即使基督徒真理迫使我等去承認每一位各自是上帝和主, 但大公之信仰禁止我等去說三位上帝和主。
此信經已被普世或全世界的基督徒教會接受, 現今所有關於上帝的知識和認知都由此而來。那些尼西亞會議的參會者們, 生下了這個被稱為『亞他尼修信經』的"遺腹子", 將三一理解為三位上帝的三一。任何一個, 只要他睜眼讀一讀這個信經, 都會看到三位上帝的三一理論。於是接下來, 不但是他們這樣理解, 如今基督徒世界都是認知為三位一體, 因為關於上帝的概念全都來自於這個信經, 並且每個信徒的信仰都是以這些話為基礎。
[2]倘若任何人懷疑當今基督徒世界通行"三位一體"的教義, 讓我訴諸于任一見證人。平信徒好好, 牧師也罷; 大學老師和教授也好, 主教和大主教也罷; 紅衣主教, 甚至教宗自己也行; 請他們每一位思考這些並說出他腦中所示的想法。假如我們順著這個普世接受的教義往下念, 是不是清楚透明如同玻璃缸中的清水？例如, 它聲明有三位, 他們每一位是上帝和主; 按著基督徒的真理, 他們當承認或接受每一位自己是上帝和主, 但被大公宗教或信仰禁止說有或叫出三位上帝和主。於是, 真理和宗教, 或真理和信仰, 就不是一, 而是兩個相互對立的事情。
此信經的作者加上一個落款:只有一位上帝和主, 沒有三位上帝和主。這只不過是為了避免在全世界面前被嘲笑而已。因為誰都會笑話三位上帝的概念, 誰看不出來所加條款是何等的矛盾呢？
[3]然而, 如果他們說:父有神性本質, 子有神性本質, 聖靈有神性本質, 但並不是三個神性本質, 而是一個不可分開的神性本質, 那麼這個奧秘就能夠解釋了。確切地講, 理解為父是起源之神性, 子作為神性之人,從父之神性而來, 聖靈是從祂們的神性發出, 這三者屬於一位上帝。又或之前所說, 我們理解為:父之神性如同人的靈魂, 神性之人如同屬於那靈魂的身體, 聖靈則如同從靈魂和身體發出的活動, 於是這三要素就可以理解為屬於同一個人, 構成一個不可分割的本體。
172. 4. At a conceptual level, the idea of a trinity of divine persons from eternity (meaning before the world was created) is a trinity of gods. This idea is impossible to wipe out just by orally confessing one God. The following words in the Athanasian Creed make it very obvious that a trinity of divine persons from eternity is a trinity of gods: "The Father is one person, the Son another, and the Holy Spirit another. The Father is God and Lord, the Son is God and Lord, and the Holy Spirit is God and Lord. Nevertheless there are not three gods and lords; there is one God and Lord. Just as Christian truth compels us to confess each person individually as God and Lord, so the catholic religion forbids us to say three gods or three lords. "
This creed has been accepted by the entire Christian church as ecumenical or universal. Today everything known and acknowledged about God comes from it. Those who took part in the Council of Nicaea that gave birth to this posthumous child called the Athanasian Creed had no other concept of the Trinity except a trinity of gods, as any can see who merely keep their eyes open as they read it. Since then they have not been the only people thinking in terms of a trinity of gods; the Christian world thinks in terms of no other Trinity because its whole concept of God comes from that creed and everyone now lives in a faith based on those words.
[2] I submit it as a challenge to everyone - both laity and clergy, laureled professors and doctors as well as consecrated bishops and archbishops, even cardinals robed in scarlet and in fact the Roman pope himself - that the Christian world nowadays thinks of no other Trinity except a trinity of gods. You should all examine yourselves and then speak on the basis of the images in your mind.
The words of this creed - the universally accepted teaching about God - make it as clear and obvious as water in a crystal bowl. For example, the creed says that there are three persons, each of whom is God and Lord. It also says that because of Christian truth, people ought to confess or acknowledge that each person is individually God and Lord, but that the catholic or Christian religion or faith forbids us to say three gods or lords. This would mean that truth and religion, or truth and faith, are not the same thing; they are at odds with each other.
The writers of the creed added the point that there is one God and Lord, not three gods and lords, so that they would not be exposed to ridicule before the whole world. Who would not laugh at three gods? On the other hand, though, anyone can see the contradiction in the phrase they added.
[3] If instead they had said that the Father has a divine essence, the Son has a divine essence, and the Holy Spirit has a divine essence, but nevertheless there are not three divine essences, there is one indivisible essence, then that mystery would be explainable. That is, "the Father" means the divine nature as an origin, "the Son" means the divine-human nature that came from that origin, and "the Holy Spirit" means the divine influence that radiates out. These are three aspects of one God. Another way of putting it is that the Father's divinity means something like the soul in us, the divine-human manifestation means something like our body, which comes from our soul, and the Holy Spirit means something like our actions, which come from both our body and our soul. Then we see three essences that belong to one and the same person. Together they form one indivisible essence.
172. (iv) A TRINITY OF DIVINE PERSONS FROM ETERNITY, OR EXISTING BEFORE THE CREATION OF THE WORLD, IMPLIES THINKING ABOUT A TRINITY OF GODS; AND THIS THOUGHT CANNOT BE BANISHED BY A VERBAL CONFESSION OF BELIEF IN ONE GOD.
It is perfectly plain from the following passage in the Athanasian Creed that a Trinity of Divine persons from eternity is a Trinity of Gods:
There is one person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Spirit. The Father is God and Lord, the Son is God and Lord, and the Holy Spirit is God and Lord; yet there are not three Gods and Lords, but one God and Lord, because just as we are forced by Christian verity to confess each person singly to be God and Lord, so we are forbidden by the catholic religion to speak of three Gods or three Lords.
This creed has been accepted by the whole Christian church as worldwide and universal, and it is the source of all current knowledge and acknowledgment of God. Anyone who reads it merely with his eyes open can see that the members of the Council of Nicaea, which gave birth as it were posthumously to the so-called Athanasian Creed, understood the Trinity as a Trinity of Gods. It follows that not only did they understand the Trinity as a Trinity of Gods, but that no other idea of the Trinity is current in the Christian world, because this creed is the source from which all gain their knowledge of God, and everyone subscribes to the belief indicated by its wording.
[2] If anyone doubts that the current belief of the Christian world is in a Trinity of Gods, let me appeal to any witness, lay as well as clerical, to the masters and doctors of universities as well as consecrated bishops and archbishops, and to cardinals in their purple, indeed to the Roman Pontiff himself. Let each consider the matter and then pronounce as the ideas in his mind dictate. Is it not as clear and transparent as water in a crystal goblet, if we follow the words of this universally accepted doctrine about God? For instance, it states that there are three persons, and each of these is God and Lord; and that in accordance with Christian verity they ought to confess or acknowledge each person singly as God and Lord, but the catholic or Christian religion or faith prohibits speaking of or naming three Gods and Lords. So verity and religion, or verity and faith, are not one, but two mutually opposed things. The additional clause, that there are not three Gods and Lords, but one God and Lord, has been inserted to prevent its authors being exposed to ridicule before the whole world, for anyone would laugh at the idea of three Gods. Can anyone fail to see the contradiction in this addition?
[3] If, however, they had said that the Father had a Divine essence, the Son had a Divine essence and the Holy Spirit had a Divine essence, but there were not three Divine essences, but a single and indivisible one, then this mystery might have been capable of explanation, to be precise, by understanding the Father as the originating Divine, the Son as the Divine Human from that origin, and the Holy Spirit as the Divine which proceeds from them, since these three belong to a single God. Or again, if we understand by the Father's Divine something resembling the soul in man, by the Divine Human something resembling the body belonging to that soul, and by the Holy Spirit something resembling the activity which comes from both, then the three essences become intelligible as belonging to one and the same person, and so making up a single, indivisible essence.
172. (4) In the ideas of thought a Trinity of Divine Persons from eternity, or before the world was created, is a Trinity of Gods; and these ideas cannot be effaced by, a lip-confession of one God. That a trinity of Divine persons from eternity is a trinity of Gods is clearly evident from the following passage in the Athanasian Creed: "There is one person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Spirit; the Father is God and Lord; the Son is God and Lord; and the Holy Spirit is God and Lord; nevertheless there are not three Gods and Lords, but one God and Lord; for as we are compelled by the Christian verity to confess each person singly to be God and Lord, so are we forbidden by the Catholic religion to say three Gods or three Lords." This creed is accepted as ecumenical or universal by the whole Christian church, and all that is at this day known and acknowledged respecting God is from it. That no other trinity than a trinity of Gods was understood by the members of the Nicene Council, from which the Athanasian Creed came forth like a posthumous birth, anyone can see who reads it with his eyes open. And not only was the trinity understood by them to be a trinity of Gods, it was so understood by the whole Christian world as well, for the reason that the whole Christian world derives all its knowledge of God from that source, and every man clings to a belief in its words.
[2] I appeal to everyone, layman and clergyman, to titled masters and professors, consecrated bishops and arch-bishops, purple-robed cardinals, and even the Roman pontiff himself, whether in the Christian world today the trinity is understood to be anything else than a trinity of Gods; let everyone of them consult with himself and speak from the things that are in his mind; for from the words of this universally accepted doctrine respecting God this is as manifest and clear as water in a crystal goblet, and also that there are three persons, each one of whom is God and Lord; and further that according to Christian verity each person singly ought to be confessed or acknowledged to be God and Lord, but that the Catholic or Christian religion or faith forbids the saying or naming three Gods and Lords; thus verity and religion, or verity and faith, are not one thing but two things, each contrary to the other. But lest all this should be exposed to ridicule before the whole world it was added that there are not three Gods and Lords, but one God and Lord; for who would not laugh at the idea of three Gods? And still does not everyone see the contradiction in this addition?
[3] If they had said, indeed, that to the Father belongs the Divine essence, to the Son the Divine essence, and to the Holy Spirit the Divine essence, and yet there are not three Divine essences, but one indivisible essence, that is to say, if by the Father there be understood the Divine from whom [a Quo], by the Son the Divine Human therefrom, and by the Holy Spirit the proceeding Divine, which are the three constituents of the one God, then this mystery would be explicable. Or if we understood by the Divine of the Father what is like the soul in man, and by the Divine Human what is like the body of that soul, and by the Holy Spirit what is like the operation that proceeds from both, then three essences, which belong to one and the same person, and so together constitute one indivisible essence, are understood.
172. (4) A TRINITY OF DIVINE PERSONS FROM ETERNITY, OR BEFORE THE WORLD WAS CREATED, IS IN IDEA A TRINITY OF GODS; AND THIS IDEA CANNOT BE REMOVED BY THE ORAL CONFESSION OF ONE GOD.
That a trinity of Divine Persons from eternity is a trinity of gods is plainly evident from the following passage in the Athanasian Creed: 1
"There is one Person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Ghost. The Father is God and Lord, the Son is God and Lord, and the Holy Ghost is God and Lord; nevertheless there are not three gods and lords, but one God and Lord; for as we are compelled by Christian verity to acknowledge each Person by Himself to be God and Lord, so are we forbidden by the Catholic religion to say there are three gods or three lords."
This creed is received as ecumenical, or universal by the whole Christian Church, and from it is derived all that is at this day known and acknowledged concerning God. Every one who reads this creed with his eyes open may see that only a trinity of gods was understood by those who formed the Nicene Council, from which came forth, as a posthumous production, this Athanasian Creed. That not only was a trinity of gods understood by them, but also that no other trinity is understood throughout the Christian world, follows from the fact that all its knowledge of God is derived from that creed, to which every one pays literal obedience.
[2] I appeal to every one, whether layman or clergyman, both learned masters and doctors of divinity consecrated bishops and archbishops, to purple-robed cardinals, even to the Roman Pontiff himself, whether any other trinity than a trinity of gods is at the present day understood in the Christian world.
Let each one consult himself, and then declare the ideas he has formed. From the words of this generally received doctrine concerning God it is as manifest and clear as water in a crystal cup, that there are three Persons, each of whom is God and Lord; also that according to Christian verity men ought to confess or acknowledge each Person separately to be God and Lord, but that the Catholic or Christian religion or faith forbids them to say or name three gods and lords; and thus that verity and religion, or truth and faith, are not one thing, but two, at variance with one another. Moreover it was added that there are not three gods and lords, but one God and Lord, lest they should be exposed to the ridicule of the whole world, for who can forbear derision at the idea of three gods? Who does not see the contradiction in this addition?
[3] If, however, they had said that the Divine Essence belongs to the Father, and the Divine Essence to the Son, and the Divine Essence to the Holy Spirit, and that there are not three Divine Essences, but that the Divine Essence is one and indivisible, then this mystery would be comprehensible; that is, when by the Father is understood the originating Divine, by the Son the Divine Human therefrom, and by the Holy Spirit the proceeding Divine, which are the three constituents of one God; or if the Divine of the Father is understood to be like the soul in man, the Divine Human like the body of that soul, and the Holy Spirit like the operation proceeding from both, then indeed three essences are understood, but they belong to one and the same Person, and thus constitute one indivisible Essence.
Footnotes:
1. Athanasian Symbol or Creed. Although bearing the name of Athanasius, it was probably composed by Hilary, in the century after the formulation of the Nicene Creed, A.D. 325. The name was given to it about the year A.D. 670 as an excellent system of the doctrines of Athansius concerning the Trinity and the Incarnation, principally in opposition to the Arians. It is received by the Romish Church and also by the Reformed.
172. IV. QUOD TRINITAS DIVINARUM PERSONARUM AB AETERNO, SEU ANTE MUNDUM CREATUM, SIT IN IDEIS COGITATIONIS TRINITAS DEORUM, ET QUOD HAEC NON ABOLERI POSSIT PER CONFESSIONEM ORALEM UNIUS DEI. Quod Trinitas Divinarum Personarum ab aeterno sit Trinitas Deorum, manifeste constat ex his in Symbolo Athanasiano; Alia est Persona Patris, alia Filii, et alia Spiritus sancti: Deus et Dominus est Pater, Deus et Dominus est Filius, ac Deus et Dominus est Spiritus Sanctus; sed tamen non tres Dii et Domini sunt, sed unus Deus et Dominus: quia sicut singulatim unamquamque Personam Deum et Dominum confiteri, Christiana veritate compellimur, ita tres Deos aut tres Dominos dicere, Catholica Religione prohibemur: hoc Symbolum ut Oecumenicum seu universale a tota Ecclesia Christiana receptum est, et omne quod hodie scitur de Deo et agnoscitur, inde est; quod ab illis, qui fuerunt in Concilio Nicaeno, a quo symbolum, quod vocatur Athanasianum, ut foetus posthumus, prodiit, non alia Trinitas, quam Trinitas Deorum, intellecta fuerit, quisque qui modo apertis oculis illud legit, videre potest: quod Trinitas Deorum non modo ab illis intellecta fuerit, sed etiam quod non alia Trinitas in Christiano Orbe intelligatur, sequitur, quia inde est omnis cognitio de Deo, et quisque manet in fide verborum ibi.
[2] Quod non alia Trinitas quam Trinitas Deorum hodie in Christiano Orbe intelligatur, provoco ad quemcunque, tam Laicum quam Clericum, tam ad laureatos Magistros et Doctores, quam ad consecratos Episcopos et Archiepiscopos, et quoque ad purpuratos Cardinales, imo ad ipsum Pontificem Romanum; consulat se quisque, et tunc eloquatur ex ideis mentis suae; ex verbis hujus universaliter receptae Doctrinae de Deo, hoc tam manifestum et diaphanum est, sicut aqua per Chrystallinum Schyphum; ut quod sint tres Personae, et unaquaevis illarum sit Deus et Dominus; tum quod ex Veritate Christiana singulatim unamquamque Personam Deum et Dominum debeant confiteri seu agnoscere, sed quod Religio seu Fides Catholica aut Christiana prohibeat tres Deos et Dominos dicere seu nominare; et sic quod Veritas et Religio, seu veritas et fides, non res una sint, sed res duae sibi contrariantes. Quod autem adjectum sit, quod non tres Dii et Domini sint, sed unus Deus et Dominus, factum est, ne coram Universo Mundo exponerentur risui, nam quis non cachinnaret ad tres Deos; sed quis non videt contradictionem in adjecto.
[3] Si autem dixissent, quod Divina Essentia sit Patri, Divina Essentia Filio, et Divina Essentia Spiritui 1 Sancto, sed quod non tres Essentiae Divinae sint, sed una et individua, tunc mysterium illud explicabile esset, videlicet dum per Patrem intelligitur Divinum a quo, per Filium Divinum Humanum inde, et per Spiritum Sanctum Divinum procedens, quae tria Unius Dei sunt; aut si per Divinum Patris simile intelligitur quod apud hominem per Animam, per Divinum Humanum simile quod per Corpus illius animae, et per Spiritum Sanctum simile quod per Operationem, quae ab utroque procedit, tunc intelliguntur tres essentiae, quae unius ejusdemque Personae sunt, et sic simul unam et individuam Essentiam faciunt.
Footnotes:
1. Prima editio: Spiritus.