| |
I believe that from what has been said you have
learnt sufficiently which are the things that those whose solicitude is the fear
of God have to understand and utter concerning God the Father. Let us now quote
and examine also the words uttered by our blessed Fathers in the profession of
faith concerning the Son: And in one Lord Jesus Christ the Only Begotten Son of
God, the first-born of all the creatures.
It was right that after their doctrine
concerning the Father they should teach concerning the Son according to the
teaching of our Lord, while preserving the order and the sequence of their
words. As when speaking of the Father they not only said "Father" according to
the teaching of our Lord, but added, in one God the Father and the Creator of
all things, and first placed the name of God in the profession of faith by
saying that He is one in order to refute the error of polytheism, and then
added, the Father and the Creator of all things—so also they acted concerning
the Son: In one Lord Jesus Christ the Only Begotten Son of God, the first-born
of all the creatures. In this they clearly followed the preaching of the blessed
Paul, who when teaching against idols and erroneous creeds said in refutation of
the error of polytheism: "There is but one God," and because he knew that we
hold the doctrine of the faith in the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, he
strove openly to show us that the question of the faith in these persons does
not inflict any injury on us in our faith nor does it lead us to the error of
polytheism.
Because we know that the Divine nature of the
Father, of the Son and of the Holy Spirit is one, when he desired to teach us
this faith in a succinct manner he said: "To us there is but one God, the
Father, of whom are all things." In saying "one God the Father" he confuted all
the error of polytheism, and showed that to us one Divine nature is preached. By
the addition of the person of the Father he showed us the Son also, as after
this he said: "And one Lord Jesus Christ by whom are all things" in order to
proclaim the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit together, while including also
in his sentence the Incarnation of our Lord which took place for our salvation
and in which Divine nature became our Saviour. When he says: "one Lord by whom
are all things" he alludes to God the Word who is a true Son consubstantial with
His Father. He called Him rightly Lord in order to make us understand that He is
from the Divine nature of God the Father.
We do not say that the Father is one God in the
sense that the Son is not God, nor that the Son is one Lord in the sense that
the Father is not Lord, because it is known and evident that any one who is
truly God is also truly Lord, and any one who is truly Lord is also truly God,
and any one who is not truly God is not truly Lord: "The Lord thy God is one
Lord," as He alone is so in truth. He who possesses these true attributes is
alone called Lord and God in truth, and there is no other thing outside this
nature which may be called Lord and God in truth. He who says "one God" shows
also that there is one Lord, and he who says "there is but one Lord" confesses
also that there is but one God. He (Paul) first said: "There is but one God" and
immediately after "there is but one Lord," in order to separate the persons,
because in repeating the word "one" about each one of them he showed that the
two persons are to be known as of one Divine nature, which is truly both Lord
and God.
In order to include in their sentence the human
nature which was assumed for our salvation they said: In one Lord Jesus Christ.
This name is that of the man whom God put on, as the angel said: "She shall
bring forth a Son whose name shall be called 'Jesus.'" They added also the word
Christ in order to allude to the Holy Spirit, as it is written: "Jesus of
Nazareth whom God anointed with the Holy Ghost and with power." And He is God
because of the close union with that Divine nature which is truly God.
In this same way our blessed Fathers who
assembled in that wonderful Council of the Catholic Church [of Nicea] first
spoke, like Paul, of Divine nature while coupling with it a word which denotes
the form of humanity which He took upon Him and said: And in one Lord Jesus
Christ the Only Begotten Son of God, the first-born of all creatures. It is thus
that they wished to teach mankind when they spoke of the Divine nature of the
Son. His humanity, in which is Divine nature, is also made known and proclaimed
in it, according to the saying of the blessed Paul: "God was manifest in the
flesh," and according to the saying of John the evangelist, "The Word was made
flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only
begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth."
Our Fathers rightly thought not to overlook the
humanity of our Lord which possesses such an ineffable union with Divine nature,
but added: And in one Lord Jesus Christ, as if they had said, 'We believe in one
Lord who is of Divine nature, to which the name of Lord and God is truly due.'
In speaking of God the Word they said: By whom are all things, as the evangelist
said: "All things were made by Him, and nothing was made without Him." It is as
if they had said, ' This one we understand to be one Lord who is of the Divine
nature of God the Father, who for our salvation put on a man in whom He dwelt
and through whom He appeared and became known to mankind. It is this man who was
said by the angel that he would be called Jesus, who was anointed with the Holy
Ghost in whom He was perfected and justified, as the blessed Paul testifies.'
After saying these and showing the Divine nature and the human nature which God
put on, they added: The "Only Begotten Son," the "first-born" of all creatures.
With these two words they alluded to the two natures, and by the difference
between the words they made us understand the difference between the natures.
From the fact also that they referred both words to the one person of the Son
they showed us the close union between the two natures. They did not make use of
these words out of their own head but they took them from the teaching of Holy
Writ. The blessed Paul said: "Of whom Christ in the flesh, who is God over all,"
not that He is God by nature from the fact that He is of the House of David in
the flesh, but he said "in the flesh" in order to indicate the human nature that
was assumed. He said "God over all" in order to indicate the Divine nature which
is higher than all, and which is the Lord. He used both words of one person in
order to teach the close union of the two natures, and in order to make manifest
the majesty and the honour that came to the man who was assumed by God who put
Him on.
In this same way they said also: The Only
Begotten Son, the first-born of all creatures. Because they were on the point of
enlightening us concerning the two natures: how they are, which was the Divine
nature which came down, and which was the human nature which was assumed—they
used in advance these two expressions together in order to indicate the two
natures through them. It is clear that they do not speak of one nature when they
say: The Only Begotten Son, the first-born of all creatures, because the two
expressions cannot be said of one nature, as there is a great difference between
an only son and a first-born. It is not possible that an only son and a
first-born should denote the same man. A first-born is the one who has many
brothers while an only son is the one who has no brothers. So great is the
difference between an only son and a firstborn that it may be compared with the
difference that nature places between the one who is alone and the one who is in
company of others.
We call an only son one who has no other
brothers at all while we call a first-born one who clearly has other brothers.
This the Sacred Book teaches us also without ambiguity. In wishing to speak of
an only son it says: "We beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of
the Father, full of grace and truth." It says also: "The only begotten Son who
is in the bosom of the Father," so that by His close proximity to His Father He
might be known as an only Son. The sentence, "We beheld His glory, the glory as
of an only begotten of the Father" shows that He alone is of the nature of the
Father by birth, and He alone is a Son. In using the word "bosom" it conveys to
us a union that never ceases, as it is unbecoming to understand this word to
refer to a corporeal bosom of God. Inasmuch as they call eye "sight" and ear
"hearing," so also they call a union that never ceases "bosom," as it is said:
"Render unto our neighbours sevenfold into their bosom," that is to say let them
receive punishment continually and always. The expression "only Son" that has
been used signifies, therefore, that He is alone born of the Father, that He is
alone Son, that He is always with His Father and is known with Him, because He
is truly a Son from His Father.
As to the expression "the first-born of all the
creatures," we understand it in the sense in which it is said: "For whom He did
foreknow He also did predestinate, and He formed them to the image of His Son
that He might be the first-born among many brethren." (Paul) did not make use of
this word in order to show us that He is Son alone, but in order to make us
understand that He has many brethren and that He is known among many since they
acquired with Him participation in the adoption of sons, and because of them He
is called first-born as they are His brothers. In another passage He is called
"first-born of all the creatures." This is also said about the humanity of
Christ, because (Paul) did not simply say "first-born" but "first-born of all
the creatures."
No one is called first-born if he has no other
brothers because of whom he is called and is a first-born, so the expression
"the first-born of all creatures" means that He was the first to be renewed by
His resurrection from the dead; and He changed into a new and wonderful life,
and He renewed also all the creatures and brought them to a new and a higher
creation. It is indeed said: "Everything that is in Christ is a new creature.
Old things are passed away, and all things are become new through our Lord Jesus
Christ." He is the firstborn of all the creatures because all the creation was
renewed and changed through the renewal which He granted to it by His grace from
the renewal into which He Himself was renewed, and through which He moved to a
new life and ascended high above all creatures.
He is rightly called the first-born of all the
creatures, because He was first renewed, and then He renewed the creatures,
while He is higher in honour than all of them. This is how we understand the
difference between the two names. Our Fathers, who took their wisdom from Holy
Writ, referred this difference to one person and said: In the Only Begotten Son,
the first-born of all creatures, in order to show us, as I said previously, the
close union of the two natures. It is with justice, therefore, that they first
said, "an only Son" and then, "the first-born." Indeed they had first to show us
who was the one who was in the form of God, and who, because of His grace, took
upon Him our nature, and afterwards to speak of that form of a servant which was
assumed for our salvation. In this way and by the change in the terms that they
used, they made manifest to us the two natures and differences, and also the
unity of sonship arising out of the closeness of the union of the natures, which
was effected by the will of God. In this they kept also the right order of
things as they taught first concerning Divine nature which by its grace came
down to us and put on humanity, and then concerning that humanity which was
assumed through grace, and afterwards they gave the true doctrine for the
refutation of the heretics who strove to twist the truth.
In their teaching they began later to speak of
Divine nature about which they had already spoken at the beginning of the
profession of faith: Who was bom before all the worlds, and not made. It is
clear that they said these words concerning Divine nature, although the word
"only Son" was sufficient to teach the true doctrine concerning the Son to all
non-contentious. If He is an only Son, it is clear that He alone is born of God,
and He alone is a Son con-substantial with His Father. The expression "only Son"
denotes all these things, and even more, because those who are called sons of
God are numerous, while this one is alone the only Son. It is, indeed written:
"I have said, Ye are gods, and all of you children of the Most High," and again,
"I have nourished and brought up children." Since there are many who are called
"sons" this one would not have been called "an only Son" if there was not a
great difference between them. They were called sons by grace because they
became near to God and members of the household, and because of this membership
of the household they deserved by grace to be called by this name. This one,
however, was called an only Son because He alone is a Son consubstantial with
His Father. He was not called a Son, because He, like others, became by grace
worthy of the adoption of sons, but because He was born of the very nature (of
the Father) He was called and He is a Son. Although these things are clear and
evident in the Sacred Books, and although it is patent to every one that no one
can be called an only son except the one who is truly of the same nature as his
father, the unholy and erroneous opinion of the heretics remained for some time
without rectification.
Of all those who had received the knowledge of
Christ, Arius was the first to dare and to say impiously that the Son was a
creature and was made from nothing: a novel theory alien to public opinion and
to the laws of nature, as any one who is created is not a Son, and any one who
is a Son is not a creature, because it is impossible that a creature should be
called a true Son or a true Son to be called a creature. This compelled our
blessed Fathers to assemble from all regions and hold a holy Synod in the town
of Nicea in the district of Bithynia, and to write this (profession of) faith in
order to uphold the true faith, to confute the wickedness of Arius, to refute
those who sprang up later and who are called by the name of their deceiver
Eunomius, and to overthrow those heresies which arose out of erroneous opinions.
Although the question was clear and evident to all from the law of nature, from
common consent and from the teaching of the Sacred Books, they added and said:
Born and not made.
They used words suitable to the belief in the
Son, as if they had said: we call Him a Son, not a mere man and not like one who
is figuratively called so—such as those who are by grace called children because
of their adoption in the household—but alone a true Son. He is a true Son
because He is an only Son; and He is truly born of His Father, is from Him and
from His nature, and is eternally like Him. There is no created thing that is
before the worlds, as the one who is before the worlds is the one who is alone
from eternity. As the Father is from eternity so also the Son who is from Him is
from eternity. He did not come into existence after a time nor was He born
later, but He was born eternally before all the worlds from the one who is from
eternity, and He is with Him from eternity as the evangelist said: "In the
beginning was the Word."
He is from eternity, and did not come into
existence later, but He was in the beginning before everything. He who comes
into existence later is called "the last," and the last is not the first; and he
who is not the first was not in the beginning. If, therefore, He was in the
beginning, He was also the first, as there is nothing that precedes the
beginning. If He is the first He is not the last, and if He is not the last He
did not come into existence later.
In the beginning He was, and He was in the
beginning from God, that is to say He was from eternity and before all the
worlds with God. And to show that He was with God, and not from outside, as
something foreign and not from the very nature of Divinity, the blessed
evangelist called Him "Word," because a word belongs to a man and is from a man;
and since it is possible that the being who was with Him was from another he
made use of this illustration so that the hearers should not doubt that He was
from eternity from the one who is eternally from eternity. Indeed, the word of
the soul, the rational character of which is accomplished in itself, is with it
and in it by nature, and it is through it that this same soul is known to be
rational. And it comes out of the soul, and is seen from it and in it, and is
always with it and known through it.
In this same way the Son is from the Father like
the word is from the soul. He is eternally from Him, with Him and in Him, and He
is known from eternity with Him. "He was in the beginning," that is to say He
was from eternity, from the beginning, and before everything; not that He came
into existence later, but that He was in the beginning and always; that He was
eternally from Him and eternally with Him, like the word is with the soul, from
which and with which it always is.
The word, however, is seen as something
different from the soul, and is the personality of the soul, because not having
its own personality it is seen in the soul. In order that, by following this
illustration, we may not believe that the Son has no personality or that He was
alien to the nature of the Father he quickly added: "And the Word was God."
After saying that He "was" and that He "was with God" he added "And the Word was
God" so that he should show clearly that He was not from a nature different from
that of God, or that He was different from Him in the Godhead, but that He was
identical with the one from whom He was and that He was God with the one who was
God.
He said wonderfully: "And the Word was God" in
order to show that He is what God is, and that He is what our blessed Fathers
rightly described: Born of Him before all the worlds. In this they wished to
convey that from eternity and before all the worlds He was in the beginning from
Him and with Him. Their words did not stop here but to complete the doctrine of
truth, to warn the children of faith and to overthrow the error of the heretics,
they added the sentence: And not made.
We should be in need of many words if we
intended to comment fully upon all things said by our blessed Fathers concerning
the Divinity of the Only Begotten. In order, however, to lighten to you the
burden of the many things that are said to you we shall utter them little by
little so that you may better be able to hear and to learn them. With your
permission, therefore, we shall put an end here to the things that were said
to-day, and keep the things that follow (in the credo) to another day, and for
all of them let us praise the Father, the Only Begotten Son and the Holy Spirit,
now, always, and for ever and ever. Amen.
Here ends the third chapter. |
|
