Bad Advertisement?
Are you a Christian?
Online Store:Visit Our Store
| Proof of the Catholic Sense of the Word Son. Power, Word or Reason, and Wisdom, the names of the Son, imply eternity; as well as the Father's title of Fountain. The Arians reply, that these do not formally belong to the essence of the Son, but are names given Him; that God has many words, powers, &c. Why there is but one Son and Word, &c. All the titles of the Son coincide in Him.
PREVIOUS SECTION - NEXT SECTION - HELP 
Chapter
IV.—Proof of the Catholic Sense of the
Word Son. Power, Word or Reason, and Wisdom, the names of the
Son, imply eternity; as well as the Father’s title of Fountain.
The Arians reply, that these do not formally belong to the essence of
the Son, but are names given Him; that God has many words, powers,
&c. Why there is but one Son and Word, &c. All the titles of
the Son coincide in Him.
15. This then is quite
enough to expose the infamy of the Arian heresy; for, as the Lord has
granted, out of their own words is irreligion brought home to them848
| 848 The
main argument of the Arians was that our lord was a Son, and
therefore was not eternal, but of a substance which had a
beginning. [Prolegg. ch. ii. §3 (2) a.] Accordingly Athanasius
says, ‘Having argued with them as to the meaning of their own
selected term “Son,” let us go on to others, which on the
very face make for us, such as Word, Wisdom, &c.’ | . But come now and let us on our part act on
the offensive, and call on them for an answer; for now is fair time,
when their own ground has failed them, to question them on ours;
perhaps it may abash the perverse, and disclose to them whence they
have fallen. We have learned from divine Scripture, that the Son of
God, as was said above, is the very Word and Wisdom of the Father. For
the Apostle says, ‘Christ the power of God and the Wisdom of
God849
;’ and John after saying, ‘And the
Word was made flesh,’ at once adds, ‘And we saw His glory,
the glory as of the Only-begotten of the Father, full of grace and
truth850
,’ so that, the Word being the
Only-begotten Son, in this Word and in Wisdom heaven and earth and all
that is therein were made. And of this Wisdom that God is Fountain we
have learned from851
Baruch, by
Israel’s being charged with having forsaken the Fountain of
Wisdom. If then they deny Scripture, they are at once aliens to their
name, and may fitly be called of all men atheists852
| 852 Vid.
supr. §1. note 2, bis. | ,
and Christ’s enemies, for they have brought upon themselves these
names. But if they agree with us that the sayings of Scripture are
divinely inspired, let them dare to say openly what they think in
secret that God was once wordless and wisdomless853
| 853 ἄλογος,
ἄσοφος. Vid.
infr., §26. This is a frequent argument in the controversy, viz.
that to deprive the Father of His Son or substantial Word (λόγος), is as great a sacrilege as to deny His Reason, λόγος, from which the Son receives His name. Thus Orat. i.
§14. fin. Athan. says, ‘imputing to God’s nature an
absence of His Word (ἀλογίαν or
irrationality), they are most irreligious.’ Vid. §19. fin.
24. Elsewhere, he says, ‘Is a man not mad himself, who even
entertains the thought that God is word-less and wisdom-less? for such
illustrations and such images Scripture hath proposed, that,
considering the inability of human nature to comprehend concerning God,
we might even from these, however poorly and dimly, discern as far as
is attainable.’ Orat. ii. 32. vid. also iii. 63. iv. 12.
Serap. ii. 2. | ;
and let them in their madness854
| 854 Vid.
above, §1, note 6. | say, ‘There was once when He was
not,’ and, ‘before His generation, Christ was not855
| 855 These
were among the original positions of the Arians; for the former, see
above, note 1; the latter is one of those specified in the Nicene
Anathema. | ;’ and again let them declare that the
Fountain begat not Wisdom from itself, but acquired it from without,
till they have the daring to say, ‘The Son came of
nothing;’ whence it will follow that there is no longer a
Fountain, but a sort of pool, as if receiving water from without, and
usurping the name of Fountain856
| 856 And
so πηγὴ
ξηρά. Serap. ii. 2.
Orat. i. §14 fin. also ii. §2, where Athanasius speaks
as if those who deny that Almighty God is Father, cannot really believe
in Him as a Creator. If the divine substance be not fruitful
(καρπογόνος), but barren, as they say, as a light which enlightens
not, and a dry fountain, are they not ashamed to maintain that He
possesses the creative energy?’ Vid. also πηγὴ
θεότητος, Pseudo-Dion. Div. Nom. c. 2. πηγὴ ἐκ
πηγῆς, of the Son,
Epiphan. Ancor. 19. And Cyril, ‘If thou take from God His
being Father, thou wilt deny the generative power (καρπογόνον) of the divine nature so that It no longer is
perfect. This then is a token of its perfection, and the Son who
went forth from Him apart from time, is a pledge (σφραγίς) to the Father that He is perfect.’ Thesaur.
p. 37. | .
16. How full of irreligion this is, I consider
none can doubt who has ever so little understanding. But since they
mutter something about Word and Wisdom being only names of the Son857
| 857 Arius
said, as the Eunomians after him, that the Son was not really, but only
called, Word and Wisdom, which were simply attributes of God, and the
prototypes of the Son. Vid. Socr. i. 6. Theod. H. E. i. 3, and
infr. Orat. ii. 37, 38. | , we must ask then, If these are only names of
the Son, He must be something else beside them. And if He is higher
than the names, it is not lawful from the lesser to denote the higher;
but if He be less than the names, yet He surely must have in Him the
principle of this more honourable appellation; and this implies his
advance, which is an irreligion equal to anything that has gone before.
For He who is in the Father, and in whom also the Father is, who says,
‘I and the Father are one858
,’ whom he that
hath seen, hath seen the Father, to say that He has been exalted859
by anything external, is the extreme of
madness. However, when they are beaten hence, and like Eusebius and his
fellows, are in these great straits, then they have this remaining
plea, which Arius too in ballads, and in his own Thalia860
, fabled, as a new difficulty: ‘Many
words speaketh God; which then of these are we to call Son and Word,
Only-begotten of the Father861
| 861 As the
Arians took the title Son in that part of its earthly sense in which it
did not apply to our Lord, so they misinterpreted the title Word also;
which denoted the Son’s immateriality and indivisible presence in
the Father, but did not express His perfection. Vid. Orat. ii.
§34–36. contr. Gent. 41. ad Ep. Æg. 16.
Epiph. Hær. 65. 3. Nyss. in Eun. xii. p. 349. Origen
(in a passage, however, of questionable doctrine), says, ‘As
there are gods many, but to us one God the Father, and many lords, but
to us one Lord Jesus Christ, so there are many words, but we pray that
in us may exist the Word that was in the beginning, with God, and was
God.’ In Joan. tom. ii. 3. ‘Many things, it is
acknowledged, does the Father speak to the Son,’ say the
Semiarians at Ancyra, ‘but the words which God speaks to the Son,
are not sons. They are not substances of God, but vocal energies; but
the Son, though a Word, is not such, but, being a Son, is a
substance.’ Epiph. Hær. 73. 12. The Semiarians are
speaking against Sabellianism, which took the same ground here as
Arianism; so did the heresy of the Samosatene, who according to
Epiphanius, considered our Lord as the internal Word, or thought.
Hær. 65. The term word in this inferior sense is often in
Greek ῥῆμα. Epiph. supr. and Cyril,
de Incarn. Unig. init. t. v. i. p. 679. | ?’ Insensate,
and anything but Christians862
| 862 ‘If they understood and acknowledged the characteristic idea
(χαρακτῆρα) of Christianity, they would not have said that the Lord
of glory was a creature.’ Ad Serap. ii. 7. In Orat.
i. §2, he says, Arians are not Christians because they are
Arians, for Christians are called, not from Arius, but from Christ, who
is their only Master. Vid. also de Syn. §38. init. Sent.
D. fin. Ad Afros. 4. Their cruelty and cooperation with the
heathen populace was another reason. Greg. Naz. Orat. 25.
12. | ! for first, on using
such language about God, they conceive of Him almost as a man, speaking
and reversing His first words by His second, just as if one Word from
God were not sufficient for the framing of all things at the
Father’s will, and for His providential care of all. For His
speaking many words would argue a feebleness in them all, each needing
the service of the other. But that God should have one Word, which is
the true doctrine, both shews the power of God, and the perfection of
the Word that is from Him, and the religious understanding of them who
thus believe.
17. O that they would consent to confess the
truth from this their own statement! for if they once grant that God
produces words, they plainly know Him to be a Father; and acknowledging
this, let them consider that, while they are loth to ascribe one Word
to God, they are imagining that He is Father of many; and while they
are loth to say that there is no Word of God at all, yet they do not
confess that He is the Son of God,—which is ignorance of the
truth, and inexperience in divine Scripture. For if God is Father of a
word at all, wherefore is not He that is begotten a Son? And again, who
should be Son of God, but His Word? For there are not many words, or
each would be imperfect, but one is the Word, that He only may be
perfect, and because, God being one, His Image too must be one, which
is the Son. For the Son of God, as may be learnt from the divine
oracles themselves, is Himself the Word of God, and the Wisdom, and the
Image, and the Hand, and the Power; for God’s offspring is one,
and of the generation from the Father these titles are tokens863
| 863 All the
titles of the Son of God are consistent with each other, and variously
represent one and the same Person. ‘Son’ and
‘Word,’ denote His derivation; ‘Word’ and
‘Image,’ His Similitude; ‘Word’ and
‘Wisdom,’ His immateriality; ‘Wisdom’ and
‘Hand,’ His coexistence. ‘If He is not Son, neither
is He Image’ Orat. ii. §2. ‘How is there Word
and Wisdom, unless He be a proper offspring of His substance? ii.
§22. Vid. also Orat. i. §20. 21. and at great length
Orat. iv. §20, &c. vid. also Naz. Orat. 30. n.
20. Basil. contr. Eunom. i. 18. Hilar. de Trin. vii. 11.
August. in Joan. xlviii. 6. and in Psalm. xliv. (xlv.)
5. | . For if you say the Son, you have declared
what is from the Father by nature; and if you think of the Word, you
are thinking again of what is from
Him, and what is inseparable; and, speaking of Wisdom, again you mean
just as much, what is not from without, but from Him and in Him; and if
you name the Power and the Hand, again you speak of what is proper to
essence; and, speaking of the Image, you signify the Son; for what else
is like God but the offspring from Him? Doubtless the things, which
came to be through the Word, these are ‘founded in Wisdom’
and what are ‘founded in Wisdom,’ these are all made by the
Hand, and came to be through the Son. And we have proof of this, not
from external sources, but from the Scriptures; for God Himself says by
Isaiah the Prophet; ‘My hand also hath laid the foundation of the
earth, and My right hand hath spanned the heavens864
.’ And again, ‘And I will cover
thee in the shadow of My Hand, by which I planted the heavens, and laid
the foundations of the earth865
.’ And David
being taught this, and knowing that the Lord’s Hand was nothing
else than Wisdom, says in the Psalm, ‘In wisdom hast Thou made
them all; the earth is full of Thy creation866
.’ Solomon also received the same from
God, and said, ‘The Lord by wisdom founded the earth867
,’ and John, knowing that the Word was
the Hand and the Wisdom, thus preached, ‘In the beginning was the
Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God; the same was in
the beginning with God: all things were made by Him, and without Him
was not anything made868
.’ And the
Apostle, seeing that the Hand and the Wisdom and the Word was nothing
else than the Son, says, ‘God, who at sundry times and in divers
manners spake in time past unto the Fathers by the Prophets, hath in
these last days spoken unto us by His Son, whom He hath appointed Heir
of all things, by whom also He made the ages869
.’ And again, ‘There is one Lord
Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and we through Him870
.’ And knowing also that the Word, the
Wisdom, the Son Himself was the Image of the Father, he says in the
Epistle to the Colossians, ‘Giving thanks to God and the Father,
which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the
Saints in light, who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and
hath translated us into the kingdom of His dear Son; in whom we have
redemption, even the remission of sins; who is the Image of the
Invisible God, the First-born of every creature; for by Him were all
things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and
invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions or principalities or
powers; all things were created by Him and for Him; and He is before
all things, and in Him all things consist871
.’ For as all things are created by the
Word, so, because He is the Image, are they also created in Him872
| 872 Vid. a
beautiful passage, contr. Gent. 42, &c. Again, of men, de
Incarn. 3. 3; also Orat. ii. 78. where he speaks of Wisdom
as being infused into the world on its creation, that it might possess
‘a type and semblance of its Image.’ | . And thus anyone who directs his thoughts to
the Lord, will avoid stumbling upon the stone of offence, but rather
will go forward to the brightness in the light of truth; for this is
really the doctrine of truth, though these contentious men burst with
spite873
| 873 διαῤ&
191·αγῶσιν,
and so Serap. ii. fin. διαῤ&
191·ηγνύωνται. de Syn. 34. διαῤ&
191·ηγύωσιν
ἑαυτούς.
Orat. ii. §23. σπαραττέτωσαν
ἑαυτούς.
Orat. ii. §64. τριζέτω
τοὺς
ὀδόντας.
Sent. D. 16. | , neither religious toward God, nor abashed at
their confutation.E.C.F. INDEX & SEARCH
|
