Bad Advertisement?
Are you a Christian?
Online Store:Visit Our Store
| Texts Explained; Ninthly, John x. 30; xvii. 11, &c. Arian explanation, that the Son is one with the Father in will and judgment; but so are all good men, nay things inanimate; contrast of the Son. Oneness between Them is in nature, because oneness in operation. Angels not objects of prayer, because they do not work together with God, but the Son; texts quoted. Seeing an Angel, is not seeing God. Arians in fact hold two Gods, and tend to Gentile polytheism. Arian explanation that the Father and Son are one as we are one with Christ, is put aside by the Regula Fidei, and shewn invalid by the usage of Scripture in illustrations; the true force of the comparison; force of the terms used. Force of 'in us;' force of 'as;' confirmed by S. John. In what sense we are 'in God' and His 'sons.'
PREVIOUS SECTION - NEXT SECTION - HELP 
Chapter XXV.—Texts
Explained; Ninthly, John x. 30; xvii.
11, &c. Arian
explanation, that the Son is one with the Father in will and judgment;
but so are all good men, nay things inanimate; contrast of the Son.
Oneness between Them is in nature, because oneness in operation. Angels
not objects of prayer, because they do not work together with God, but
the Son; texts quoted. Seeing an Angel, is not seeing God. Arians in
fact hold two Gods, and tend to Gentile polytheism. Arian explanation
that the Father and Son are one as we are one with Christ, is put aside
by the Regula Fidei, and shewn invalid by the usage of Scripture in
illustrations; the true force of the comparison; force of the terms
used. Force of ‘in us;’ force of ‘as;’
confirmed by S. John. In what sense we are ‘in God’ and His
‘sons.’
10. However here too
they introduce their private fictions, and contend that the Son and the
Father are not in such wise ‘one,’ or ‘like,’
as the Church preaches, but, as they themselves would have it2866
| 2866 ὡς αὐτοὶ
θέλουσι.
vid. §8, n. 12. ‘not as you say, but as we will.’ This
is a common phrase with Athan. vid. supr. Or. i. 13, n. 6. and
especially Hist. Ar. 52, n. 4. (vid. also Sent. Dion. 4,
14). It is here contrasted to the Church’s doctrine, and
connected with the word ἴδιος· for which
de Syn. 3, n. 6; Or. i. 37, n. 1. Vid. also Letter
54. fin. Also contr. Apoll. ii. 5 init. in contrast with
the εὐαγγελικὸς
ὅρος. | . For they say, since what the Father wills,
the Son wills also, and is not contrary either in what He thinks or in
what He judges, but is in all respects concordant2867
| 2867 σύμφωνος. vid. infr. 23, de Syn. 48, and 53, n. 9. the
Arian συμφωνία is touched on de Syn. 23, n. 3. Besides Origen,
Novatian, the Creed of Lucian, and (if so) S. Hilary, as mentioned in
the former of these notes, ‘one’ is explained as oneness of
will by S. Hippolytus, contr. Noet. 7, where he explains
John x. 30. by xvii.
22.
like the Arians; and, as might be expected, by Eusebius Eccl.
Theol. iii. p. 193. and by Asterius ap. Euseb. contr. Marc.
pp. 28, 37. The passages of the Fathers in which this text is adduced
are collected by Maldonat. in loc. | with Him, declaring doctrines which are the
same, and a word consistent and united with the Father’s
teaching, therefore it is that He and the Father are One; and some of
them have dared to write as well as say this2868
.
Now what can be more unseemly or irrational than this? for if therefore
the Son and the Father are One and if in this way the Word is like the
Father, it follows forthwith2869
| 2869 ὥρα. vid. de Syn. 34, n. 4. also Orat. ii. 6, b.
iv. 19, c. d. Euseb. contr. Marc. p. 47, b. p. 91, b. Cyril.
Dial. p. 456. Thesaur. p. 255 fin. | that the Angels2870
| 2870 This
argument is found de Syn. 48. vid. also Cyril. de Trin.
i. p. 407. | too, and the other beings above us, Powers
and Authorities, and Thrones and Dominions, and what we see, Sun and
Moon, and the Stars, should be sons also, as the Son; and that it
should be said of them too, that they and the Father are one, and that
each is God’s Image and Word. For what God wills, that will they;
and neither in judging nor in doctrine are they discordant, but in all
things are obedient to their Maker. For they would not have remained in
their own glory, unless, what the Father willed, that they had willed
also. He, for instance, who did not remain, but went astray, heard the
words, ‘How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the
morning2871
?’ But if this be so, how is only
He Only-begotten Son and Word and Wisdom? or how, whereas so many are
like the Father, is He only an Image? for among men too will be found
many like the Father, numbers, for instance, of martyrs, and before
them the Apostles and Prophets, and again before them the Patriarchs.
And many now too keep the Saviour’s command, being merciful
‘as their Father which is in heaven2872
,’ and observing the exhortation,
‘Be ye therefore followers of God as dear children, and walk in
love, as Christ also hath loved us2873
;’ many
too have become followers of Paul as he also of Christ2874
. And yet no one of these is Word or Wisdom
or Only-begotten Son or Image; nor did any one of them make bold to
say, ‘I and the Father are One,’ or, ‘I in the
Father, and the Father in Me2875
;’ but it is
said of all of them, ‘Who is like unto Thee among the gods, O
Lord? and who shall be likened to the Lord among the sons of Gods2876
?’ and of Him on the contrary that He
only is Image true and natural of the Father. For though we have been
made after the Image2877
| 2877 Aug.
de Trin. vii. fin. | , and called both
image and glory of God, yet not on our own account still, but for that
Image and true Glory of God inhabiting us, which is His Word, who was
for us afterwards made flesh, have we this grace of our
designation.
11. This their notion then being evidently
unseemly and irrational as well as the rest, the likeness and the
oneness must be referred to the very Essence of the Son; for unless it
be so taken, He will not be shown to have anything beyond things
originate, as has been said, nor will He be like the Father, but He
will be like the Father’s doctrines; and He differs from the
Father, in that the Father is Father2878
| 2878 Cf.
Serap. i. 16. de Syn. 51. and infr. §19,
note. And so S. Cyril, cf. Or. i. 21–24, de Decr.
11, n. 6, Thesaur. p. 133, Naz. Orat. 29, 5. vid. also
23, 6 fin. 25, 16. vid. also the whole of Basil, adv. Eun. ii.
23. ‘One must not say,’ he observes, ‘that these
names properly and primarily, κυρίως καὶ
πρώτως belong to
men, and are given by us but by a figure καταχρηστικῶς
(ii. 39, n. 7) to God. For our Lord Jesus Christ,
referring us back to the Origin of all and True Cause of beings says,
“Call no one your father upon earth, for One is your Father,
which is in heaven.”’ He adds, that if He is properly and
not metaphorically even our Father (de Decr. 31, n. 5), much
more is He the πατὴρ τοῦ
κατὰ φύσιν
υἱοῦ. Vid. also Euseb.
contr. Marc. p. 22, c. Eccl. Theol. i. 12. fin. ii. 6.
Marcellus, on the other hand, said that our Lord was κυρίως
λόγος, not
κυρίως
υἱ& 231·ς. ibid. ii.
10 fin. vid. supr. ii. 19, note 3. | , but the doctrines and teaching are the
Father’s. If then in respect to the doctrines and the teaching
the Son is like the Father, then the Father according to them will be
Father in name only, and the Son will not be an exact Image, or rather
will be seen to have no propriety at all or likeness of the Father; for
what likeness or propriety has he who is so utterly different from the
Father? for Paul taught like the Saviour, yet was not like ‘Him
in essence2879
| 2879 κατ᾽ οὐσίαν
ὅμοιος,
Or. i. 21, n. 8. | .’ Having then such notions, they
speak falsely; whereas the Son and the Father are one in such wise as
has been said, and in such wise is the Son like the Father Himself and
from Him, as we may see and understand son to be towards father, and as
we may see the radiance towards the sun. Such then being the Son,
therefore when the Son works, the Father is the Worker2880
, and the Son coming to the Saints, the
Father is He who cometh in the Son2881
| 2881 And
so ἐργαζομένου
τοῦ πατρὸς,
ἐργάζεσθαι
καὶ τὸν υἱ&
231·ν. In illud Omn. 1, d. Cum
luce nobis prodeat, In Patre totus Filius, et totus in Verbo Pater.
Hymn. Brev. in fer. 2. Ath. argues from this oneness of
operation the oneness of substance. And thus S. Chrysostom on the text
under review argues that if the Father and Son are one κατὰ τὴν
δύναμιν,
they are one also in οὐσία. in
Joan. Hom. 61, 2, d. Tertullian in Prax. 22. and S.
Epiphanius, Hær. 57. p. 488. seem to say the same on the
same text. vid. Lampe in loc. And so S. Athan. τριὰς
ἀδιαίρετος
τῇ φύσει, καὶ
μία ταύτης ἡ
ἐνέργεια. Serap. i. 28, f. ἓν
θέλημα
πατρὸς καὶ
υἱοῦ καὶ
βούλημα, ἐπεὶ
καὶ ἡ φύσις
μία. In illud Omn. 5.
Various passages of the Fathers to the same effect (e.g. of S. Ambrose,
si unius voluntatis et operationis, unius est essentiæ, de
Sp. ii. 12. fin. and of S. Basil, ὦν
μία ἐνέργεια,
τούτων καὶ
οὐσία μία, of Greg. Nyss. and Cyril. Alex.) are brought together in the
Lateran Council. Concil. Hard. t. 3, p. 859, &c. The subject
is treated at length by Petavius Trin. iv. 15. | , as He
promised when He said, ‘I and My Father will come, and will make
Our abode with him2882
;’ for in the
Image is contemplated the Father, and in the Radiance is the Light.
Therefore also, as we said just now, when the Father gives grace and
peace, the Son also gives it, as Paul signifies in every Epistle,
writing, ‘Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord
Jesus Christ.’ For one and the same grace is from the Father in
the Son, as the light of the sun and of the radiance is one, and as the
sun’s illumination is effected through the radiance; and so too
when he prays for the Thessalonians, in saying, ‘Now God Himself
even our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ, may He direct our way unto
you2883
,’ he has guarded the unity of the
Father and of the Son. For he has not said, ‘May they
direct,’ as if a double grace were given from two Sources, This
and That, but ‘May He direct,’ to shew that the Father
gives it through the Son;—at which these irreligious ones will
not blush, though they well might.
12. For if there were no unity, nor the Word the
own Offspring of the Father’s Essence, as the radiance of the
light, but the Son were divided in nature from the Father, it were
sufficient that the Father alone should give, since none of originate
things is a partner with his Maker in His givings; but, as it is, such
a mode of giving shews the oneness of the Father and the Son. No one,
for instance, would pray to receive from God and the Angels2884
| 2884 Vid.
Basil de Sp. S. c. 13. Chrysostom on Col. 2. And Theodoret on
Col. iii. 17. says, ‘Following this rule, the Synod of Laodicea,
with a view to cure this ancient disorder, passed a decree against the
praying to Angels, and leaving our Lord Jesus Christ.’ ‘All
supplication, prayer, intercession, and thanksgiving is to be addressed
to the Supreme God, through the High Priest who is above all Angels,
the Living Word and God.…But angels we may not fitly call upon,
since we have not obtained a knowledge of them which is above
men.’ Origen contr. Cels. v. 4, 5. vid. also for similar
statements Voss. de Idololatr. i. 9. The doctrine of the
Gnostics, who worshipped Angels, is referred to supr. Orat. i.
56, fin. note 1. | , or from any other creature, nor would any
one say, ‘May God and the Angel give thee;’ but from Father
and the Son, because of Their oneness and the oneness of Their giving.
For through the Son is given what is given; and there is nothing but
the Father operates it through the Son; for thus is grace secure to him
who receives it. And if the Patriarch Jacob, blessing his grandchildren
Ephraim and Manasses, said, ‘God which fed me all my life long
unto this day, the Angel which delivered me from all evil, bless the
lads2885
| 2885 Gen. xlviii. 15,
16.
vid. Serap. i. 14. And on the doctrine vid. de Syn. 27
(15, 16). Infr. §14, he shews that his doctrine, when fully
explained, does not differ from S. Augustine, for he says, ‘what
was seen was an Angel, but God spoke in him,’ i.e.
sometimes the Son is called an Angel, but when an Angel was
seen, it was not the Son; and if he called himself God, it was
not he who spoke, but the Son was the unseen speaker. vid. Benedictine
Monitum in Hil. Trin. iv. For passages vid. Tertull. de
Præscr. p. 447, note f. Oxf. Transl. | ,’ yet none of created and natural
Angels did he join to God their Creator, nor rejecting God that fed
him, did he from Angel ask the blessing on his grandsons; but in
saying, ‘Who delivered me from all evil,’ he shewed that it
was no created Angel, but the Word of God, whom he joined to the Father
in his prayer, through whom, whomsoever He will, God doth deliver. For
knowing that He is also called the Father’s ‘Angel of great
Counsel2886
,’ he said that none other than
He was the Giver of blessing, and Deliverer from evil. Nor was it that
he desired a blessing for himself from God but for his grandchildren
from the Angel, but whom He Himself had besought saying, ‘I will
not let Thee go except Thou bless me2887
’ (for
that was God, as he says himself, ‘I have seen God face to
face’), Him he prayed to bless also the sons of Joseph. It is
proper then to an Angel to minister at the command of God, and often
does he go forth to cast out the Amorite, and is sent to guard the
people in the way; but these are not his doings, but of God who
commanded and sent him, whose also it is to deliver, whom He will
deliver. Therefore it was no other
than the Lord God Himself whom he had seen, who said to him, ‘And
behold I am with thee, to guard thee in all the way whither thou2888
goest;’ and it was no other than God
whom he had seen, who kept Laban from his treachery, ordering him not
to speak evil words to Jacob; and none other than God did he himself
beseech, saying, ‘Rescue me from the hand of my brother Esau, for
I fear him2889
;’ for in conversation too with
his wives he said, ‘God hath not suffered Laban to injure
me.’
13. Therefore it was none other than God Himself
that David too besought concerning his deliverance, ‘When I was
in trouble, I called upon the Lord, and He heard me; deliver my soul, O
Lord, from lying lips and from a deceitful tongue2890
.’ To Him also giving thanks he spoke
the words of the Song in the seventeenth Psalm, in the day in which the
Lord delivered him from the hand of all his enemies and from the hand
of Saul, saying, ‘I will love Thee, O Lord my strength; the Lord
is my strong rock and my defence and deliverer2891
.’ And Paul, after enduring many
persecutions, to none other than God gave thanks, saying, ‘Out of
them all the Lord delivered me; and He will deliver in Whom we trust2892
.’ And none other than God blessed
Abraham and Isaac; and Isaac praying for Jacob, said, ‘May God
bless thee and increase thee and multiply thee, and thou shalt be for
many companies of nations, and may He give thee the blessing of Abraham
my father2893
.’ But if it belong to none other
than God to bless and to deliver, and none other was the deliverer of
Jacob than the Lord Himself and Him that delivered him the Patriarch
besought for his grandsons, evidently none other did he join to God in
his prayer, than God’s Word, whom therefore he called Angel,
because it is He alone who reveals the Father. Which the Apostle also
did when he said, ‘Grace unto you and peace from God our Father
and the Lord Jesus Christ2894
.’ For thus
the blessing was secure, because of the Son’s indivisibility from
the Father, and for that the grace given by Them is one and the same.
For though the Father gives it, through the Son is the gift; and though
the Son be said to vouchsafe it, it is the Father who supplies it
through and in the Son; for ‘I thank my God,’ says the
Apostle writing to the Corinthians, ‘always on your behalf, for
the grace of God which is given you in Christ Jesus2895
.’ And this one may see in the instance
of light and radiance; for what the light enlightens, that the radiance
irradiates; and what the radiance irradiates, from the light is its
enlightenment. So also when the Son is beheld, so is the Father, for He
is the Father’s radiance; and thus the Father and the Son are
one.
14. But this is not so with things originate and
creatures; for when the Father works, it is not that any Angel works,
or any other creature; for none of these is an efficient cause2896
, but they are of things which come to be;
and moreover being separate and divided from the only God, and other in
nature, and being works, they can neither work what God works, nor, as
I said before, when God gives grace, can they give grace with Him. Nor,
on seeing an Angel would a man say that he had seen the Father; for
Angels, as it is written, are ‘ministering spirits sent forth to
minister2897
,’ and are heralds of gifts given
by Him through the Word to those who receive them. And the Angel on his
appearance, himself confesses that he has been sent by his Lord; as
Gabriel confessed in the case of Zacharias, and also in the case of
Mary, bearer of God2898
| 2898 τῆς
θεοτόκου
Μαρίας.
[Prolegg. ch. iv. §5.] vid. also infr. 29, 33. Orat.
iv. 32. Incarn. c. Ar. 8, 22. supr. Or. i. 45, n. 3. As
to the history of this title, Theodoret, who from his party would
rather be disinclined towards it, says that the most ancient
(τῶν
πάλαι καὶ
πρόπαλαι) heralds of the orthodox faith taught to name and believe the
Mother of the Lord θεοτόκον, according to ‘the Apostolical tradition.’
Hær. iv. 12. And John of Antioch, whose championship of
Nestorius and quarrel with S. Cyril are well known, writes to the
former. ‘This title no ecclesiastical teacher has put aside;
those who have used it are many and eminent, and those who have not
used it have not attacked those who used it.’ Concil. Eph.
part i. c. 25 (Labb.). Socrates Hist. vii. 32. says that Origen,
in the first tome of his Comment on the Romans (vid. de la Rue in Rom.
lib. i. 5. the original is lost), treated largely of the word; which
implies that it was already in use. ‘Interpreting,’ he
says, ‘how θεοτόκος is used, he discussed the question at length.’
Constantine implies the same in a passage which divines, e.g. Pearson
(On the Creed, notes on Art. 3.), have not dwelt upon (or rather
have apparently overlooked, in arguing from Ephrem. ap. Phot.
Cod. 228, p. 776. that the literal phrase ‘Mother of
God’ originated in S. Leo). [See vol. 1, p. 569 of this
Series.] | . And he who beholds
a vision of Angels, knows that he has seen the Angel and not God. For
Zacharias saw an Angel; and Isaiah saw the Lord. Manoah, the father of
Samson, saw an Angel; but Moses beheld God. Gideon saw an Angel, but to
Abraham appeared God. And neither he who saw God, beheld an Angel, nor
he who saw an Angel, considered that he saw God; for greatly, or rather
wholly, do things by nature originate differ from God the Creator. But
if at any time, when the Angel was seen, he who saw it heard
God’s voice, as took place at the bush; for ‘the Angel of
the Lord was seen in a flame of fire out of the bush, and the Lord
called Moses out of the bush, saying, I am the God of thy father, the
God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob2899
,’ yet was not the Angel the God of Abraham, but in the Angel
God spoke. And what was seen was an Angel; but God spoke in him2900
. For as He spoke to Moses in the pillar of a
cloud in the tabernacle, so also God appears and speaks in Angels. So
again to the son of Nun He spake by an Angel. But what God speaks, it
is very plain He speaks through the Word, and not through another. And
the Word, as being not separate from the Father, nor unlike and foreign
to the Father’s Essence, what He works, those are the
Father’s works, and His framing of all things is one with His;
and what the Son gives, that is the Father’s gift. And he who
hath seen the Son, knows that, in seeing Him, he has seen, not Angel,
nor one merely greater than Angels, nor in short any creature, but the
Father Himself. And he who hears the Word, knows that he hears the
Father; as he who is irradiated by the radiance, knows that he is
enlightened by the sun.
15. For divine Scripture wishing us thus to
understand the matter, has given such illustrations, as we have said
above, from which we are able both to press the traitorous Jews, and to
refute the allegation of Gentiles who maintain and think, on account of
the Trinity, that we profess many gods2901
| 2901 Serap. i. 28 fin. Naz. Orat. 23, 8. Basil.
Hom. 24 init. Nyssen. Orat. Catech. 3. p. 481. | .
For, as the illustration shows, we do not introduce three Origins or
three Fathers, as the followers of Marcion and Manichæus; since we
have not suggested the image of three suns, but sun and radiance. And
one is the light from the sun in the radiance; and so we know of but
one origin; and the All-framing Word we profess to have no other manner
of godhead, than that of the Only God, because He is born from Him.
Rather then will the Ario-maniacs with reason incur the charge of
polytheism or else of atheism2902
| 2902 Infr. §64. Ep. Æg. 14. | , because they idly
talk of the Son as external and a creature, and again the Spirit as
from nothing. For either they will say that the Word is not God; or
saying that He is God2903
, because it is so
written, but not proper to the Father’s Essence, they will
introduce many because of their difference of kind (unless forsooth
they shall dare to say that by participation only, He, as all things
else, is called God; though, if this be their sentiment, their
irreligion is the same, since they consider the Word as one among all
things). But let this never even come into our mind. For there is but
one form2904
of Godhead, which is also in the Word;
and one God, the Father, existing by Himself according as He is above
all, and appearing in the Son according as He pervades all things, and
in the Spirit according as in Him He acts in all things through the
Word2905
| 2905 And
so infr. 25, 36 fin. Serap. i. 20, b. vid. also ibid. 28,
f. a. 30, a. 31, d. iii. 1, b. 5 init. et fin. Eulogius ap. Phot.
cod. p. 865. Damascen. F. O. i. 7. Basil de Sp. S.
47, e. Cyr. Cat. xvi. 4. ibid. 24. Pseudo-Dion. de Div.
Nom. i. p. 403. Pseudo-Athan. c. Sab. Greg. 10,
e. | . For thus we confess God to be one through
the Triad, and we say that it is much more religious than the godhead
of the heretics with its many kinds2906
, and many
parts, to entertain a belief of the One Godhead in a Triad.
16. For if it be not so, but the Word is a
creature and a work out of nothing, either He is not True God because
He is Himself one of the creatures, or if they name Him God from regard
for the Scriptures, they must of necessity say that there are two
Gods2907
| 2907 Vid.
p. 75, note 7; de Syn. 27 (2), and 50, note 5. The Arians were
in the dilemma of holding two gods or worshipping the creature, unless
they denied to our Lord both divinity and worship. vid. de Decr.
6, note 5, Or. i. 30, n. 1. But ‘every substance,’
says S. Austin, ‘which is not God, is a creature, and which is
not a creature, is God.’ de Trin. i. 6. And so S. Cyril
in Joan. p. 52. vid. also Naz. Orat. 31, 6. Basil.
contr. Eunom. ii. 31. | , one Creator, the other creature, and must
serve two Lords, one Unoriginate, and the other originate and a
creature; and must have two faiths, one in the True God, and the other
in one who is made and fashioned by themselves and called God. And it
follows of necessity in so great blindness, that, when they worship the
Unoriginate, they renounce the originate, and when they come to the
creature, they turn from the Creator. For they cannot see the One in
the Other, because their natures and operations are foreign and
distinct2908
. And with such sentiments, they will
certainly be going on to more gods, for this will be the essay2909
| 2909 ἐπιχείρημα, de Decr. 1, note. | of those who revolt from the One God.
Wherefore then, when the Arians have these speculations and views, do
they not rank themselves with the Gentiles? for they too, as these,
worship the creature rather than God the Creator of all2910
| 2910 Vid.
supr. ii. 14, n. 7. Petavius gives a large collection of
passages, de Trin. ii. 12. §5. from the Fathers in proof of
the worship of Our Lord evidencing His Godhead. On the Arians as
idolaters vid. supr. Or. i. 8, n. 8. also Ep. Æg. 4,
13. and Adelph. 3 init. Serap. i. 29, d. Theodoret in
Rom. i. 25. | , and though they shrink from the Gentile
name, in order to deceive the unskilful, yet they secretly hold a like
sentiment with them. For their subtle saying which they are accustomed
to urge, We say not two ‘Unoriginates2911
,’ they plainly say to deceive the
simple; for in their very professing ‘We say not two
Unoriginates,’ they imply two Gods, and these with different
natures, one originate and one Unoriginate. And though the Greeks
worship one Unoriginate and many originate, but these one Unoriginate
and one originate, this is no difference from them; for the God whom they call
originate is one out of many, and again the many gods of the Greeks
have the same nature with this one, for both he and they are creatures.
Unhappy are they, and the more for that their hurt is from thinking
against Christ; for they have fallen from the truth, and are greater
traitors than the Jews in denying the Christ, and they wallow2912
| 2912 συγκυλίονται, vid. Orat. i. 23. ii. 1 init.; Decr. 9
fin.; Gent. 19, c. cf. 2 Pet. ii. 22. | with the Gentiles, hateful2913
| 2913 θεοστυγεῖς, infr. Letter 54. 1 fin. | as they are to God, worshipping the creature
and many deities. For there is One God, and not many, and One is His
Word, and not many; for the Word is God, and He alone has the Form2914
| 2914 εἶδος· also
in Gen. xxxii. 30, 31. Sept. [a substitute
for Heb. ‘face.’] vid. Justin Tryph. 126. and
supr. de Syn. 56, n. 6. for the meaning of the word. It was just
now used for ‘kind.’ Athan. says, de Syn. ubi supr.
‘there is but one form of Godhead;’ yet the word is used of
the Son as synonymous with ‘image.’ It would seem as if
there are a certain class of words, all expressive of the One Divine
Substance, which admit of more appropriate application either
ordinarily or under circumstances, to This or That Divine Person who is
also that One Substance. Thus ‘Being’ is more descriptive
of the Father as the πηγὴ
θεότητος, and He is said to be ‘the Being of the Son;’ yet the
Son is really the One Supreme Being also. On the other hand the
words μορφὴ and
εἶδος [on them see Lightfoot, Philipp. p. 128] are rather
descriptive of the Divine Substance in the Person of the Son, and He is
called ‘the form of the Father,’ yet there is but one Form
and Face of Divinity, who is at once Each of Three Persons; while
‘Spirit’ is appropriated to the Third Person, though God is
a Spirit. Thus again S. Hippolytus says ἐκ [τοῦ
πατρὸς]
δύναμις
λόγος, yet shortly
before, after mentioning the Two Persons, he adds, δύναμιν
δὲ μίαν,
contr. Noet. 7 and 11. And thus the word
‘Subsistence,’ ὑπόστασις, which expresses the One Divine Substance, has been found
more appropriate to express that Substance viewed personally. Other
words may be used correlatively of either Father or Son; thus the
Father is the Life of the Son, the Son the Life of the Father; or,
again, the Father is in the Son and the Son in the Father. Others in
common, as ‘the Father’s Godhead is the
Son’s,’ ἡ
πατρικὴ
υἱοῦ
θεότης, as
indeed the word οὐσία itself.
Other words on the contrary express the Substance in This or That
Person only, as ‘Word,’ ‘Image,’
&c. | of the Father. Being then such, the Saviour
Himself troubled the Jews with these words, ‘The Father Himself
which hath sent Me, hath borne witness of Me; ye have neither heard His
voice at any time nor seen His Form; and ye have not His Word abiding
in you; for whom He hath sent, Him ye believe not2915
.’ Suitably has He joined the
‘Word’ to the ‘Form,’ to shew that the Word of
God is Himself Image and Expression and Form of His Father; and that
the Jews who did not receive Him who spoke to them, thereby did not
receive the Word, which is the Form of God. This too it was that the
Patriarch Jacob having seen, received a blessing from Him and the name
of Israel instead of Jacob, as divine Scripture witnesses, saying,
‘And as he passed by the Form of God, the Sun rose upon him2916
.’ And This it was who said, ‘He
that hath seen Me hath seen the Father,’ and, ‘I in the
Father and the Father in Me,’ and, ‘I and the Father are
one2917
;’ for thus God is One, and one the
faith in the Father and Son; for, though the Word be God, the Lord our
God is one Lord; for the Son is proper to that One, and inseparable
according to the propriety and peculiarity of His Essence.
17. The Arians, however, not even thus abashed,
reply, ‘Not as you say, but as we will2918
;’ for, whereas you have overthrown our
former expedients, we have invented a new one, and it is this:—So
are the Son and the Father One, and so is the Father in the Son and the
Son in the Father, as we too may become one in Him. For this is written
in the Gospel according to John, and Christ desired it for us in these
words, ‘Holy Father, keep through Thine own Name, those whom Thou
hast given Me, that they may be one, as We are2919
.’ And shortly after; ‘Neither
pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on Me
through their Word; that they all may be one, as Thou, Father, art in
Me, and I in Thee, that they also may be one in Us, that the world may
believe that Thou hast sent Me. And the glory which Thou gavest Me I
have given them, that they may be one, even as We are one; I in them,
and Thou in Me, that they may be made perfect in one, and that the
world may know that Thou didst send Me2920
.’ Then, as having found an evasion,
these men of craft2921
| 2921 οἱ δόλιοι. crafty as they are, also infr. 59. | add, ‘If, as
we become one in the Father, so also He and the Father are one, and
thus He too is in the Father, how pretend you from His saying, “I
and the Father are One,” and “I in the Father and the
Father in Me,” that He is proper and like2922
| 2922 Or. i. 21, n. 8, cf. infr. §67. |
the Father’s Essence? for it follows either that we too are
proper to the Father’s Essence, or He foreign to it, as we are
foreign.’ Thus they idly babble; but in this their perverseness I
see nothing but unreasoning audacity and recklessness from the devil2923
, since it is saying after his pattern,
‘We will ascend to heaven, we will be like the Most High.’
For what is given to man by grace, this they would make equal to the
Godhead of the Giver. Thus hearing that men are called sons, they
thought themselves equal to the True Son by nature such2924
| 2924 Supr. p. 171, note 5. | . And now again hearing from the Saviour,
‘that they may be one as We are2925
,’ they deceive themselves, and are
arrogant enough to think that they may be such as the Son is in the
Father and the Father in the Son; not considering the fall of their
‘father the devil2926
,’ which
happened upon such an imagination.
18. If then, as we have many times said, the Word
of God is the same with us, and nothing differs from us except in time,
let Him be like us, and have the same place with the Father as we have; nor let Him be called
Only-begotten, nor Only Word or Wisdom of the Father; but let the same
name be of common application to all us who are like Him. For it is
right, that they who have one nature, should have their name in common,
though they differ from each other in point of time. For Adam was a
man, and Paul a man, and he who is now born is a man, and time is not
that which alters the nature of the race2927
| 2927 De
Decr. 10; Or. i. 26, n. 1. | .
If then the Word also differs from us only in time, then we must be as
He. But in truth neither we are Word or Wisdom, nor is He creature or
work; else why are we all sprung from one, and He the Only Word? but
though it be suitable in them thus to speak, in us at least it is
unsuitable to entertain their blasphemies. And yet, needless2928
| 2928 Cf.
Hist. Ar. 80, n. 11. | though it be to refine upon2929
| 2929 περιεργάζεσθαι·
vid. Or. ii. 34, n. 5. | these passages, considering their so clear
and religious sense, and our own orthodox belief, yet that their
irreligion may be shewn here also, come let us shortly, as we have
received from the fathers, expose their heterodoxy from the passage. It
is a custom2930
| 2930 Orat. ii. 53, n. 4; Orat. iv. 33 init. | with divine Scripture to take the
things of nature as images and illustrations for mankind; and this it
does, that from these physical objects the moral impulses of man may be
explained; and thus their conduct shewn to be either bad or righteous.
For instance, in the case of the bad, as when it charges, ‘Be ye
not like to horse and mule which have no understanding2931
.’ Or as when it says, complaining of
those who have become such, ‘Man, being in honour, hath no
understanding, but is compared unto the beasts that perish.’ And
again, ‘They were as wanton horses2932
.’ And the Saviour to expose Herod
said, ‘Tell that fox2933
;’ but, on the
other hand, charged His disciples, ‘Behold I send you forth as
sheep in the midst of wolves; be ye therefore wise as serpents and
harmless as doves2934
.’ And He said
this, not that we may become in nature beasts of burden, or become
serpents and doves; for He hath not so made us Himself, and therefore
nature does not allow of it; but that we might eschew the irrational
motions of the one, and being aware of the wisdom of that other animal,
might not be deceived by it, and might take on us the meekness of the
dove.
19. Again, taking patterns for man from divine
subjects, the Saviour says; ‘Be ye merciful, as your Father which
is in heaven is merciful2935
;’ and,
‘Be ye perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect2936
.’ And He said this too, not that we
might become such as the Father; for to become as the Father, is
impossible for us creatures, who have been brought to be out of
nothing; but as He charged us, ‘Be ye not like to horse,’
not lest we should become as draught animals, but that we should not
imitate their want of reason, so, not that we might become as God, did
He say, ‘Be ye merciful as your Father,’ but that looking
at His beneficent acts, what we do well, we might do, not for
men’s sake, but for His sake, so that from Him and not from men
we may have the reward. For as, although there be one Son by nature,
True and Only-begotten, we too become sons, not as He in nature and
truth, but according to the grace of Him that calleth, and though we
are men from the earth, are yet called gods2937
| 2937 θεοί, §§23
end, 25, and ii. 70, n. 1. | ,
not as the True God or His Word, but as has pleased God who has given
us that grace; so also, as God do we become merciful, not by being made
equal to God, nor becoming in nature and truth benefactors (for it is
not our gift to benefit but belongs to God), but in order that what has
accrued to us from God Himself by grace, these things we may impart to
others, without making distinctions, but largely towards all extending
our kind service. For only in this way can we anyhow become imitators,
and in no other, when we minister to others what comes from Him. And as
we put a fair and right2938
sense upon these
texts, such again is the sense of the lection in John. For he does not
say, that, as the Son is in the Father, such we must
become:—whence could it be? when He is God’s Word and
Wisdom, and we were fashioned out of the earth, and He is by nature and
essence Word and true God (for thus speaks John, ‘We know that
the Son of God is come, and He hath given us an understanding to know
Him that is true, and we are in Him that is true, even in His Son Jesus
Christ; this is the true God and eternal life2939
’) and we are made sons through Him by
adoption and grace, as partaking of His Spirit (for ‘as many as
received Him,’ he says, ‘to them gave He power to become
children of God, even to them that believe on His Name2940
’), and therefore also He is the Truth
(saying, ‘I am the Truth,’ and in His address to His
Father, He said, ‘Sanctify them through Thy Truth, Thy Word is
Truth2941
’); but we by imitation2942
| 2942 κατὰ
μίμησιν.
Clem. Alex. Pædag. i. 3. p. 102. ed. Pott. Naz. Ep.
102. p. 95. (Ed. Ben.) Leo in various places, supr. ii. 55, n.
1. Iren. Hær. v. 1. August. Serm. 101, 6. August.
Trin. iv. 17. also ix. 21. and Eusebius, κατὰ τὴν
αὐτοῦ
μίμησιν.
Eccl. Theol. iii. 19, a. For inward grace as opposed to
teaching, vid. supr. Orat. ii. 56, n. 5, and 79, n.
10. | become virtuous2943
| 2943 ἐνάρετοι so πανάρετος
Clem. Rom. Ep. i. |
and sons:—therefore not that
we might become such as He, did He say ‘that they may be one as
We are;’ but that as He, being the Word, is in His own Father, so
that we too, taking an examplar and looking at Him, might become one
towards each other in concord and oneness of spirit, nor be at variance
as the Corinthians, but mind the same thing, as those five thousand in
the Acts2944
, who were as one.
20. For it is as ‘sons,’ not as the
Son; as ‘gods,’ not as He Himself; and not as the Father,
but ‘merciful as the Father.’ And, as has been said, by so
becoming one, as the Father and the Son, we shall be such, not as the
Father is by nature in the Son and the Son in the Father, but according
to our own nature, and as it is possible for us thence to be moulded
and to learn how we ought to be one, just as we learned also to be
merciful. For like things are naturally one with like; thus all flesh
is ranked together in kind2945
; but the Word is
unlike us and like the Father. And therefore, while He is in nature and
truth one with His own Father, we, as being of one kind with each other
(for from one were all made, and one is the nature of all men), become
one with each other in good disposition2946
| 2946 διαθέσει, de Decr. 2, note 5; Ep. ad Mon. (1) init.
Hipp. c. Noet. 7. | ,
having as our copy the Son’s natural unity with the Father. For
as He taught us meekness from Himself, saying, ‘Learn of Me for I
am meek and lowly in heart2947
,’ not that we
may become equal to Him, which is impossible, but that looking towards
Him, we may remain meek continually, so also here wishing that our good
disposition towards each other should be true and firm and
indissoluble, from Himself taking the pattern, He says, ‘that
they may be one as We are,’ whose oneness is indivisible; that
is, that they learning from us of that indivisible Nature, may preserve
in like manner agreement one with another. And this imitation of
natural conditions is especially safe for man, as has been said; for,
since they remain and never change, whereas the conduct of men is very
changeable, one may look to what is unchangeable by nature, and avoid
what is bad and remodel himself on what is best.
21. And for this reason also the words,
‘that they may be one in Us,’ have a right sense. If, for
instance, it were possible for us to become as the Son in the Father,
the words ought to run, ‘that they may be one in Thee,’ as
the Son is in the Father; but, as it is, He has not said this; but by
saying ‘in Us’ He has pointed out the distance and
difference; that He indeed is alone in the Father alone, as Only Word
and Wisdom; but we in the Son, and through Him in the Father. And thus
speaking, He meant this only, ‘By Our unity may they also be so
one with each other, as We are one in nature and truth; for otherwise
they could not be one, except by learning unity in Us.’ And that
‘in Us’ has this signification, we may learn from Paul, who
says, ‘These things I have in a figure transferred to myself and
to Apollos, that ye may learn in us not to be puffed up above that is
written2948
.’ The words ‘in Us’
then, are not ‘in the Father,’ as the Son is in Him; but
imply an example and image, instead of saying, ‘Let them learn of
Us.’ For as Paul to the Corinthians, so is the oneness of the Son
and the Father a pattern and lesson to all, by which they may learn,
looking to that natural unity of the Father and the Son, how they
themselves ought to be one in spirit towards each other. Or if it needs
to account for the phrase otherwise, the words ‘in Us’ may
mean the same as saying, that in the power of the Father and the Son
they may be one, speaking the same things2949
;
for without God this is impossible. And this mode of speech also we may
find in the divine writings, as ‘In God will we do great
acts;’ and ‘In God I shall leap over the wall2950
;’ and ‘In Thee will we tread
down our enemies2951
| 2951 Ps. xliv. 5. Vid. Olear.
de Styl. N. T. p. 4. (ed. 1702.) [Winer. xlviii. a.] | .’ Therefore
it is plain, that in the Name of Father and Son we shall be able,
becoming one, to hold firm the bond of charity. For, dwelling still on
the same thought, the Lord says, ‘And the glory which Thou gavest
Me, I have given to them, that they may be one as We are one.’
Suitably has He here too said, not, ‘that they may be in Thee as
I am,’ but ‘as We are;’ now he who says
‘as’2952
| 2952 This
remark which comes in abruptly is pursued presently, vid.
§23. | , signifies not
identity, but an image and example of the matter in hand.
22. The Word then has the real and true identity
of nature with the Father; but to us it is given to imitate it, as has
been said; for He immediately adds, ‘I in them and Thou in Me;
that they may be made perfect in one.’ Here at length the Lord
asks something greater and more perfect for us; for it is plain that
the Word has come to be in us2953
| 2953 Cf.
de Decr. 31. fin. | , for He has put on
our body. ‘And Thou Father in Me;’ ‘for I am Thy
Word, and since Thou art in Me, because I am Thy Word, and I in them
because of the body, and because of Thee the salvation of men is
perfected in Me, therefore I ask that they also may become one,
according to the body that is in Me and according to its perfection;
that they too may become perfect,
having oneness with It, and having become one in It; that, as if all
were carried by Me, all may be one body and one spirit, and may grow up
unto a perfect man2954
.’ For we all,
partaking of the Same, become one body, having the one Lord in
ourselves. The passage then having this meaning, still more plainly is
refuted the heterodoxy of Christ’s enemies. I repeat it; if He
had said simply and absolutely2955
‘that they
may be one in Thee,’ or ‘that they and I may be one in
Thee,’ God’s enemies had had some plea, though a shameless
one; but in fact He has not spoken simply, but, ‘As Thou, Father,
in Me, and I in Thee, that they may be all one.’ Moreover, using
the word ‘as,’ He signifies those who become distantly as
He is in the Father; distantly not in place but in nature; for in place
nothing is far from God2956
| 2956 Vid.
de Decr. 11, n. 5, which is explained by the present passage.
When Ath. there says, ‘without all in nature,’ he must mean
as here, ‘far from all things in nature.’ S. Clement
loc. cit. gives the same explanation, as there noticed. It is
observable that the contr. Sab. Greg. 10 (which the Benedictines
consider not Athan.’s) speaks as de Decr. supr. Eusebius
says the same thing, de Incorpor. i. init. ap. Sirm. Op.
p. 68. vid. S. Ambros. Quomodo creatura in Deo esse potest, &c.
de Fid. i. 106. and supr. §1, n. 10. | , but in nature only
all things are far from Him. And, as I said before, whoso uses the
particle ‘as’ implies, not identity, nor equality, but a
pattern of the matter in question, viewed in a certain respect2957
| 2957 Vid.
Glass. Phil. Sacr. iii. 5. can. 27. and Dettmars, de Theol.
Orig. ap. Lumper. Hist. Patr. t. 10, p. 212. Vid. also
supr. ii. 55, n. 8. | .
23. Indeed we may learn also from the Saviour
Himself, when He says, ‘For as Jonah was three days and three
nights in the whale’s belly, so shall the Son of man be three
days and three nights in the heart of the earth2958
.’ For Jonah was not as the Saviour,
nor did Jonah go down to hades; nor was the whale hades; nor did Jonah,
when swallowed up, bring up those who had before been swallowed by the
whale, but he alone came forth, when the whale was bidden. Therefore
there is no identity nor equality signified in the term
‘as,’ but one thing and another; and it shews a certain
kind2959
| 2959 ὁμοιότητά
πως, and so at the end of
22. κατά
τι
θεωρούμενον. [A note, discussing certain views of Coplestone, Toplady,
and Blanco White, is omitted here.] | of parallel in the case of Jonah, on account
of the three days. In like manner then we too, when the Lord says
‘as,’ neither become as the Son in the Father, nor as the
Father is in the Son. For we become one as the Father and the Son in
mind and agreement2960
of spirit, and the
Saviour will be as Jonah in the earth; but as the Saviour is not Jonah,
nor, as he was swallowed up, so did the Saviour descend into hades, but
it is but a parallel, in like manner, if we too become one, as the Son
in the Father, we shall not be as the Son, nor equal to Him; for He and
we are but parallel. For on this account is the word ‘as’
applied to us; since things differing from others in nature, become as
they, when viewed in a certain relation2961
| 2961 Cyril
in Joan. p. 227, &c. | .
Wherefore the Son Himself, simply and without any condition is in the
Father; for this attribute He has by nature; but for us, to whom it is
not natural, there is needed an image and example, that He may say of
us, ‘As Thou in Me, and I in Thee.’ ‘And when they
shall be so perfected,’ He says, ‘then the world knows that
Thou hast sent Me, for unless I had come and borne this their body, no
one of them had been perfected, but one and all had remained
corruptible.2962
Work Thou then in them, O Father, and
as Thou hast given to Me to bear this, grant to them Thy Spirit, that
they too in It may become one, and may be perfected in Me. For their
perfecting shews that Thy Word has sojourned among them; and the world
seeing them perfect and full of God2963
| 2963 θεοφορουμένους. ii. 70, n. 1. | , will believe
altogether that Thou hast sent Me, and I have sojourned here. For
whence is this their perfecting, but that I, Thy Word, having borne
their body, and become man, have perfected the work, which Thou gavest
Me, O Father? And the work is perfected, because men, redeemed from
sin, no longer remain dead; but being deified2964
,
have in each other, by looking at Me, the bond of charity2965
| 2965 σύνδεσμον
τῆς ἀγαπῆς, 21. circ. fin. | .’
24. We then, by way of giving a rude view of the
expressions in this passage, have been led into many words, but blessed
John will shew from his Epistle the sense of the words, concisely and
much more perfectly than we can. And he will both disprove the
interpretation of these irreligious men, and will teach how we become
in God and God in us; and how again we become One in Him, and how far
the Son differs in nature from us, and will stop the Arians from any
longer thinking that they shall be as the Son, lest they hear it said
to them, ‘Thou art a man and not God,’ and ‘Stretch
not thyself, being poor, beside a rich man2966
.’ John then thus writes; ‘Hereby
know we that we dwell in Him and He in us, because He hath given us of
His Spirit2967
.’ Therefore because of the grace
of the Spirit which has been given to us, in Him we come to be, and He
in us2968
; and since it is the Spirit of God,
therefore through His becoming in us, reasonably are we, as having the
Spirit, considered to be in God, and thus is God in us. Not then as the
Son in the Father, so also we
become in the Father; for the Son does not merely partake the Spirit,
that therefore He too may be in the Father; nor does He receive the
Spirit, but rather He supplies It Himself to all; and the Spirit does
not unite the Word to the Father2969
| 2969 [i.e.
not by grace] Vid. the end of this section and 25 init. supr.
Or. i. 15. also Cyril Hier. Cat. xvi. 24. Epiph.
Ancor. 67 init. Cyril in Joan. pp. 929, 930. | , but rather
the Spirit receives from the Word. And the Son is in the Father, as His
own Word and Radiance; but we, apart from the Spirit, are strange and
distant from God, and by the participation of the Spirit we are knit
into the Godhead; so that our being in the Father is not ours, but is
the Spirit’s which is in us and abides in us, while by the true
confession we preserve it in us, John again saying, ‘Whosoever
shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him and he
in God2970
.’ What then is our likeness and
equality to the Son? rather, are not the Arians confuted on every side?
and especially by John, that the Son is in the Father in one way, and
we become in Him in another, and that neither we shall ever be as He,
nor is the Word as we; except they shall dare, as commonly, so now to
say, that the Son also by participation of the Spirit and by
improvement of conduct2971
| 2971 βελτιώσει
πράξεως,
and so ad Afros. τρόπων
βελτίωσις. 8. Supr. Or. i. 37, 43. it is rather some external
advance. | came to be Himself
also in the Father. But here again is an excess of irreligion, even in
admitting the thought. For He, as has been said, gives to the Spirit,
and whatever the Spirit hath, He hath from2972
the Word.
25. The Saviour, then, saying of us, ‘As
Thou, Father, art in Me, and I in Thee, that they too may be one in
Us,’ does not signify that we were to have identity with Him; for
this was shewn from the instance of Jonah; but it is a request to the
Father, as John has written, that the Spirit should be vouchsafed
through Him to those who believe, through whom we are found to be in
God, and in this respect to be conjoined in Him. For since the Word is
in the Father, and the Spirit is given from2973
the Word, He wills that we should receive the Spirit, that, when we
receive It, thus having the Spirit of the Word which is in the Father,
we too may be found on account of the Spirit to become One in the Word,
and through Him in the Father. And if He say, ‘as we,’ this
again is only a request that such grace of the Spirit as is given to
the disciples may be without failure or revocation2974
. For what the Word has by nature2975
| 2975 κατὰ
φύσιν, supr. de
Decr. 31, n. 5. | , as I said, in the Father, that He wishes to
be given to us through the Spirit irrevocably; which the Apostle
knowing, said, ‘Who shall separate us from the love of
Christ?’ for ‘the gifts of God’ and ‘grace of
His calling are without repentance2976
.’ It is
the Spirit then which is in God, and not we viewed in our own selves;
and as we are sons and gods2977
| 2977 θεοί, Or. ii.
70, n. 1. | because of the Word
in us2978
, so we shall be in the Son and in the
Father, and we shall be accounted to have become one in Son and in
Father, because that that Spirit is in us, which is in the Word which
is in the Father. When then a man falls from the Spirit for any
wickedness, if he repent upon his fall, the grace remains irrevocably
to such as are willing2979
; otherwise he who
has fallen is no longer in God (because that Holy Spirit and Paraclete
which is in God has deserted him), but the sinner shall be in him to
whom he has subjected himself, as took place in Saul’s instance;
for the Spirit of God departed from him and an evil spirit was
afflicting him2980
. God’s
enemies hearing this ought to be henceforth abashed, and no longer to
feign themselves equal to God. But they neither understand (for
‘the irreligious,’ he saith, ‘does not understand
knowledge’2981
) nor endure
religious words, but find them heavy even to hear.E.C.F. INDEX & SEARCH
|
