Worship of Christ

May Jesus Christ be worshipped and invoked in prayer if he is not by nature, in his very essence, God? This question divided the anti-Trinitarian camp of the sixteenth century like no other. Fausto Sozzini (Faustus Socinus, 1539–1604) gave an answer as clear as it was bold: Yes — Christ may and should be religiously venerated and invoked, not because he is the Creator, but because God has exalted him, given him all power over the Church, and appointed him as Mediator. Whoever honours the Son thereby honours the Father. This page recounts how Sozzini developed this thesis in two polemical treatises and defended it against his opponents Ferenc Dávid and Christian Francken.

1. Two Polemical Treatises, One Point of Contention

Sozzini's doctrine of the veneration of Christ grew out of concrete controversies, not out of the study. Two works bear the main weight. In On the Non-Invocation of Jesus Christ in Holy Prayer Sozzini responds to theses of the Transylvanian reformer Ferenc Dávid (Franciscus Davidis, c. 1520–1579), who rejected any invocation of Christ in prayer as impermissible. It was the physician and theologian Georg Blandrata who summoned Sozzini to Transylvania to defend the worship of Christ against Dávid; interspersed are also some more cautious queries from Blandrata himself, who held invocation to be permitted but not commanded. In On the Honour of Christ — a disputation with the wandering philosopher Christian Francken — Sozzini defends the same cause on purely rational grounds: may divine honour be paid to a creature?

Both writings presuppose Sozzini's well-known Christology: Christ is not from eternity consubstantial with the Father, but a — however unique — creature whom God endowed with the highest dignity. This is precisely what makes the question so explosive. If Christ were himself the Creator-God, his worship would be self-evident. Because he is not, in Sozzini's view, the veneration must be grounded differently.

The entire disputation, as Sozzini makes clear in a preface "to the reader," proceeds in two stages: up to the seventh chapter the subject is only Dávid's first thesis — whether Christ is invoked in Scripture at all. Only thereafter is the second, sharper thesis addressed: whether Christ can be invoked at all. Sozzini intends to demonstrate both — and more besides, namely that the opponents, in denying the invocability, are in truth denying Christ's power.

2. Three Concepts Carefully Distinguished: Worship, Invocation, Service

Sozzini's entire argument stands or falls on a clarification of terms. He distinguishes worship (veneration, adoratio), service, and invocation (the directing of a prayer to someone, invocatio). Worship and service are for him abiding dispositions of the soul rather than individual acts; invocation, by contrast, is a specific act, the entreating of help from a given address.

• Worship / Service — "certain inclinations of our soul and spirit more than actions," constant and adhering to us. Therefore one can in the same moment worship God and Christ.
• Invocation — "the directing of a prayer and the entreating of help," an action one undertakes according to time and occasion. One cannot invoke Christ "unless we direct our prayers explicitly to him."

From this distinction follows Sozzini's famous double assertion, mocked by Dávid as a "riddle": we must worship Christ and serve him; we may invoke him but are not obligated to do so. Sozzini regards this as entirely consistent:

So that while we must absolutely serve and worship Christ, we are not obligated — when speaking of absolute necessity — to invoke him, yet we may do so with full right. … And so you see that in that distinction of mine there is no contradiction and no riddle, but that it is in a sense self-evident to sound reason.

"On the Non-Invocation of Jesus Christ in Holy Prayer", ch. 18

3. What "Invocation" Actually Means

A second key point: Sozzini contests the claim that "invocation of Christ" must always mean a petition for help. In most scriptural passages where Christ is "invoked," the word denotes not the petition itself but "proper veneration and trust." And from veneration and trust the possibility of entreaty necessarily follows.

So you see at last in how many passages of Holy Scripture that invocation … is attributed to Christ … except that, with the exception of that passage in Rom 10, the word "invoke" does not appear to denote the entreaty itself … but proper veneration and trust. But since from veneration and trust … the possibility of entreating necessarily follows …

"On the Non-Invocation of Jesus Christ in Holy Prayer", ch. III/IV

When Scripture says that someone "calls upon the name of Christ," it means — as with "calling upon the name of God" — not merely a naming, but "the cult and the entreating of Christ's own help." Already Ananias, by using the phrase that Saul had authority to bind all who "call upon the name of Jesus" (Acts 9:14), designates those who venerated Jesus at the right hand of God and took refuge in his help.

4. The First Scriptural Proof: Stephen (Acts 7:59)

Sozzini's strongest testimony is the dying Stephen. Here the word "invoke" appears explicitly, and the prayer is directed by name to Jesus.

And they stoned Stephen as he was calling out and saying: "Lord Jesus, receive my spirit." … For one cannot say that Stephen invoked God, whom he would have designated by the name "Lord Jesus."

"On the Non-Invocation of Jesus Christ in Holy Prayer", scriptural proof (Acts 7:59)

Sozzini argues philologically: had Luke meant God the Father, he would have written — to avoid the dangerous ambiguity — not "Lord Jesus" but "Jesus, who is God." Moreover, Stephen had just before seen Jesus himself "standing at the right hand of God," "as though he were rising to come to his aid." That Stephen entreats from Jesus precisely what David and Jesus himself had formerly entreated from God (cf. Luke 23:46) contains for Sozzini "nothing absurd":

For God himself has granted Jesus such power that what previously could be entreated of God alone can now also be entreated of Jesus himself … — indeed, to the highest glory of God — be entreated.

"On the Non-Invocation of Jesus Christ in Holy Prayer", on Acts 7:59

That the very disciples who, while Jesus was still alive, cried out in the sinking boat, "Lord, save us, we are perishing" (Matt 8:25), were not wrong in doing so, even though they had no precedent of a holy man who had previously invoked Christ — this is already enough for Sozzini: they had recognised in Christ "the power … to save from danger."

5. The Second Scriptural Proof: The Letters of Paul

Paul entreats at the opening of nearly all his letters grace, peace, and mercy "from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ" and closes them mostly with "The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you." For Sozzini these are covert petitionary prayers addressed to Christ.

• Phil 2 (the Christ Hymn) — Paul's own primary testimony that the honour shown to Christ happens "to the glory of God the Father" (Phil 2:11).
• 1 Thess 3:11 — "Now may God himself, our Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, direct our way to you": a petition that invokes God and Christ simultaneously.
• 2 Cor 12:8–9 — "Three times I pleaded with the Lord that it should leave me"; the context ("so that the power of Christ may dwell in me") shows that "Lord" means Christ.
• Rom 10:13 — the only passage in which "invoke" denotes the actual entreaty, applied to Christ.

Even if, Sozzini argues, one were to refer all direct prayer formulas to the Father, the mere possibility of invoking Christ would already be sufficiently established by the existence of indirect formulas (such as those at the openings and closings of Paul's letters).

6. The Real Ground: Christ's Power, Providence, and Omniscience

Behind all the individual passages stands Sozzini's foundational rational argument: whoever can be invoked must (a) have the power to help and (b) be able to perceive our prayers. Both apply to the exalted Christ. From "almost innumerable passages" it is evident that Christ is equipped with supreme power and cares for his Church from heaven.

• Matt 28:18 — "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me."
• Acts 2:36 — God has made the Crucified "both Lord and Christ."
• Eph 1:21–23 — set above every rule and authority, given as head over all things to the Church.
• Rev 1:18; 3:7 — he holds "the key of David" and "the keys of death and Hades."
• Rev 2:23 — "I am he who searches minds and hearts": Christ knows our works and penetrates our innermost being.

Omniscience is the decisive link: if Christ "not only understands our prayers but knows all our works and even searches hearts and minds," then nothing further stands in the way of his invocability. Sozzini draws the conclusion:

Since it is thus evident that Christ, having been seated at the right hand of God in heaven, is not only equipped with supreme power but also bears care for his Church … : who would dare deny that he can be invoked?

"On the Non-Invocation of Jesus Christ in Holy Prayer", ch. 2 (Christ's Authority)

7. The Exaltation: Phil 2:9–11 and Heb 1:6

The ground of Christ's dignity is not his nature but his Exaltation (exaltatio). In the dispute with Francken, Sozzini reduces this to a formula: God can share his honour with whomever he wills.

And even if the distance between God and the creature is the greatest, it is not therefore necessary that the difference between the honour of God and that of the creature be equally great. For God can share his honour with whomever he wills; this he has shown to Christ, who is worthy of such honour …

"On the Honour of Christ"

Phil 2:9–11 proves for Sozzini that this Exaltation has commanding force: God "now also wills that this should come to pass," that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow. And Heb 1:6 reinforces it: "And let all God's angels worship him" — a sentence that in the Psalm originally refers to God, but is applied by the letter to the Hebrews to Christ. If even the angels, who are far superior to us, are to worship Christ, how much more are we.

For what you say, that the words "And let all God's angels worship him," which in the Psalm … are referred to God himself — what then, when that divine writer applies them to Christ … and teaches that this worship of God should take place?

"On the Non-Invocation of Jesus Christ in Holy Prayer", ch. 18 (on Heb 1:6)

Characteristic is Sozzini's reading of the Hymn itself: Christ was "in the form of God," but did not hold onto equality with God "as robbers are wont to do," but laid it aside — and therefore, as the reward of his obedience, God exalted him. The glory of which Phil 2 speaks is for Sozzini clearly "a glory of worship," "since it is expressly said there that knees are to be bowed before him."

8. "That All May Honour the Son, Even as They Honour the Father" (John 5:22–23)

Dávid deploys this passage against Sozzini: if the honouring is extended to worship and invocation, we would have to venerate the Son in the same way as the Father — in which case Sozzini's mediatorial distinction collapses, "for then the worship and invocation would not be equal." Sozzini turns the argument around:

That very passage in John teaches sufficiently clearly that the invocation of Christ belongs to the glorification of God. … The word "even as" neither here nor anywhere else by itself denotes complete equality … but only equality of the thing itself.

"On the Non-Invocation of Jesus Christ in Holy Prayer", on John 5:22–23

To honour Christ "even as" the Father means for Sozzini not to attribute all the Father's properties to him — the honour of the Son will "never in all things be equal" to that of the Father — but it does mean acknowledging and publicly confessing that "his goodness and righteousness can be invoked." Whoever denies to the Son this invocability does precisely not honour him as the Father.

9. The Decisive Pivot: The Honour Shown to Christ Flows Back to the Father

Here lies the theological heart of the matter. Sozzini does not contest the first commandment — he reads it anew. Whatever worship, service, trust, and invocation we render to Christ, we render "in reality not primarily to Christ himself, but to God, who has raised him to such great majesty."

For whatever we render through his worship and service, this divine service we render in reality not primarily to Christ himself, but to God, who has raised him to such great majesty. Hence Paul says: "so that every tongue confesses that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father" (Phil 2:11).

"On the Non-Invocation of Jesus Christ in Holy Prayer", ch. 2

The parallel Sozzini draws repeatedly: just as the one "who believes in Christ" in truth believes not in Christ but in the one "who sent me" (John 12:44), so the one who worships Christ in truth worships God. Worship and faith flow through Christ toward the Father. Therefore it holds:

And then, because the worship of Christ is the worship of God himself: whom we worship in Christ and through Christ.

"On the Non-Invocation of Jesus Christ in Holy Prayer", ch. 19 (Exodus-God and worship)

Sozzini impresses this with a parable that runs through all of Scripture: Christ is like the governor whom a king has set over his city. Whoever petitions the governor for something that belongs to his office has "sought it from the king himself" — and yet he sought it from the governor. Thus the commandment to invoke God the Father alone remains in force, and yet one may invoke Christ.

10. Christ as Mediator — and What That Does Not Mean

Christ is invoked "not as the author, but as the Mediator, or as the one to whom the Father has granted this." Sozzini carefully delimits his concept of mediator, however: he does not mean that Christ now still obtains something from God for us through intercession — eternal redemption has already been accomplished (Heb 9:12; 5:9). Rather, Christ is Mediator as the one "through whom everything comes to pass":

Thus Christ is to be regarded as the Mediator between us and God the Father: through whom, namely, everything from God is bestowed upon the Church and conversely everything from the Church is referred to God.

"On the Non-Invocation of Jesus Christ in Holy Prayer", ch. 17

To Blandrata's question whether the mediatorial office is not equally "possible but not necessary" as the invocation, Sozzini replies with the rule of time: "Distinguish the times, and you will bring the Scriptures into harmony." What was formerly owed to God alone is "later, at the command or with the consent of that same God, also owed to Christ" — no contradiction of the Scriptures, but a difference in the epochs of salvation.

11. The Objections of Dávid and Blandrata — and Sozzini's Replies

"You shall worship the Lord your God, and him only shall you serve" (Matt 4:10)

Dávid's principal weapon is the strict commandment of exclusive veneration. Sozzini replies that the same commandment applies also to worship and service — "and yet we cannot only worship Christ, but must do so." The commandment therefore does not exclude the Son, provided the honour shown to Christ flows back to the Father. Moreover, the Lord's Prayer (Luke 11:2; Matt 6:9) is not an answer to the question of whom to worship, but how the Father is to be worshipped — and it dates from a time when Christ "had not yet appeared nor been glorified in his exalted state."

"The Question Is Not What We Can Do, But What We Should Do"

Dávid (and with him Blandrata) seeks to narrow the dispute to the should: without an explicit commandment one should venture nothing, "but go to the source, not to the rivulets." Sozzini counters that Dávid's own second thesis contests the can — and it is precisely that which must be refuted. It is sufficient for the possibility of invocation that Christ's power and omniscience are established; whether a duty follows from this is a second, independent question.

An Explicit Commandment "Call upon Me!" Is Lacking

Dávid demands the "letter": where does the Father or the Son explicitly command the invocation of Christ by name? Sozzini calls this demand "ridiculous" — "one and the same assertion can be expressed not only by a single word, but by many words." Moreover, the charge strikes Dávid himself, who "throughout the entire disputation, relying on your wondrous inferences, never cites a single letter." For worship, on the other hand, Sozzini cites a whole series of explicit passages (Matt 2:11; 8:2; 14:33; 28:9,17; John 9:38, etc.) in which Christ "was worshipped in true trust of heart."

Christ Was Silent Concerning His Own Invocation

Dávid: had the Father willed Christ to be worshipped, Christ would have informed his disciples, "for everything that I have heard from my Father I have made known to you" (John 15:15). Sozzini replies that the same Christ said: "I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now" (John 16:12). The worship of the Exalted presupposes his heavenly rule, which the disciples before Pentecost were simply unable to grasp. That they understood it after receiving the Spirit is shown by the first martyr: Stephen invoked Christ "in the very matter in which Christ himself had invoked God the Father."

True Worship Takes Place "In Spirit and in Truth" to the Father (John 4:23)

Sozzini contests that John 4 determines whom to worship at all. The passage deals with whether one should worship in this or that place, and its conclusion is: not in a particular place, but "everywhere, provided only that worship is rendered sincerely and truly." It does not follow from this that only the worship of the Father is true and that of the Son false.

The Prayer Formulas Are Addressed to the Father

Even if all direct petition formulas were aimed at the Father, this would not prove that Christ cannot be invoked. And in fact such formulas exist for Christ as well — Stephen (Acts 7:59) and Paul (2 Cor 12:8) attest it; added to these are the indirect formulas of Paul's letters. That the fixed, liturgical prayers of the Church are addressed to the Father is no counter-evidence, but merely confirms that the invocation of Christ is not obligatory but permitted.

Would Not "Two Gods" Then Be Invoked?

Dávid warns: if the Son is also to be invoked with true trust of heart, it is not one God but "a triad of gods" that is invoked. Sozzini denies this: the Son is "neither the same person nor the same essence as the Father"; he has received everything from the Father. This very difference shows "that the invocation and worship of the Son is of a somewhat different character from that of the Father." There is no coordination of two gods, but a subordination of the receiving Son to the giving Father.

The Father Would Lose His Prerogative (the Lord's Prayer Argument)

Dávid: Christ taught us to ask the Father for all that is needful; if one divides the "object of things to be asked" between Father and Son, the Father is no longer the "all-sufficient" God. Sozzini denies any division: "We do not divide what is to be asked between Father and Son." Rather, everything that concerns the Church and is to be asked of the Father "can also be asked of the Son, through whom the Father, who gives all things, bestows it on us." Christ's power to give in no way diminishes the omnipotence of the Father, "since that power proceeded entirely from the Father himself and depends constantly on his will."

Christ Is the Image of God — and Images Must Not Be Worshipped

Dávid invokes the prohibition of images (Exod 20:4). Sozzini distinguishes: what is forbidden is the image "fashioned by human hands and set up by them for their own worship" — but not "the image of himself produced by God himself, which he has set up for worship." God did not deprive himself by that commandment of the right "to set before us for worship also someone other than himself"; he only forbade "that we should do this on our own initiative." That is precisely why idolaters are without excuse: they worship on their own initiative, against God's explicit command.

The Father Heard Cornelius' Prayers, Not Christ (Acts 10)

Dávid: Cornelius' prayers came before God the Father, not before Christ — therefore Christ does not hear prayers. Sozzini counters with the governor image: Cornelius did not yet know Christ and had not directed his prayers to him at all; "the governor has not heard the one who petitioned the king through him." That the Father hears where one invokes him proves nothing against the invocability of Christ. Moreover, it was to Cornelius himself that Peter preached that Jesus is "Lord of all" and "appointed by God to be judge of the living and the dead" (Acts 10:36,42) — which demonstrates Christ's present power and thus his invocability.

12. "My Glory I Give to No Other" (Isa 42:8)

Dávid's supposedly strongest testimony: God gives his glory "to no other." If Christ were to receive the honour of worship, God would have shared his glory after all. Sozzini replies threefold.

1. "Give" means "permit." As in Ps 16:10 ("you will not give your Holy One to see corruption"), "give" here means "allow/permit." God will not permit "that his glory should be attributed to another against or without his will" — those meant are the "carved images," which have nothing in common with God.
2. "Another" is not Christ. An "other" is a god alien to him, who has nothing from God. But Christ "owes to him everything he has and depends entirely on him" — he is precisely not an "other" in this sense. In fact, God has shared with Christ even "the glory of judging all things" (John 5:22), which is God's own glory.
3. The reversal of the argument. A friend drew his attention to a reading (it goes back to Justin Martyr): since Isa 42 is a prophecy about Christ, one can have God say that he will give his glory to "no other except Christ." Thus the passage that seems most apt to you for denying honour to Christ becomes the most apt for attributing it to him.

Sozzini adds a bitter barb: it is no wonder that Dávid applies to Christ what was said of graven images — "since Christ among you today takes the place of carved images: he effects nothing, provides for nothing, does ultimately nothing at all."

13. Does the Invocation of Christ Nourish Faith? (1 Pet 1:21; 1 Cor 15)

Dávid contests that the invocation of Christ strengthens faith and hope — Peter expressly directs both "to God" (1 Pet 1:21). Sozzini counters that God made Jesus "Lord and Christ for no weightier reason" than "to nourish and advance our faith and hope as well." It is for this very reason that Christ is given to us as "brother," as the one "tempted in every way" (Heb 4:15) who stands ready to help — a comfort that the weak finds in the invocation of Christ.

This auxiliary function also explains Sozzini's qualification: whoever "is endowed with so great a faith that he dares constantly to approach God himself directly" does "not need to invoke Christ." Whoever invokes him nevertheless "does not thereby offend God, but will by that act glorify God."

Sozzini also places the end of salvation history in its proper context: when "there will be no more place for faith and hope," Christ will "hand over the kingdom to God and the Father" (1 Cor 15:24,28) and subject himself to the one "who gave him the power to subject all things to himself." The invocation of Christ is therefore a matter of this present age — the age of the pilgrim's faith.

14. The Testimony of the Book of Revelation

The Book of Revelation is for Sozzini a continuous testimony to Christ's present rule and invocability. In the letters to the seven churches (Rev 2–3), Christ speaks throughout "in his own person" — "To the one who conquers I will give …", "I will confess his name before my Father" — not merely in the name of the Father. Whoever would take from him "the kingdom and the governance of the Church" here would be opposing "the most manifest truth."

Noteworthy is Sozzini's observation concerning Christ's omniscience even before his Exaltation: if Christ "was endowed with this power while he worked on earth" (cf. John 2:24–25), "he must now be endowed with it all the more," having been appointed as head of the Church, "who fills all in all" (Eph 1:22–23).

15. And the Holy Spirit?

Here Sozzini draws a clear line. When Dávid mockingly suggests that by the same logic the Holy Spirit too must be invoked, Sozzini rejects the comparison: the Holy Spirit is "not a person, but the power and efficacy of God." This removes any reason to regard him as an independent addressee of prayer. Worship belongs to the Father — and, as the exalted Mediator, to the Son.

16. Consequences for Prayer and Worship

Sozzini's teaching deliberately leaves room for pious practice rather than forcing it into a new law.

• The ordinary, public prayer of the Church is directed — in accordance with the most ancient custom, and entirely rightly — to God the Father, often "through Jesus Christ."
• Prayers may explicitly go to the Father "in the name of Jesus" (John 14:13; 16:23).
• Whoever wishes may direct prayers explicitly to Christ — "in every place and at every time" — and entreat him for help in all that concerns the Church.
• No one sins who prays to the Father alone; no one sins who invokes Christ. Both are permitted, because both ultimately honour the same Father.

17. The Consequence for the Doctrine of God

Sozzini turns the argument at the end against the doctrine of the Trinity itself. The opponents were distorting "not doubtful but the clearest testimonies for the invocation of Christ" — out of fear that Christ's invocation might violate God's honour. The precise opposite is true: the invocation of Christ increases God's glory "to the highest degree," because it acknowledges God's greatest beneficence — that he "has granted such great power to our human nature in Christ."

With this, the thrust of the argument is also reversed for Sozzini: one does not need to declare Christ the consubstantial God in order to be permitted to worship him. The worship of the exalted man Christ is not the reason for, but the sharpest objection against, consubstantiality — for everything in Christ that appears divine is received dignity, "communicated" by the Father, which "depends constantly on his will."

18. Sozzini's Closing Exhortation

Sozzini urges earnestly at the end not to resist "the most manifest truth," and asks the opponents to "at some point cease" denying the invocability of Christ — for whoever denies it simultaneously denies Christ's power.

May they at some point cease to deny this, and confess that Jesus, the Son of God, can be invoked, that is, that our prayers may be directed to him. For then full honour and glory would be given both to our most gracious God and to his almighty Christ in this matter.

"On the Non-Invocation of Jesus Christ in Holy Prayer", Sozzini's reply to Blandrata

---

• Trinity — The Doctrine Under Scrutiny
• The Pre-existence of Christ
• The Atoning Sacrifice of Christ
• Philippians 2:6–7 — the Christ Hymn
• 1 Corinthians 15:28 — "so that God may be all in all"