Bad Advertisement?
Are you a Christian?
Online Store:Visit Our Store
| What is Said of the Father and Son Together, and What Not.
PREVIOUS SECTION - NEXT SECTION - HELP 
Chapter 2 .—What is Said of
the Father and Son Together, and What Not.
3. But if nothing is spoken of the
Father as such, except that which is spoken of Him in relation to
the Son, that is, that He is His father, or begetter, or beginning;
and if also the begetter is by consequence a beginning to that
which he begets of himself; but whatever else is spoken of Him is
so spoken as with the Son, or rather in the Son;
whether that He is great with that greatness which He begat, or
just with that justice which He begat, or good with that goodness
which He begat, or powerful with that force or power which He
begat, or wise with that wisdom which He begat: yet the Father is
not said to be greatness itself, but the begetter of greatness; but
the Son, as He is called the Son as such, is not so called
with the Father but in relation to the Father, so is not
great in and by himself, but with the Father, of whom He is
the greatness; and so also is called wise with the Father,
of whom He Himself is the wisdom; just as the Father is called wise
with the Son, because He is wise with that wisdom which He
begat; therefore the one is not called without the other, whatever
they are called in respect to themselves; that is, whatever they
are called that manifests their essential nature, both are so
called together;—if these things are so, then the Father is not
God without the Son, nor the Son God without the Father, but both
together are God. And that which is said, “In the beginning was
the Word,” means that the Word was in the Father. Or if “In the
beginning” is intended to mean, Before all things; then in that
which follows, “And the Word was with God,” the Son alone is
understood to be the Word, not the Father and Son together, as
though both were one Word (for He is the Word in the same way as He
is the Image, but the Father and Son are not both together the
Image, but the Son alone is the Image of the Father: just as He is
also the Son of the Father, for both together are not the Son). But
in that which is added, “And the Word was with God,” there is
much reason to understand thus: “The Word,” which is the Son
alone, “was with God,” which is not the Father alone, but God
the Father and the Son together.603
| 603 [The term “God,” in the
proposition, “the Word was with God,” must refer to the Father,
not to “the Father and Son together,” because the Son could not
be said to be “with” himself. St. John says that “the word
was God” (θεὸς). The
absence of the article with
θεὸς denotes the abstract
deity, or the divine nature without reference to the persons in it.
He also says that “the Word was with God” (τὸν
θεὸν). The presence of the
article in this instance denotes one of the divine persons in the
essence: namely, the Father, with whom the Word was from eternity,
and upon whose “bosom” he was from eternity. (John i. 18).—W.G.T.S.] | But what wonder is there, if this
can be said in the case of some twofold things widely different
from each other? For what are so different as soul and body? Yet we
can say the soul was with a man, that is, in a man; although the
soul is not the body, and man is both soul and body together. So
that what follows in the Scripture, “And the Word was God,”604
may be
understood thus: The Word, which is not the Father, was God
together with the Father. Are we then to say thus, that the Father
is the begetter of His own greatness, that is, the begetter of His
own power, or the begetter of His own wisdom; and that the Son is
greatness, and power, and wisdom; but that the great, omnipotent,
and wise God, is both together? How then God of God, Light
of Light? For not both together are God of God, but only the Son is
of God, that is to say, of the Father; nor are both together Light
of Light, but the Son only is of Light, that is, of the Father.
Unless, perhaps, it was in order to intimate and inculcate briefly
that the Son is co-eternal with the Father, that it is said, God of
God, and Light of Light, or anything else of the like kind: as if
to say, This which is not the Son without the Father, of
this which is not the Father without the Son; that is, this Light
which is not Light without the Father, of that Light,
viz. the Father, which is not Light without the Son; so that,
when it is said, God which is not the Son without the Father, and
of God which is not the Father without the Son, it may be
perfectly understood that the Begetter did not precede that which
He begot. And if this be so, then this alone cannot be said of
them, namely, this or that of this or that, which they are not both
together. Just as the Word cannot be said to be of
the Word, because both are not the Word together, but only
the Son; nor image of image, since they are not both
together the image; nor Son of Son, since both together are
not the Son, according to that which is said, “I and my Father
are one.”605
For “we
are one” means, what He is, that am I also; according to essence,
not according to relation.E.C.F. INDEX & SEARCH
|
