The Trinity And Division

Simplices enim quique, ne dixerim imprudentes et idiotae, quae maior semper credentium pars est, quoniam et ipsa regula fidei a pluribus diis saeculi ad unicum et verum deum transfert, non intellegentes unicum quidem sed cum sua oeconomia esse credendum, expavescunt ad oeconomiam. Numerum et dispositionem trinitatis divisionem praesumunt unitatis, quando unitas ex semetipsa derivans trinitatem non destruatur ab illa sed administretur. Itaque duos et tres iam iactitant a nobis praedicari, se vero unius dei cultores praesumunt, quasi non et unitas irrationaliter collecta haeresim faciat et trinitas rationaliter expensa veritatem constituat. Monarchiam, inquiunt, tenemus et ita sonum ipsum vocaliter exprimunt etiam Latini, et tam opifice ut putes illos tam bene intellegere monarchiam quam enuntiant; sed monarchiam sonare student Latini, oi0konomian  intellegere nolunt etiam Graeci. At ego, si quid utriusque linguae praecerpsi, monarchiam nihil aliud significare scio quam singulare et unicum imperium: non tamen praescribere monarchiam ideo quia unius sit eum cuius sit aut filium non habere aut ipsum se sibi filium fecisse aut monarchiam suam non per quos velit administrare. Atquin nullam dico dominationem ita unius sui esse, ita singularem, ita monarchiam, ut non etiam per alias proximas personas administretur quas ipsa prospexerit officiales sibi:  si vero et filius fuerit ei cuius monarchia sit, non statim dividi eam et monarchiam esse desinere si particeps eius adsumatur et filius, sed proinde illius esse principaliter a quo communicatur in filium, et dum illius est proinde monarchiam esse quae a duobus tam unitis continetur.  Igitur si et monarchia divina per tot legiones et exercitus angelorum administratur sicut scriptum est, Milies centies centena milia adsistebant ei et milies centena milia apparebant ei, nec ideo unius esse desiit, ut desinat monarchia esse quia per tanta milia virtutum procuratur,  quale est ut deus divisionem et dispersionem pati videatur in filio et in spiritu sancto secundum et tertium sortitis locum, tam consortibus substantiae patris, quas non patitur in tot angelorum numero et quidem tam alienorum a substantia Patris? membra et pignora et instrumenta et ipsam vim ac totum censum monarchiae eversionem deputas eius? non recte. Tertullianus, Adversus Praxeam

Certainly the simple, who I will not call unwise and unlearned, who always constitute the majority of the faithful, because the very rule of faith withdraws them from the world's plurality of gods to the one and true God, not understanding that though He is the One He must be believed in with His own economy, are troubled at this arrangement. The number and distribution of the Trinity they assume to be a division of unity when the unity which derives the Trinity out of its own self is not destroyed but actually supported by it. Thus they throw against us that two and three gods are preached by us while they believe themselves to be the true worshipers of the One God, as if the unity itself held irrationally was not productive of heresy, and the Trinity rationally contemplated constituted the truth. They say that we maintain the Monarchy, and as far as the sound is expressed, even Latins pronounce it in such a way that you would think their understanding of the Monarchy was as complete as their pronunciation, but while Latins take care to pronounce the Monarchy, Greeks are unwilling to understand the arrangement. But I, if I have grasped anything of either language, am sure that Monarchy means nothing other than single and individual rule; but even so, this monarchy does not prescribe, because it is of One, Him whose it is, either from having a Son, or from having made for Himself a Son, or from administering His monarchy by as He will. And further I say that no dominion belongs to one only, as his own, or is in such a sense singular, or is in such a sense a monarchy, as not also to be administered through others closely associated with it, and whom it has itself appointed as officials to itself, and if indeed there is a Son to Him whose monarchy it is, it does not instantly divide and cease to be a monarchy if the Son also be taken as a participant in it, but it is equally His by whom it is communicated to the Son, and being His it is quite as much a monarchy, since it is held together by two who are in unity. Therefore as the Divine Monarchy also is administered by so many legions and hosts of angels, as it is written: 'Thousand thousands ministered unto Him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before Him," 1 and since it has not because of this ceased to be of One so as no longer to be a monarchy because it is maintained by so many thousands of powers, how is it that God should seem to suffer division in the Son and in the Holy Spirit, who have the second and the third places assigned to them, partaking of the substance of the Father, when He does not so in the multitude of so many angels who are not of his substance? And do you consider that the actual members and the pledges and instruments of His might and the entire system of His monarchy, are the overthrow and of it? That is not right.  Tertullian, from Against Praxeas 1 Dan 7.10