Bad Advertisement?
Are you a Christian?
Online Store:Visit Our Store
| Chapter III. He explains the apostle's saying: “If from henceforth we know no man according to the flesh,” etc.
PREVIOUS SECTION - NEXT SECTION - HELP 
Chapter III.
He explains the apostle’s saying: “If from
henceforth we know no man according to the flesh,” etc.
And so the same Apostle
says: “From henceforth we know no man according to the flesh, and
if we have known Christ according to the flesh, yet now we know Him so
no longer.”2422
Admirably
consistent are all the writings of the sacred word with each other, and
in every portion of them: even where they do not correspond in the
form of the words, yet they agree in the drift and substance. As
where he says: “And if we have known Christ according to the
flesh, yet now we know Him so no longer.” For the witness of the
passage before us confirms that quoted above, in which he said:
“Of whom is Christ according to the flesh, who is over all, God
blessed for ever.” For there he writes: “Of whom is Christ
according to the flesh;” and here: “if we have known Christ
according to the flesh.” There: “who is over all, God
blessed for ever;” and here: “yet now we no longer know
Christ according to the flesh.” The look of the words is
different, but their force and drift is the same. For it is the same
Person whom he
there
declares to be God over all born according to the flesh, whom he here
asserts that he no longer knows according to the flesh. And plainly for
this reason; viz., because Him whom he had known as born in the flesh,
he acknowledges as God for ever; and therefore says that he knows him
not after the flesh, because He is over all, God blessed for ever; and
the phrase there: “who is over all God,” answers to this:
“we no longer know Christ according to the flesh;” and this
phrase: “we no longer know Christ according to the flesh”
implies this: “who is God blessed for ever.”2423
| 2423
Petschenig’s text reads as follows: Ac per hoc et illud ibi;
Qui est super omnia Deus, hoc dicit: non novimus, jam Christum secundum
carnem et hic: non novimus jam Christum secundum carnem, hoc ait: Qui
est Deus benedictus in sæcula. That of Gazæus has: Ac
per hoc et illud ibi qui est super omnia Deus: et hoc dicit, non
novimus jam Christum secundum carnem: Quia est Deus benedictus in
sæcula. | The declaration of Apostolic teaching
then somehow rises, as it were to greater heights, and though it is
self-consistent throughout, yet it supports the mystery of the perfect
faith, with a still more express statement, and says: “And though
we have known Christ according to the flesh, yet now we know Him so no
longer,” i.e., as formerly we knew Him as man as well as God, yet
now only as God. For when the frailty of flesh comes to an end, we no
longer know anything in Him except the power of Divinity, for all that
is in Him is the power of Divine Majesty, where the weakness of human
infirmity has ceased to exist. In this passage then he has thoroughly
expounded the whole mystery of the Incarnation, and of His perfect
Divinity. For where he says: “And if we have known Christ
according to the flesh,” he speaks of the mystery of God born in
flesh. But by adding “yet now we know Him so no longer,” he
manifests His power when weakness is laid aside. And thus that
knowledge of the flesh has to do with His humanity, and that ignorance,
with the glory of His Divinity. For to say “we have known Christ
according to the flesh:” means “as long as that which was
known, existed. Now we no longer know it, after it has ceased to exist.
For the nature of flesh has been transformed into a spiritual
substance: and that which formerly belonged to the manhood, has all
become God’s. And therefore we no longer know Christ according to
the flesh, because when bodily infirmity has been absorbed by Divine
Majesty,2424
| 2424 The language
used in the text by Cassian is scarcely defensible. The whole tenour of
the treatise shows clearly enough that his meaning is orthodox
enough, and that he fully recognizes that the Human nature of Christ is
still existing (see especially c. vi.): but the language used
comes perilously near to Eutychianism, and might be taken to imply that
the human nature had been absorbed in the Divine. Again in Book V. c.
vii. he speaks of the Son of man “united to the Son of God”
(cf. also c. viii.), language which taken by itself might seem to
sanction Nestorianism, the very heresy against which Cassian himself is
writing. These instances of inaccurate language, which a later writer
would have carefully avoided, serve to show one great service which
heresies did to the Church in making Churchmen write λογικώτερον.
Cf. Dorner, Doctrine of the Person of Christ, Vol. i. p. 458 (E.
T.). | nothing remains
in that Sacred Body, from which weakness of the flesh can be known in
it. And thus whatever had formerly belonged to a twofold substance, has
become attached to a single Power. Since there is no sort of doubt that
Christ, who was crucified through human weakness lives entirely through
the glory of His Divinity.E.C.F. INDEX & SEARCH
|
