Novatian, Trinity, Modalism, Hypostatic Union

The quotations which I will cite here are taken from Novatian's Treatise Concerning the Trinity. All emphasis will be mine.

Novatian sets forth biblical texts to refute the modalist lie that Jesus is the Father. He instead proves that the Father, Son and Spirit are personally distinct and yet one and the same Divinity. Novatian also demonstrates that the Son is fully God and fully human, being one eternal divine Person who became flesh from the Holy Virgin.

What makes Novatian’s apologetic so remarkable is that he cites a plethora of Old Testament texts, not just New Testaments, to prove both the Divinity of our risen Lord and the Triunity of God. He will quote verses such as Psalm 110:1, Hosea 1:6-7, Romans 9:5, etc., to set forth the doctrine of the Trinity, Hypostatic Union and so on.

With the foregoing in view, I now turn to Novatian’s response.

Chapter 12

That Christ is God, is Proved by the Authority of the Old Testament Scriptures.

Why, then, should we hesitate to say what Scripture does not shrink from declaring? Why shall the truth of faith hesitate in that wherein the authority of Scripture has never hesitated? For, behold, Hosea the prophet_says in the person of the Father:I will not now save them by bow, nor by horses, nor by horsemen; but I will save them by the Lord their God._ Hosea 1:7 If God says that He saves by God_, still God does not save except by Christ. Why, then, should man hesitate to call Christ_ God_, when he observes that He is declared to be God by the Father according to the_ Scriptures_? Yea, if_ God_the Father does not save except by_ God_, no one can be saved by_ God_the Father unless he shall have confessed Christ to be_ God_, in whom and by whom the Father promises that He will give him_ salvation: so that, reasonably, whoever acknowledges Him to be God, may find salvation in Christ God; whoever does not acknowledge Him to be God, would lose salvation which he could not find elsewhere than in Christ God. For in the same way as Isaiah says, Behold, a virgin_shall conceive and bear a son, and you shall call His name_ Emmanuel_, which is, interpreted, God with us_ ; Isaiah 7:14 so Christ Himself says, Lo, I am with you, even to the consummation of the world. Matthew 28:20 Therefore He is God with us; yea, and much rather, He is in us. Christ is with us, therefore it is He whose name is God with us, because He also is with us ; or is He not with us? How then does He say that He is with us? He, then, is with us. But because He is with us He was called Emmanuel_, that is, God with us._ God_, therefore, because He is with us, was called God with us_ , The same prophet says: Be strengthened, you relaxed hands, and you feeble knees; be consoled, you that are cowardly in heart; be strong; fear_not. Lo, our God shall return judgment; He Himself shall come, and shall save you: then shall the eyes of the blind be opened, and the ears of the deaf shall hear; then shall the lame man leap as an hart, and the tongue of the dumb shall be eloquent_. Since the prophet says that at God's advent these should be the signs which come to pass; let men acknowledge either that Christ is the Son of God, at whose advent and by whom these wonders of healings were performed; or, overcome by the truth of Christ's divinity, let them rush into the other heresy, and refusing to confess Christ to be the Son of God, and God, let them declare Him to be the Father.

For, being bound by the words of the prophets_, they can no longer deny Christ to be God. What, then, do they reply when those signs are said to be about to take place on the advent of_ God_, which were manifested on the advent of Christ? In what way do they receive Christ as God? For now they cannot deny Him to be God_. As God the Father, or as God the Son? If as the Son, why do they deny that the Son of God is God? If as the Father, why do they not follow those who appear to maintain blasphemies of that kind? Unless because in this contest against them concerning the truth, this is in the meantime sufficient for us, that, being convinced in any kind of way, they should confess Christ to be God, seeing they have even wished to deny that He is God. He says by Habakkuk the prophet: God shall come from the south, and the Holy One from the dark and dense mountain. Whom do they wish to represent as coming from the south? If they say that it is the Almighty God the Father, then God the Father comes from a place, from which place, moreover, He is thus excluded, and He is bounded within the straitnesses of some abode; and thus by such as these, as we have said, the sacrilegious__ heresy_of Sabellius is embodied_. Since Christ is believed to be not the Son, but the Father; since by them He is asserted to be in strictness a bare man, in a new manner, by those, again, Christ is proved to be God the Father Almighty. But if in Bethlehem, the region of which local division looks towards the southern portion of heaven, Christ is born, who by the Scriptures_is also said to be_ God_, this God is rightly described as coming from the south, because He was foreseen as about to come from_ Bethlehem. Let them, then, choose of the two alternatives, the one that they prefer, that He who came from the south is the Son, or the Father; for God is said to be about to come from the south. If the Son_, why do they shrink from calling Him Christ and God? For the_ Scripture_says that God shall come_. If the Father, why do they shrink from being associated with the boldness of Sabellius, who says that Christ is the Father? Unless because, whether they call Him Father or Son, from his heresy, however unwillingly, they must needs withdraw if they are accustomed to say that Christ is merely man; when compelled by the facts themselves, they are on the eve of exalting Him as God, whether in wishing to call Him Father or in wishing to call Him Son.

Chapter 13

That the Same Truth is Proved from the Sacred Writings of the New Covenant.

And thus also John, describing the nativity of Christ, says: The Word_was_ made flesh_, and dwelt among us, and we saw His_ glory_, the_ glory_as of the only begotten of the_ Father_, full Of_ grace_and_ truth_… For, moreover, His name is called the_ Word of God_,_ Revelation 19:13 and not without reason. My heart has emitted a good word ; which word He subsequently calls by the name of the King inferentially, I will tell my works to the King. For by Him were made all the works, and without Him was nothing made. John 1:3 Whether says the apostle they be thrones or dominations, or powers, or mights, visible things and invisible, all things subsist by Him. Colossians 1:16 Moreover, this is that word which came unto His own, and His own received Him not. For the world was made by Him, and the world knew_Him not_. John 1:10-11 Moreover, this Word was in the beginning with God_, and God was the Word_. John 1:1 Who then can doubt, when in the last clause it is said, The Word_was_ made flesh_, and dwelt among us_ , that Christ, whose is the nativity, and because He was made flesh, is man; and because He is the Word of God, who can shrink from declaring without hesitation that He is God_, especially when he considers the evangelical Scripture, that it has associated both of these substantial natures into one concord of the nativity of Christ_? For He it is who as a bride-groom goes forth from his bride-chamber; He exulted as a giant to run his way. His going forth is from the end of the heaven, and His return unto the ends of it. Because, even to the highest, not any one has ascended into heaven save He who came down from heaven, the Son of man__who is in heaven__. John 3:13 Repeating this same thing, He says: Father, glorify me with that glory_wherewith I was with You before the world was_. And if this Word came down from heaven as a bridegroom to the flesh, that by the assumption of flesh He might ascend there as the Son of man_, whence the_ Son of God_had descended as the Word, reasonably, while by the mutual connection both flesh wears the_ Word of God_, and the_ Son of God_assumes the frailty of the flesh; when the flesh being espoused ascending there, whence without the flesh it had descended, it at length receives that_ glory_which in being shown to have had before the foundation of the world, it is most manifestly_ proved_. to be God_. And, nevertheless, while the world itself is said to have been founded after Him, it is found to have been created by Him; by that very divinity in Him whereby, the world was made, both His glory_and His authority are_ proved_. Moreover, if, whereas it is the property of none but God to_ know_the secrets of the heart, Christ beholds the secrets of the heart; and if, whereas it belongs to none but God to remit_ sins_, the same Christ remits_ sins_; and if, whereas it is the portion of no man to come from heaven, He descended by coming from heaven; and if, whereas this word can be_ true_of no man,I and the Father are one , John 10:30_Christ alone declared this word out of the consciousness of His divinity; and if, finally, the Apostle Thomas, instructed in all the proofs_and conditions of_ Christ's_divinity, says in reply to_ Christ_,My Lord and my_ God_;_ John 20:28_and if, besides, the_ Apostle Paul_says,Whose are the fathers, and of whom Christ came according to the flesh, who is over all, God blessed for evermore , Romans 9:5_writing in his epistles; and if the same apostle declares that he was ordained an apostle not by men__, nor of__ man__, but by__ Jesus Christ_; and if the same contends that he learned the_ Gospel__not from men or by man, but received it from__ Jesus Christ_, reasonably Christ is_ God.

Therefore, in this respect, one of two things must needs be established. For since it is evident that all things were made by Christ, He is either before all things, since all things were by Him, and so He is justly__ God; or because He is man He is subsequent to all things, and justly nothing was made by Him. But we cannot say that nothing was made by Him, when we observe it written that all things were made by Him. He is not therefore subsequent to all things; that is, He is not man only, who is subsequent to all things, but God also, since God is prior to all things. For He is before all things, because all things are by Him, while if He were only man, nothing would be by Him; or if all things were by Him, He would not be man only, because if He were only man, all things would not be by Him; nay, nothing would be by Him. What, then, do they reply? That nothing is by Him, so that He is man only? How then are all things by Him? Therefore He is not man only, but God also, since all things are by Him ; so that we reasonably ought to understand that Christ is not man only, who is subsequent to all things, but God also, since by Him all things were made. For how can you say that He is man only, when you see Him also in the flesh, unless because when both aspects are considered, both truths are rightly believed?…

Chapter 17.

It Is, Moreover, Proved by Moses in the Beginning of the Holy Scriptures.

What if Moses pursues this same rule of truth, and delivers to us in the beginning of his sacred writings, this principle by which we may learn that all things were created and founded by the Son of God_, that is, by the_ Word of God? For He says the same that John and the rest say; nay, both John and the others are perceived to have received from Him what they say. For if John says, All things were made by Him, and without Him was nothing made , the prophet David too says, I tell my works to the King. Moses, moreover, introduces God commanding that there should be light at the first, that the heaven should be established, that the waters should be gathered into one place, that the dry land should appear, that the fruit should be brought forth according to its seed, that the animals should be produced, that lights should be established in heaven, and stars. He shows that none other was then present to God — by whom these works were commanded that they should be made — than He by whom all things were made, and without whom nothing was made. And if He is the Word of God— for my heart has uttered forth a good Word — He shows that in the beginning the Word was , and that this Word was with the Father, and besides that the Word was God_, and that all things were made by Him. Moreover, this_ Word_was_ made flesh_and dwelt among us, — to wit, Christ the_ Son of God; whom both on receiving subsequently as man according to the flesh, and seeing before the foundation of the world to be the Word of God_, and_ God_, we reasonably, according to the instruction of the Old and_ New Testament_,_ believe_and hold to be as well God as man, Christ Jesus_. What if the same Moses introduces God saying, Let us make man after our image and likeness ; and below, And God made man; in the image of God made He him, male and female made He them? If, as we have already shown, it is the Son of God_by whom all things were made, certainly it was the_ Son of God_by whom also man was ordained, on whose account all things were made_. Moreover, when God commands that man should be made, He is said to be God who makes man; but the Son of God_makes man, that is to say, the_ Word of God_,by whom all things were made, and without whom nothing was made. And this_ Word__was__ made flesh__, and dwelt among us_ : therefore Christ is God; therefore man was made by Christ as by the_ Son of God. But God made man in the image of God; He is therefore God who made man in the image of God; therefore Christ is God: so that with reason neither does the testimony of the Old Testament_waver concerning the person of_ Christ_, being supported by the manifestation of the_ New Testament; nor is the power of the New Testament detracted from, while its truth is resting on the roots of the same Old Testament. Whence they who presume Christ the Son of God and man to be only man, and not God also, do so in opposition to both Old and New Testaments, in that they corrupt the authority and the truth_both of the Old and New Testaments_. What if the same Moses everywhere introduces God the Father infinite and without end, not as being enclosed in any place, but as one who includes every place; nor as one who is in a place, but rather one in whom every place is, containing all things and embracing all things, so that with reason He can neither descend nor ascend, because He Himself both contains and fills all things, and yet nevertheless introduces God descending to consider the tower which the sons of men were building, asking and saying , Come ; and then, Let us go down and there confound their tongues, that each one may not understand the words of his neighbour. Whom do they pretend here to have been the God who descended to that tower, and asking to visit those men at that time? God the Father? Then thus He is enclosed in a place; and how does He embrace all things? Or does He say that it is an angel__descending with__ angels__, and saying__ , Come ; and subsequently, Let us go down and there confound their tongues? And yet in Deuteronomy we observe that God told these things, and that God said, where it is written , When He scattered abroad the children of Adam, He determined the bounds of the nations according to the number of the angels_of_ God. Neither, therefore, did the Father descend, as the subject itself indicates; nor did an angel__command these things, as the fact shows__. Then it remains that He must have descended, of whom the Apostle Paul_says,He who descended is the same who ascended above all the heavens, that He might fill all things , that is, the Son of God, the_ Word of God_. But the_ Word of God_was made flesh, and dwelt among us. This must be Christ. Therefore Christ must be declared to be God_.

Chapter 18.

Moreover Also, from the Fact that He Who Was Seen of Abraham is Called God**; Which Cannot Be Understood of the Father, Whom No Man Hath Seen at Any Time; But of the Son in the Likeness of an Angel.**

Behold, the same Moses tells us in another place that God was seen of Abraham. And yet the same Moses hears from God, that no man can see God and live. If God cannot be seen, how was God seen? Or if He was seen, how is it that He cannot be seen? For John also says, No man has seen God at any time ; and the Apostle Paul, Whom no man has seen, nor can see. But certainly the Scripture_does not lie; therefore,_ truly_, God was seen. Whence it may be understood that it was not the Father who was seen, seeing that He never was seen;but the_ Son__, who has both been accustomed to descend, and to be seen because He has descended__. For He is the image of the invisible God, as the imperfection and frailty of the human condition was accustomed sometimes even then to see God the Father in the image of God, that is, in the Son of God. For gradually and by progression human frailty was to be strengthened by the image to that glory of being able one day to see God the Father. For the things that are great are dangerous if they are sudden. For even the sudden light of the sun after darkness, with its too great splendour, will not make manifest the light of day to unaccustomed eyes, but will rather strike them with blindness.

And lest this should occur to the injury of human eyes, the darkness is broken up and scattered by degrees; and the rising of that luminary, mounting by small and unperceived increments, gently accustoms men's eyes to bear its full orb by the gentle increase of its rays. Thus, therefore, Christ also — that is, the image of God, and the Son of God— is looked upon by men, inasmuch as He could be seen. And thus the weakness and imperfection of the human destiny is nourished, led up, and educated by Him; so that, being accustomed to look upon the Son, it may one day be able to see God the Father Himself also as He is, that it may not be stricken by His sudden and intolerable brightness, and be hindered from being able to see God the Father, whom it has always desired. Wherefore it is the Son who is seen; but the Son of God_is the_ Word of God_: and the_ Word of God_was made flesh, and dwelt among us; and this is_ Christ_. What in the world is the reason that we should hesitate to call Him_ God_, who in so many ways is acknowledged to be_ proved_God_? And if, moreover, the angel meets with Hagar, Sarah's maid, driven from her home as well as turned away, near the fountain of water in the way to Shur; asks and learns the reason of her flight, and after that offers her advice that she should humble herself; and, moreover, gives her the hope of the name of mother, and pledges and promises that from her womb there should be a numerous seed, and that she should have Ishmael to be born from her; and with other things unfolds the place of his habitation, and describes his mode of life; yet Scripture sets forth this angel__as both Lord and God — for He would not have promised the blessing of seed unless the__ angel__had also been God__. Let them ask what the heretics can make of this present passage. Was that the Father that was seen by Hagar or not? For He is declared to be God. But far be it from us to call God_the Father an_ angel_, lest He should be subordinate to another whose_ angel_He would be.But they will say that it was an_ angel__. How then shall He be God if He was an__ angel_?_ Since this name is nowhere conceded to angels, except that on either side the truth compels us into this opinion, that we ought to understand it to have been God the Son__, who, because He is of__ God__, is rightly called__ God__, because He is the__ Son of God__. But, because He is subjected to the__ Father__, and the Announcer of the Father's will, He is declared to be the Angel of Great Counsel. Therefore, although this passage neither is suited to the person of the__ Father__, lest He should be called an__ angel__, nor to the person of an__ angel__, lest he should be called__ God__; yet it is suited to the person of Christ that He should be both God because He is the__ Son of God__, and should be an__ angel__because He is the Announcer of the Father's mind__. And the heretics ought to understand that they are setting themselves against the Scriptures, in that, while they say that they believe Christ to have been also an angel, they are unwilling to declare Him to have been also God, when they read in the Old Testament that He often came to visit the human race.

To this, moreover, Moses_added the instance of God seen of_ Abraham_at the oak of Mature, when he was sitting at the opening of his tent at noon-day_. And nevertheless, although he had beheld three men, note that he called one of them Lord; and when he had washed their feet, he offers them bread baked on the ashes, with butter and abundance of milk itself, and urges them that, being detained as guests, they should eat. And after I this he hears also that he should be a father, and learns that Sarah his wife should bring forth a son by him; and acknowledges concerning the destruction of the people of Sodom, what they deserve to suffer; and learns that God had come down on account of the cry of Sodom. in which place, if they will have it that the Father was seen at that time to have been received with hospitality in company with two angels, the heretics have believed the Father to be visible. But if an angel_, although of the three_ angels_one is called Lord, why, although it is not usual, is an_ angel_called God_? Unless because, in order that His proper invisibility may be restored to the Father, and the proper inferiority be remitted to the angel, it was only God the Son_, who also is_ God_, who was seen by_ Abraham_, and was_ believed_to have been received with hospitality_. For He anticipated sacramentally what He was hereafter to become. He was made a of Abraham, being about to be among the sons of Abraham. And his children's feet, by way of proving what He was, He washed; returning in the children the claim of hospitality which formerly the Father had put out to interest to Him. Whence also, that there might be no doubt but that it was He who was the of Abraham_on the destruction of the people of_ Sodom_, it is declared:Then the Lord rained upon_ Sodom__and upon Gomorrha fire and brimstone from the Lord out of heaven_. For thus also said the prophet_in the person of God:I have overthrown you, as the Lord overturned Sodom and Gomorrha_. Therefore the Lord overturned_ Sodom_, that is, God overturned_ Sodom_; but in the overturning of_ Sodom_, the Lord rained fire from the Lord. And this Lord was the God seen by_ Abraham_; and this God was the of_ Abraham_, certainly seen because He was also touched_.

But although the Father, being invisible, was assuredly not at that time seen, He who was accustomed to be touched and seen was seen and received to hospitality. But this the Son of God_,The Lord rained from the Lord upon_ Sodom and Gomorrha__brimstone and fire_. And this is the Word of God.And the_ Word of God__was made flesh, and dwelt among us_ ; and this is Christ. It was not the_ Father_, then, who was a with_ Abraham_, but Christ. Nor was it the Father who was seen then, but the Son; and Christ was seen. Rightly, therefore, Christ is both Lord and_ God_, who was not otherwise seen by_ Abraham_, except that as_ God the Word_He was begotten of_ God_the Father before_ Abraham_himself_. Moreover, says the Scripture, the same Angel and God visits and consoles the same Hagar when driven with her son from the dwelling of Abraham. For when in the desert she had exposed the infant, because the water had fallen short from the pitcher; and when the lad had cried out, and she had lifted up her weeping and lamentation, God_heard_ , says the Scripture, the voice of the lad from the place where he was. Having told that it was God who heard the voice of the infant, it adds: And the angel_of the Lord called Hagar herself out of heaven_ , saying that that was an angel_whom it had called_ God_, and pronouncing Him to be Lord whom it had set forth as an_ angel_; which Angel and God moreover promises to Hagar herself greater consolations, in saying_ , Fear not; for I have heard the voice of the lad from the place where he was. Arise, take up the lad, and hold him; for I will make of him a great nation. Why does this angel, if angel only, claim to himself this right of saying, I will make of him a great nation , since assuredly this kind of power belongs to God_, and cannot belong to an_ angel_?_ Whence also He is confirmed to be God, since He is able to do this; because, by way of proving this very point, it is immediately added by the Scripture: And God opened her eyes, and she saw a well of running water; and she went and filled the bottle from the well, and gave to the lad: and God was with the lad. If, then, this God was with the Lord, who opened the eyes of Hagar that she might see the well of running water, and might draw the water on account of the urgent need of the lad's thirst, and this God who calls her from heaven is called an angel_when, in previously hearing the voice of the lad crying, He was rather_ God_; is not understood to be other than_ angel_, in like manner as He was God also. And since this cannot be applicable or fitting to the_ Father_, who is God only, but may be applicable to_ Christ_, who is declared to be not only_ God_, but_ angel_also, it manifestly appears that it was not the Father who thus spoke to Hagar, but rather Christ, since He is_ God_; and to Him also is applied the name of_ angel_, since He became the_ angel_of great counsel. And He is the_ angel_, in that He declares the bosom of the_ Father_, as John sets forth_. For if John himself says, that He Himself who sets forth the bosom of the Father, as the Word, became flesh in order to declare the bosom of the Father, assuredly Christ is not only man, but angel_also; and not only_ angel_, but He is shown by the_ Scriptures_to be God also. And this is_ believed_to be the case by us_ ; so that, if we will not consent to apprehend that it was Christ who then spoke to Hagar, we must either make an angel God, or we must reckon God the Father Almighty among the angels.

Chapter 19.

That God Also Appeared to Jacob as an Angel; Namely, the Son of God.

What if in another place also we read in like manner that God was described as an angel_?_ For when, to his wives Leah and Rachel, Jacob complained of the injustice of their father, and when he told them that he desired now to go and return into his own land, he moreover inter posed the authority of his dream; and at this time he says that the angel of God had said to him in a dream, Jacob, Jacob. And I said, says he, What is it? Lift up your eyes, said He, and see, the he-goats and the rams leaping upon the sheep, and the she-goats are black and white, and many-colored, and grizzled, and speckled: for I have seen all that Laban has done to you. I am God_, who appeared to you in the place of_ God_, where you anointed for me there the standing stone, and there vowed a vow unto me: now therefore arise, and go forth from this land, and go unto the land of your nativity, and I will be with you_. If the Angel of God speaks thus to Jacob, and the Angel himself mentions and says,I am God__, who appeared unto you in the house of__ God_, we see without any hesitation that this is declared to be not only an_ angel_, but God also; because He speaks of the vow directed to Himself by Jacob in the place of_ God_, and He does not say, in my place. It is then the place of God, and He also is_ God. Moreover, it is written simply in the place of God, for it is not said in the place of the angel and God, but only of God; and He who promises those things is manifested to be both God and Angel , so that reasonably there must be a distinction between Him who is called God only, and Him who is declared to be not God simply, but Angel also. Whence if so great an authority cannot here be regarded as belonging to any other angel, that He should also avow Himself to be God, and should bear witness that a vow was made to Him, except to Christ alone, to whom not as angel_only, but as to_ God_, a vow can be vowed; it is manifest that it is not to be received as the_ Father_, but as the_ Son_, God and Angel_. Moreover, if this is Christ, as it is, he is in terrible risk who says that Christ is either man or angel alone, withholding from Him the power of the divine name — an authority which He has constantly received on the faith_of the heavenly Scriptures, which continually say that He is both Angel and God_. To all these things, moreover, is added this, that in like manner as the divine Scripture_has frequently declared Him both Angel and_ God_, so the same_ divine Scripture_declares Him also both man and_ God, expressing thereby what He should be, and depicting even then in figure what He was to be in the truth of His substance. For , it says, Jacob remained alone; and there wrestled with him a man even till daybreak. And He saw that He did not prevail against him; and He touched the broad part of Jacob's thigh while He was wrestling with him and he with Him, and said to him, Let me go, for the morning has dawned. And he said, I will not let You go, unless You bless me. And He said, What is your name? And he said, Jacob. And He said to him, Your name shall no longer be called Jacob, but Israel_shall be your name; because you have prevailed with_ God_, and you are powerful with men. And it adds, moreover: And Jacob called the name of that place the Vision of God: for I have seen the Lord face to face, and my_ soul_has been made safe. And the sun arose upon him. Afterwards he crossed over the Vision of_ God_, but he halted upon his thigh_. A man , it says, wrestled with Jacob. If this was a mere man, who is he? Whence is he? Wherefore does he contend and wrestle with Jacob? What had intervened? What had happened? What was the cause of so great a dispute as that, and so great a struggle? Why, moreover, is Jacob, who is found to be strong enough to hold the man with whom he is wrestling, and asks for a blessing from Him whom he is holding, asserted to have asked therefore, except because this struggle was prefigured as that which should be between Christ and the sons of Jacob, which is said to be completed in the Gospel? For against this man Jacob's people struggled, in which struggle Jacob's people was found to be the more powerful, because against Christ it gained the victory of its iniquity: at which time, on account of the crime that it committed, hesitating and giving way, it began most sorely to halt in the walk of its own faith and salvation; and although it was found the stronger, in respect of the condemnation of Christ, it still needs His mercy, still needs His blessing.

But, moreover, the man who wrestled with Jacob says, Moreover, your name shall no longer be called Jacob, but Israel_shall be your name_ ; and if Israel is the man who sees God, the Lord was beautifully showing that it was not only a man who was then wrestling with Jacob, but God also. Certainly Jacob saw God_, with whom he wrestled_ , although he was holding the man in his own struggle. And in order that there might still be no hesitation, He Himself laid down the interpretation by saying, Because you have prevailed with God_, and art powerful with men_. For which reason the same Jacob, perceiving already the force of the Mystery, and apprehending the authority of Him with whom he had wrestled, called the name of that place in which he had wrestled, the Vision of God. He, moreover, superadded the reason for his interpretation being offered of the Vision of God: For I have seen, said he, God_face to face, and my_ soul_has been saved_. Moreover, he saw God_, with whom he wrestled as with a man_ ; but still indeed he held the man as a conqueror, though as an inferior he asked a blessing as from God. Thus he wrestled with God and with man; and thus truly was that struggle prefigured, and in the Gospel was fulfilled, between Christ and the people of Jacob, wherein, although the people had the mastery, yet it proved to be inferior by being shown to be guilty. Who will hesitate to acknowledge that Christ, in whom this type of a wrestling was fulfilled, was not man only, but God also, since even that very type of a wrestling seems to have proved Him man and God? And yet, even after this, the same divine Scripture justly does not cease to call the Angel God, and to pronounce God the Angel. For when this very Jacob was about to bless Manasseh and Ephraim, the sons of Joseph, with his hands placed across on the heads of the lads, he said, The God which fed me from my youth even unto this day, the Angel who delivered me from all evils_, bless these lads._ Even to such a point does he affirm the same Being to be an Angel, whom he had called God, as in the end of his discourse, to express the person of whom he was speaking as one, when he said bless these lads. For if he had meant the one to be understood as God, and the other as an angel, he would have comprised the two persons in the plural number; but now he defined the singular number of one person in the blessing, whence he meant it to be understood that the same person is God and Angel. But yet He cannot be received as God the Father; but as God and Angel, as Christ He can be received. And Him, as the author of this blessing, Jacob also signified by placing his hands crossed upon the lads, as if their father was Christ, and showing, from thus placing his hands, the figure and future form of the passion. Let no one, therefore, who does not shrink from speaking of Christ as an Angel, thus shrink from pronouncing Him God also, when he perceives that He Himself was invoked in the blessing of these lads, by the sacrament of the passion, intimated in the type of the crossed hands, as both God and Angel.

There’s more from Novatian in the next part: Novatian, Trinity, Modalism, Hypostatic Union Pt. 2.