Chapter XVII. 1–5.

1. That the Son was glorified by the Father in His form of a servant, which the Father raised from the dead and set at His own right hand, is indicated by the event itself, and is nowhere doubted by the Christian. But as He not only said, “Father, glorify Thy Son,” but likewise added, “that Thy Son may glorify Thee,” it is worthy of inquiry how it was that the Son glorified the Father, seeing that the eternal glory of the Father neither suffered diminution in any human form, nor could be increased in respect of its own divine perfection. In itself, indeed, the glory of the Father could neither be diminished nor enlarged; but without any doubt it was less among men when God was known only in Judea:¹⁶⁹⁷

1697 Ps. lxxvi. 1.

1698 Ps. cxiii. 3; 1: pueri, from the LXX. παῖδες. The Hebrew is עַבְדֵי, “servants.”—Tr.

1699 Ps. cxiii. 3; 1: pueri, from the LXX. παῖδες. The Hebrew is עַבְדֵי, “servants.”—Tr.

2. And then expanding still further how it was that the Father should be glorified by the Son, He says: “As Thou hast given Him power over all flesh, that He should give eternal life to all that Thou hast given Him.” By all flesh, He meant every man, signifying the whole by a part; as, on the other hand, the whole man is signified by the superior part, when the apostle says, “Let every soul be subject to the higher powers.” ¹⁷⁰⁰

1700 Rom. xiii. 1.

1701 Col. i. 16.

3. “And this,” He adds, “is eternal life, that they may know Thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom Thou hast sent.” The proper order of the words is, “That they may know Thee and Jesus Christ, whom Thou hast sent, as the only true God.” Consequently, therefore, the Holy Spirit is also understood, because He is the Spirit of the Father and Son, as the substantial and consubstantial love of both. For the Father and Son are not two Gods, nor are the Father and Son and Holy Spirit three Gods; but the Trinity itself is the one only true God. And yet the Father is not the same as the Son, nor the Son the same as the Father, nor the Holy Spirit the same as the Father and the Son; for the Father and Son and Holy Spirit are three [persons], yet the Trinity itself is one God. If, then, the Son glorifies Thee in the same manner “as Thou hast given Him power over all flesh,” and hast so given, “that He should give eternal life to all that Thou hast given Him,” and “this is life eternal, that they may know Thee;” in this way, therefore, the Son glorifies Thee, that He makes Thee known to all whom Thou hast given Him. Accordingly, if the knowledge of God is eternal life, we are making the greater advances to life, in proportion as we are enlarging our growth in such a knowledge. And we shall not die in the life eternal; for then, when there shall be no death, the knowledge of God shall be perfected. Then will be effected the full effulgence of God, because then the completed glory, as expressed in Greek by δόξα. For from it we have the word δόξασον, that is used here, and which some Latins have interpreted by “clarifica” (make effulgent), and some by “glorifica” (glorify). But by the ancients, glory, from which men are styled glorious, is thus defined: Glory is the widely-spread fame of any one accompanied with praise. But if a man is praised when the fame regarding him is believed, how will God be praised when He Himself shall be seen? Hence it is said in Scripture, “Blessed are they that dwell in Thy house; they will be praising Thee for ever and ever.”¹⁷⁰²

1702 Ps. lxxxiv. 4.

4. But God is first of all glorified here, while He is being made known to men by word of mouth, and preached through the faith of believers. Wherefore, He says, “I have glorified Thee on the earth: I have finished the work which Thou gavest me to do.” He does not say, Thou orderedst; but, “Thou gavest:” where the evident grace of it is commended to notice. For what has the human nature even in the Only-begotten, that it has not received? Did it not receive this, that it should do no evil, but all good things, when it was assumed into the unity of His person by the Word, by whom all things were made? But how has He finished the work which was committed unto Him to do, when there still remains the trial of the passion wherein He especially furnished His martyrs with the example they were to follow, whereof, says the apostle Peter, “Christ suffered for us, leaving us an example, that we should follow His steps:” ¹⁷⁰³

1703 1 Pet. ii. 21.

1704 Ps. xxii. 16, 17. Dinumeraverunt (they counted), in accordance with a reading of the Septuagint—that found in the printed text—ἐξηρίθμησαν. A better reading, however, is also found in mss., ἐξήρίθμησα, conforming in person, though not in tense, to the Hebrew אֲכַפֵּר (I may count).—Tr.

1705 Ps. xxii. 16, 17. Dinumeraverunt (they counted), in accordance with a reading of the Septuagint—that found in the printed text—ἐξηρίθμησαν. A better reading, however, is also found in mss., ἐξήρίθμησα, conforming in person, though not in tense, to the Hebrew אֲכַפֵּר (I may count).—Tr.

1706 Chap. xv. 15.

1707 Chap. xvi. 12.

1708 Isa. xlv. 11, according to the Septuagint. See note, Tract. LXVIII. sec. 1.

5. In a way similar, also, to this, He proceeds to say: “And now, O Father, glorify thou me with Thine own self with the glory which I had with Thee before the world was.” For He had said above, “Father, the hour is come; glorify Thy Son, that Thy Son may glorify Thee:” in which arrangement of the words He had shown that the Father was first to be glorified by the Son, in order that the Son might glorify the Father. But now He said, “I have glorified Thee on the earth: I have finished the work which Thou gavest me to do; and now glorify Thou me;” as if He Himself had been the first to glorify the Father, by whom He then demands to be glorified. We are therefore to understand that He used both words above in accordance with that which was future, and in the order in which they were future, “Glorify Thy Son, that Thy Son may glorify Thee:” but that He now used the word in the past tense of that which was still future, when He said, “I have glorified Thee on the earth: I have finished the work which Thou gavest me to do.” And then, when He said, “And now, O Father, glorify Thou me with Thine own self,” as if He were afterwards to be glorified by the Father, whom He Himself had first glorified; what did He intimate but that, when He said above, “I have glorified Thee on the earth,” He had so spoken as if He had done what He was still to do; but that here He demanded of the Father to do that whereby the Son should yet do so; in other words, that the Father should glorify the Son, by means of which glorification of the Son, the Son also was yet to glorify the Father? In fine, if, in connection with that which was still future, we put the verb also in the future tense, where He has used the past in place of the future tense, there will remain no obscurity in the sentence: as if He had said, “I will glorify Thee on the earth: I will finish the work which Thou hast given me to do; and now, O Father, glorify Thou me with Thine own self.” In this way it is as plain as when He says, “Glorify Thy Son, that Thy Son may glorify Thee:” and this is indeed the whole sentence, save that here we are told also the manner of that same glorification, which there was left unnoticed; as if the former were explained by the latter to those whose hearts it was able to stir, how it was that the Father should glorify the Son, and most of all how the Son also should glorify the Father. For in saying that the Father was glorified by Himself on the earth, but He Himself by the Father with the Father’s very self, He showed them assuredly the manner of both glorifications. For He Himself glorified the Father on earth by preaching Him to the nations; but the Father glorified Him with His own self in setting Him at His own right hand. But on that very account, when He says afterward in reference to the glorifying of the Father, “I have glorified Thee,” He preferred putting the verb in the past tense, in order to show that it was already done in the act of predestination, and what was with perfect certainty yet to take place was to be accounted as already done; namely, that the Son, having been glorified by the Father with the Father, would also glorify the Father on the earth.

6. But this predestination He still more clearly disclosed in respect of His own glorification, wherewith He was glorified by the Father, when He added, “With the glory which I had, before the world was, with Thee.” The proper order of the words is, “which I had with Thee before the world was.” To this apply His words, “And now glorify Thou me;” that is to say, as then, so also now: as then, by predestination; so also now, by consummation: do Thou in the world what had already been done with Thee before the world: do in its own time what Thou hast determined before all times. This, some have imagined, should be so understood as if the human nature, which was assumed by the Word, were converted into the Word, and the man were changed into God; yea, were we reflecting with some care on the opinions they have advanced, as if the humanity were lost in the Godhead. For no one would go the length of saying that out of such a transmutation of the humanity the Word of God is either doubled or increased, so that either what was one should now be two, or what was less should now be greater. Accordingly, if with His human nature changed and converted into the Word, the Word of God will still be as great as He was, and what He was, where is the humanity, if it is not lost?

7. But to this opinion, which I certainly do not see to be conformable to the truth, there is nothing to urge us, if, when the Son says, “And now, O Father, glorify Thou me with Thine own self, with the glory which I had with Thee before the world was,” we understand the predestination of the glory of His human nature, as thereafter, from being mortal, to become immortal with the Father: and that this had already been done by predestination before the world was, as also in its own time it was done in the world. For if the apostle has said of us, “According as He hath chosen us in Him before the foundation of the world,”¹⁷⁰⁹

1709 Eph. i. 4.

1710 1 Tim. ii. 5.

1711 Rom. iv. 17.

1712 Rom. viii. 28–30.

8. But perhaps we shall have some fear in saying that He was predestinated, because the apostle seems to have said so only in reference to our being made conformable to His image. As if, indeed, any one, faithfully considering the rule of faith, were to deny that the Son of God was predestinated, who yet cannot deny that He was man. For it is rightly said that He was not predestinated in respect of His being the Word of God, God with God. For how could He be predestinated, seeing He already was what He was, without beginning and without ending, everlasting? But that, which as yet was not, had to be predestinated, in order that it might come to pass in its time, even as it was predestinated so to come before all times. Accordingly, whoever denies predestination of the Son of God, denies that He was also Himself the Son of man. But, on account of those who are disputatious, let us also on this subject listen to the apostle in the exordium of his epistles. For both in the first of his epistles, which is that to the Romans, and in the beginning of the epistle itself, we read: “Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called [to be] an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God, which He had promised afore by His prophets in the Holy Scriptures, concerning His Son, who was made for Him of the seed of David according to the flesh, who was predestinated¹⁷¹³

1713 Rom. i. 1–4: ὁρισθέντος, determined, declared, not “predestinated,” which is a mistake of the Latin version used by Augustin.—Tr.

1714 Rom. i. 1–4: ὁρισθέντος, determined, declared, not “predestinated,” which is a mistake of the Latin version used by Augustin.—Tr.

E.C.F. INDEX & SEARCH