Commentary on the Gospel of John

Against those who dare to say that the conceived and Natural word in God the Father is one, and He that is called Son by the Divine Scriptures another: such is the misconceit of Eunomius' party.

The Evangelist herein made a sort of recapitulation of what had been already before said. But adding the word This, he is seen ail-but crying aloud^ He Who is in the beginning, the Word with the Father, He Who is God of God, He it is and none other, regarding Whom our august book is set forth. But he seems again not idly to add to what has been said the words, This ivas in the beginning ivith God. For he, enlightened by the Divine Spirit unto the knowledge of things to come, was not ignorant, as seems to me and as we may truly say, that certain would appear, perdition^s workpeople, Prov. vii. the devils nets, death^s snares leading down to the chambers

' ' ' and depth of hell those who from unlearning give heed to the things that them belch forth out of an evil heart. For they will rise up and be valiant against their own head, saying- that one is the word that is conceived in God the Father, and that some other most similar and like to the conceived one, is the Son and Word through Whom God works all things; in order that He may be conceived of as word of word and image of image and radiance of radiance.

The Blessed Evangelist then, as though he had already heard them blaspheming and with reason stirred against the absurd follies of their writings, having already defined, and by many words, as was due, shewn that the Word is One, and Only and Very, of God and in God and with God, with flashing eye lie adds, This ivas in the beginning with God, as Chap, Son, that is, with the Father, as inborn, as of His Essence, cap. i.' 2. as Only-Begotten; T]us, there being no second.

But siace I deem that we ought, zealously declaring such impiety, to lay yet more open their blasphemy, for the greater security of the simpler ones (for he who has learnt it will give heed and will spring out of its reach, as though a serpent lurking in the midst of the path), needs will I expose their Cf Gen. opinion, after the form of antithesis. For it shall receive its refutations in order, according to the modes which God who giveth wisdom to all shall grant.

Eunomius' opinion as to the Son of God. „ The Only-Begotten Son of God,sayshe,isnotofveryright „ His Word, but the conceived word of God the Father moves „ and is ever in Him; while the son who is said to have been „ begotten of Him, becoming recipient of his conceived word, „ knoweth all things from having learnt them and, after the „ likeness of the former, is called and is word,^'

Then in confirmation, as he imagines, of his blasphemy, he weaves some such arguments of perverted ideas, that, as it is written, the wretched man may be holden with the cords Prov. v, of his sins.

„ If the Son Himself, says he, be the Word Natural andCon-, ceived in God the Father, and is Consubstantial with Him, Who begat Him, what hinders the Father too from being, and being called Word, as Consubstantial with the Word? " And again: „ If the Son be the Word of God the Father and, there is none other than He, by means of what word, says he,, is the Father found saying to Him: Thou art My Son, this Ps. ii. 7., day have I begotten Thee? For it is very clear that not with-, out a word did the Father address Him, since every thing, that is uttered, is altogether uttered in word, and no other-, wise. And the Saviour Himself somewhere says, I kfiow Infra viii,, the Father a7id heep His saying, and again. The word ib'.xiv.24., which ye hear is not Mine, but the Father's Which sent Me., Since then the Father addresses Himself to Him in word,,and He Himself acknowledges, one while that He keeps

Book I. ^, the Father's word^ at another again, that the Jews heard, ^^^' '■ ■ „ not His word, but the Father's; how will it not, he says, be „ confessed beyond a doubt, that the Son is other than the „ word that is conceived or that stands in motion of the mind, „ whereof participating and replete, the utterer and exponent „ of the Father's Essence, that is the Son, is called word?"

Such ills then does the foolish man sow to himself and gainsaying all the Divine Scriptures at once is not ashamed, Prov. shewing that true is that which is written of himself. When LXX the luicked ma7i cometh into the dej)th of evils, he despiseth. For verily exceeding deep unto naughtiness hath the fighter against God of his folly dug, refusing the uprightness that is of truth, and halting with the rottenness of his own arguments. For that the Only-Begotten Son of God the Father is of very right His Word, we shall know by the subjoined.

Wisdomi. Slow to learn is the silly heretic. For how into a malicious soul will ivisdom at all enter? or what, tell me, can be more

2 Tim. iv. malicious than such men, who, as it is written, turn away their ears from the truth and run more easily unto the fables of their own cogitations, that justly too they may hear, uttering things not of the Divine Scriptures, Woe to them

Jer. xxiii. that prophesy of their own heart and not out of the r)iouth of

1 Cor. xii. the Lord? For who speaking out of the mouth of the Lord calleth Jesus Anathema? which thing indeed some do in unbridled haughtiness against the doctrines of piety, and as one

Micah iii. of the holy Prophets said, perverting all equity. For they say that the natural and conceived word in God the Father is one, him that is called Son and Word again another: and they bring in support of their own, as they deem, opinion, but more truly, their unbridled impiety, our Lord Jesus Christ

Infra viii. in His discourses with the Jews saying, I know the Father and keep His ivord: and moreover that which was said to Him

Ps. ex. 3. by the Father, From the womb before the Day-star begat I Thee. Then they say belching forth the venom of their own father. If the speaker is other than he whom he addresses, and the Father addresses the Son by word, the innate word wherewith the Father conversed will be other than the Son. Chap. Ajid again: If, says he^ the Son Himself declared that He cap, i. 2. keeps the Father^s word, how will not he that keepeth be other than that which is kept? To this it is perhaps not hard to reply (for the Lord ivill give utterance to them that Ps. Ixviii. evangelize with much poiver). But those who are sick of such LXX. unlearning ought to remember Him Who says. Ah they ivho Prov. ii. leave the paths of uprightness to walk in the ways o/lxx. darkness, and for us it is meet that we should cry unto our Gruide Who is in the heavens. Turn away mine eyes from Ps. cxix. beholding vanity. For vanity of a truth and rubbish and nought else are the vain utterances of their uninstructedness. For not as though He had another word of the Father in Himself did the Son say that He kept the Father^s word, nor yet did He declare that He had come to us, bringing him with Him as though a peedagogue, but as Alone in-being in the Father by Nature, and having again likewise in Himself the Father, none else intervening, I, says He, in the Father and, the Infra xiv. Father in Me, not the innate, nor yet any other word, but the Father, in Me. How then ought one to conceive of what was said by Him to the Jews, may one ask us, and that with reason. To this we say with truth what comes up upon our mind. The Saviour was teaching the most incredulous people of the Jews and, drawing by little and little His hearers from the worship of the law, did ofttimes call out to them, I am the Truth, all but saying. Throw off, sirs, the lb, 6, yoke of the law, receive the spiritual worship; let shadow now depart, type recede afar, the Truth hath beamed. But He did not seem to all to be doing rightly, subverting Moses^ precepts, yea rather leading them to what was more true, so that some even cried. If this man were of God, He would not have broken the Sabbath, which was to openly condemn of sin Him Who knew it not.

To such Kke follies then of the Jews He replying puts away all boast in His words, and lowhly and darkly designs to teach them, that the Son Who knows not sin would not work ought other than seemed good to God the Father; lest saying more nakedly, I know not sin. He should

' with wrath would have sprung upon Him saying, Not to sin belongs to God Alone: Thou then being a Man, utter not the things that beseem God Alone. Which thing they even did at another time, sajdng that with reason do they stone Him,

Infra x. because being a Man He makes Himself God. Obscurely did the Saviour, in that He was both Man and as under the law with those who were under the law, say that He kept the Father^s word, ail-but saying, I will never transgress the Father^ s Will. For by stepping aside from the Divine law is sin born, but I know not sin Who am God by Nature. Therefore I offend not the Father in My teaching. For the rest let no one find fault with Him Who is by Nature Lawgiver, but because of His Likeness unto us is Law-keeper. But He says that He knows the Father, not simply as do we, only the very same thing more simply for that He is God, but from what Himself is does He declare that He understands the Nature of the Father. But since He knows that He Who begat Him knows not to endure change. He knows, it is plain, that Himself is Unchangeable of an Unchangeable Father. And that which knows not change, how can it be said to sin, and not rather to stand unswerving in its own natural endowments?

1 /SouAt)- Son thinks ought beside the CounseP of the Father: for He keeps, as He says. His word, and by Nature knows not sinning: for He knows that the Father cannot suffer this, with Whom He is Consubstantial as Very Son. But since they meet this by citing what has been annexed to their objection. From the luomh before the Day-star begat J Thee, come let us unfold the word of piety as to this also. For not because the Father says such things to the Son, ought we therefore to think, that there is in Him an innate word and to conceive of the Son as other thanit. But first of all let us think this with ourselves that a prophet versed in uttering mysteries in the fashion, will not I presume at all compel us to conceive of two Chap. words, but referring to our own habits [of speech] the un- cap. i. 2. avoidable arrangement herein, we shall blame, if we do rightly, the weakness of our own nature, which has neither words, nor modes of idea which accurately serve unto the mysteries that are above us, or that are adequate to express faultlessly things more Divine: and to the Divine Nature again we shall attribute the superiority over our mind and speech, not conceiving of Its relations exactly as they are spoken of, but as befit It and as It wills. Or if any of the unholy heretics imagine that we unrightly abuse such words, and do not admit that the form of speech comes up to our usage of it, they will rightly hear: Let the Father be conceived of as also begetting as we do, let Him not deny the womb and the pangs of birth. For from the womh begat I Thee, says He to the Son. But perchance, yea rather of a certainty, they will say that from the likeness to us the Father^s True Begetting of the Son is signified. Therefore let the other too be piously understood, even if it be uttered in human guise, and their bitter and unholy difficulty is solved.

And these things were, I suppose, sufficient. But since we thought that we ought to smite down the difficulties devised of their stubbornness (as it were some swarm of foes), with the uprightness of pious dogmas, come let us now bringing them forward in the manner befitting each, raise up against each its opponent, and with more zealous thoughts ^ let us ^ ^fP/^°'^«'- arm against them the ever victorious truth. The objec- p-fifj-aa-i. tion again, as from them, shaU be set forth in order before the arguments which confute it, inciting the vigilance of the argument to proceed to more accurate test, and like the rush of some mountain -torrent, ever bearing down headlong the good readiness of the readers to desire ever to learn the answer.

„ If there exist not, says he, in God the Father a word essen- „ tial and conceived, other than the Only-Begotten Son That

Book I. „ is of Him, Wlio is also called word in imitation of that one, CAP. 1. 2. ^^ ^^^ result will be absurd, and we wbo deem we tbink rigbtly „ must needs confess, that if the Word is Consubstantial with „ the Father and the Father with the Word, there is nothing „ yet to hinder the Father from being and being called word, „ as Consubstantial with the Word."

Refutation of this. No argument, O most excellent, will ever constrain us to think that we ought to beheve and call the Father Word, or even to believe that He could be so, because He is Consubstantial with the Word. For in no wise will things that are of the same essence admit of a mutual interchange, and receive a sort of mixture, as from one into the other, so that the things named could be reduced from many into one, or from duality into unity. For not because our forefather Adam was consubstantial with the son born of him, will father therefore advance unto son, son again mount up into father; but beiug one with him as far as regards the unity of essential quality, he will retain what is his own: and he who is of any father will be conceived of as a son, and again the begetter of any will clearly be father. But if ye imagine that ye are constructing a clever argument hereupon, and that consubstantiality will surely constrain consubstantial to be one with consubstantial, and will suffer no distinction to prevail, so that each should exist by itself and in whatever it is, what was it persuaded the Judge of all not to punish the father for the son, nor to demand of the son satisfaction for the father? Ezek. For the soul, says he, that sinneth, it shall die. TJw son shall not hear the iniquitij of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniqnity of the son. But since the sentence of Him Who judges righteously does not bring down the father, albeit consubstantial with the son, into the position of sonship, nor yet does it briug up the son into the condition of fatherhood, but knoweth each individually, not this progressing into that, nor that stepping into this; it is I suppose evident, that no argument will constrain God the Father, because He is Consubstantial with the AVord,to change into being the Word.

For He abideth wholly in Himself, that is Father, even Chap. though He Who is begotten of Him be conceived to be and cap. i. 2. be Word and therefore Son, that things Divine may not appear in worse state than ours are.

Another in equal guise with the objection, by the method of reductio ad ahsnrdum. The Son, as having no difference from His Father, but being His most exact Likeness and the express Image of His ^^^- ^- ^• Person, is found saying to His disciples. He that hath seen Me ^"^^^ ^i^- hath seen the Father. But if He being thus, is Consubstantial with the Father, and things consubstantial admit of utter confusion with one another, there will be nothing it seems to hinder the Son from being conceived of as Father, in that He is Consubstantial with the Father, and capable of passing over into this, nought hindering it, if consubstantiality suffice unto this kind of change or transposition. Let the Son then be conceived of as Father, and let Him say, as now being so, to the real Father, Froin the ivomh before the Day-star begat Ps. ex. 3. I Thee; and let Him assume to Himself every word in short that belongs to the Father. When this at length has taken place, every thing is now thrown into confusion, and That Which ever so existeth, I mean the Holy and Consubstantial Trinity will be reduced to Unity, if That which rightly and separately belongs to Each vanishes on account of the Consubstantiality, and the sameness of nature overthrows the distinction of Persons. But this is absurd. Hence the Father will not be the Word, because Consubstantial with the Word, but will abide unchanged, being What He is, even though He have Co-nature or Consubstantiality with His Own Word. And their objection has been proved to be nought.

Another. If every word be the word of some one, pouring it forth from the tongue, that is, or belching it forth and bringing it up from the heart; and the Father be Word, because He is Consubstantial with the Word: He will be His own word, or rather no one's, or will even have no existence at all (for how will there be word, when he whose word it is, is not?). But this is absurd: for never will the Divine and Untaint Nature be receptive of non-being, nor will the Father

Book I. everpassintotlieWord^eventhoughHebeConsubstaiitialwitli the Word, but will remain Father, Whose Word also the Son is.

Another. If the Divine Nature be believed non-recipient of all turn and change as regards Essence, how will the Father, leaving His own position, pass into being the Word? For He will be recipient of change, suffering it as of necessity, and will not be the same, as not keeping what He was from the beginning. But if this be absurd (for to change is wholly foreign from the Divine Nature), the Father will not have the change into the Word, but will be Father ever, having immutability and unchange as God.

The Only-Begotten Word and Son of God, shewing that He Infra xvi. is Very God of Very God the Father says. All things that the Father hath are Mine. But though the Son is Heir of all the properties that are in the Father of Nature, as being of Him by Nature, yet He will never have that of being Father (for this too is one thing that belongs to the Father); but the Son will remain bereft of nought that is inherent in the Father, though He be not deemed of as Father, but having in Himself perfectly all the properties and endowments of the Father^s Essence. Applying this very same method of reasoning to the Person of the Father also, we say that He has all the properties of the Son by Nature, yet not the power of passing into sonship and into being Word, but that as unturning by Nature He remains what He is, that in addition to being God the Father, He may be also without change, having Unchanged in Himself the Word That appeared from Him, the Son.

Another. God the Lawgiver found fault with certain by Ezek. the holy Prophets saying. They have put no difference he- ^^"' ' twee7i the holy and jnofane. For great indeed is the difference or contrariety of manners which is seen between them by those who will discern. But if it be admissible to commingle the nature of things consubstantial one with another, and things that are in separate and individual persons can run off to whatever they please of congenerate or connatural; — what is there to separate the profane from tlie holj, if the distinction of separate being or of who one Chap. is, is never seen, but one exists in another because of same- cap. i'. 2. ness of essence? Be then (the knowledge in regard to each being hence indifferent), all jumbled up together, and let the traitor Judas be Peter or Paul, because consubstantial with Peter and Paul; be Peter again or Paul, Judas, because consubstantial with him. But so to think is most unreasoning; and the being of the same substance will by no means take away the difference of things congenerate or connatural from one another. Our weakness then will not so set itself to contend with the Divine Essence, as to compel God the Father to be called and be the Word, because He is Consubstantial with the Word, For He abides ever Father, in no wise able to lose the distinction of what He is in regard to this, nor yielding to sameness of Essence that He should possess nothing distinctively. And He will no way wrong the Son by this, but rather will shew Him as His own, and possessing from Him by Nature the Unturning and Unchangeableness of Him That begat Him, both by His possessing properly and alone Sonship and not being changed into the Father, even as neither does He into Son.

„ Not reasonably, say they, do ye blame as not thinking „ rightly those who say that the Word innate in God the „ Father is other than the Son, although ye hear Him clearly „ say in the Gospel narrative, / hiow Him and kee]) His ivord. Infra viii. „ But if, as Himself affirmed. He keeps the Father^s word, other " „ in all respects, I suppose, and of necessity will he be than „ him; since needs must the distinction of being other exist „ between him who keeps and that which is kept.^^

Different solutions in order shewing- clearly that the Son is the Word of God the Father.

If the Only-Begotten Son of God the Father is not Himself His Word, but some other than He, which thev call con-.,, ceived, exists in God, let those who put forth this contrary a-rajos, opinion tell us whether the word which is the conception of real distheir own ignorance be hypostatic ^ or no. For if they say [stence^'

* * "" will surely confess that there are two sons: but if they say that it has no existence, then, since nothing any longer comes between and severs the Son, how will He be third from the Father and not rather next Him, as Son with Father?

Another by the same considerations. The opponents define that there is in God the Father a word, the conceived, by means of which, according to their most unlovely imagination, the Son is taught the counsel of the Father. But how great folly their dogma hereupon has, we must see.

We must consider the argument about this matter thus. The name father, has of necessity no mean in relation to the son. For what will be the mean of father as regards the son, or again of son as regards the father? But if, according to their unlearning, there severs the Son from the Father an intervening will and a conceived word, which they say is interpretative thereof, no longer will the Father be conceived of as altogether father nor yet the Son as son, if we conceive that the will of God and the word that interprets it, exist in their own hypostases. But if we grant that these are without hypostasis, then the Son is in God the Father without any thing mediate and next to Him; where then will the conceived word retire, or what place will the will have, conceived of as other than the Son?

Another by the reductio ad absurdum. We believe that the Holy and Adorable Trinity is Consubstantial, even if the madness of the heretics will it not. But I think that there ought to be admitted with regard to things consubstantial, a hkeness also with one another in all things, in regard to natural properties. If then there be, according to the uncounsel of some, in God the Father some conceived word other than the Son, the Son too will surely have a conceived word in Himself,

Heb. i. 3. as being His Likeness and the unchangeable Express Image of His Person, as it is written: the Holy Ghost will have one equally with Him, according to the equal analogy of conceptions. The Trinity then has come to be in double, and the Divine Nature is shewn to be compound. But this is absurd. But in simple essences, there is nothing whatever save them-

selves. Nothing then will hinder the Holy and Consubstan- Chap. tial Trinity from being closely connected, nought intervening, cap. i. 2.

Another at length. When Divine Scripture puts forth nouns with the article prefixed, then it means some one thing which alone is properly and truly that which it is said to be; but when it does not prefix the article, it makes a more general declaration of every thing that is so called, as for example (for our discourse shall attain clear demonstration) many are called gods, but when God is spoken of with the article it signifies Him Who alone and properly is so; more simply and without the article, one perchance of those called hereto by grace. And again there are many men. But when the Saviour says with the article, The son of man, He signifies Himself as one picked out of ten thousand. Since then names have this character in Divine Scripture, how ought we to understand, In the heginning was the Word? For if every word of God is hereby meant as being in the beginning, let them shew it, and it is we who are the triflers. But if the Evangelist prefixing the article, signifies One and that is so properly, crying. In the heginning was the Word, why strive they in vain, bringing in another besides, only that they may expel the Son from the Essence of the Father? But we ought, considering the absurdity herein, to refiise the uncounsel of those who think otherwise.

Another, shewing that not after the conceived word, as they say, is the Son formed, but He is the Likeness of the Father Himself.

If the Only-Begotten Son of God is and is called, according to them, therefore Word, because, receiving the conceived word of the Father, He is as it were formed thereafter, why is He not found to say to His Disciples, J and the word of the Father are one. He that hath seen Me hath seen the word of the Father? But since overstepping all things. He hkens Himself Alone to the Father Alone, none intermediate coming forward to the Likeness, the Son will be conceived of as likening Himself tp Him Who begat Him, and to none other than Him.

Opposition, as from the opponents. „ We find, they say, the Son to be other than the con-

' ' ' „ thereon, but to considerations from the Divine Scrip-,, ture. For what shall we say when we hear the Son say- Infra xii. ^, ing to the Father, Glorify Thy Son, the Father again „ answering and saying, I have hoth glorified, and will glorify „ again? Shall we not altogether acknowledge that the Father „ repKes to the Son in a word? How then is not he through „ whom the Father answers the Son other than He V

Different solutions to this in order. Worthy of utter marvel, yea rather of mourning too, are the unholy heretics, and moreover that one* should say over Jer. xxii. them that which is spoken in the Prophets: Weejp ye not for the dead, neither hemoan him, but weep sore for him that thinketh and sayeth such things respecting the Only Begotten. For what more wi-etched than such, if they fancied that tliis was actually and truly the voice of the Father, which not only the Saviour heard, but also this crowd of the Jews which stood around, yea rather the choir of the holy disciples? For they should rather have imagined God-befitting excellencies, and not have attempted to submit things above us to the laws that guide our affairs. For upon the bodily hearing strikes a bodily voice, and noise which through the Hps is emitted into the air, or contrived by any other instrument. But the Will of the Father, in inefiable voice gently and as it were in the mind revolved, the Son Alone knoweth Who is in Him by Nature as His Wisdom. But to suppose that God uses a voice consisting in sound is wholly incredible, if we would retain to the Nature That is above all things Its superiority to the creation. Besides, our Lord Jesus Christ Himself says that this was not the voice of God the Father, and moreover shews that He needs no interpretation from s ^oi^A-rj- another to be able to learn the Father's wilP saying. This voice (Tiv, will g^j^j^g,^iqI hecause of Me, hut for your sahes. He should ra-

30. such opinions regarding Him, Ye have heard with Me the voice of the Father; but now, turning His declaration right round to the exact contrary, He avers that He had no need of the voice, but asserts tliat it came rather for their sakes, not Chap.

IV. that it was uttered by the Father, but came and that for cap. i. 2.

their sakes. And if God the Father works all things through

Him, through Him altogether was this also, yea rather He was

Himself the voice, not to Himself interpreting the disposition of the Father (for He knew it as Son), but to the hearing of the by-standers, that they might beheve.

Another. If they say that the Son needs some innate word, that thereby He may be taught the Will of God the Father, what will become of Paul who says, Christ the Power of Ood i Cor. i. and the Wisdom of God? For how is the Son the Wisdom of the Father, if lacking in wisdom He receive perfection from another, through learning what forsooth He knows not? or how must one not needs say, that the wisdom which is in the Father is not perfect? and if the Son be the Wisdom of the Father, how can His Will ^ be conceived of as other than He? s ^ovXtj. We come then to say that the Will ^ of God the Father is not '^'^ perfected in wisdom. But great is the impiety of this, and full of blasphemy the statement. Not therefore as partaker of instruction from another does the Son know what belongs to His own Father, but as Himself the Word and the Wisdom and the Will ^, does He search all things, lb. ii. lO. yea, the deep things of God, as it is written concerning the Spirit too.

Another. As the Likeness and the exact express Image of the Father do the Divine Scriptures introduce to us the Son: and the Saviour Himself saith. He that hath seen Me hath Infra xiv. seen the Father. But if with that likeness to Him, He knows not of Himself what is in Him, but needs so to speak expositions from another in order to learn it, it is time to think that the Father Himself is in the same case, if He is in the Likeness of the Son, and He will Himself too need one to unfold to Him what lies hid in His Offspring. And thus in addition to the absurdities that result from hence, the Divine Nature becomes also a recipient of ignorance. But since it is impious thus to think, we must betake ourselves to more fitting thoughts: for this clearly is what is profitable and helpful.

Book I. all things, yea the deep things of God; and he adds, For what

1 Cor. 'ii7 tnan hnoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man hut the Spirit of God Tliat is in Him. Since tlien the Holy- Spirit Which accurately discerneth all things, is Spirit not only of the Father, but of the Son too, how can He having within Him by Nature the Spirit Which knoweth all things be yet ignorant of ought that is in the Father? Superfluous then in truth does it plainly appear to imagine that the

1 eiK-nffiv Son learns of another the Will ''' of the Father; and utterly will vanish the need of a word to mediate in vain, according to their ill-instructedness. For the Son knows all things of Himself.

Another, hy the method of reductio ad ahsurdum. They who accuse the Essence of the Only-Begotten, saying that He

* fle'Ar/juo kncw not the Will ^ of the Father, but made use of in order to learn, another teacher, the word invented by them, which they call conceived, let them tell us, if they think that their own opinion hereupon ought to prevail, whether they will say that the conceived word is by nature equal to the Son (for let it be supposed to have a separate existence of itself) or not equal, but inferior perchance or even superior. If then they suppose it inferior, they will commit impiety against the Father Himself also: for there will be of a surety in Him what is worse than He, and other than He, the conceived word. But if they do not say worse, but shall allot to it a superiority to the Son, the charge against the Son will operate two-fold against the Father. For first of all He will be found to have begotten what is in worse condition than Himself. Then moreover He too will have the conceived word superior to Him, if the Father is Consubstantial with the Son who according to them has got an inferior position. But it is likely I suppose that the opponents will start back from the blasphemy that results from either alternative: and will say that the conceived word of the Father is equal to the Son as regards essence. The question then is at an end. For how will the one teach the other, as one who knows one who does not know, if both are equal by nature? The argument of these people being

then on all sides weak, it will be superfluous to imagine that the Chap. Son has any mean, and not rather to believe that He is in cap. i! 2. God the Father, God the Word Who was in the beginning. Supra i.l. Another. The blessed Paul says that in the Son are hid Col. ii. 3. the treasures of all wisdom and all hnoicledge. But if he is true in saying such things, how yet shall we suppose that He needed teaching from another, or in whom shall we any more seek perfectness in knowledge, if He Who has it all is made wise by another? how is he Wisdom who is made wise? But since we must needs give h^ed not to their words, but to those through the Spirit, and the Son hath, as Paul saith, in Himself the treasures of wisdom and of all knowledge, not from any one else will He know the things whereby He is wisdom, but being in the Father He knows all that is the Father's, as His Wisdom.

That the Son is by Nature Creator with the Father, as being of His Essence, and not taken to Him as a minister.

3 All things were rnade hy Him, and without Him was not anything made.

The blessed Evangelist, having overthrown the intricate objections of the unholy heretics, and having completed his subtil and most exact utterance respecting the Only-Begotten, comes to another snare of the devil compounded of the ancient deceit, and putting forth to us the sting of the Cf Prov. polytheic error, which has wounded and cast down many, and widening the way of perdition, and throwing open the broad and spacious gate of death, heaped up souls of men in herds unto hell and set rich food as it were before the devil

Hab. i. and brought before him choice meat. For since the children

LXX. of the Greeks applying themselves to the wisdom of the world, and having plenteously in their mind the spirit of the ruler of this world, were carried away unto polytheic error, and perverted the beauty of the truth and, like to those who walk in mist and darkness, went down to the pit of their own

Jer.ii.27. ignorance, serving lifeless idols, and saying to a stock, Thou art my father, and to a stone, Thou hast brought me forth: others again transgressing akin to them, devising nevertheless

Rom.i.25, a more polished error, deemed that they ought to worship the creature more than the Creator, and lavished the glory that befitted the Divine Nature Alone on the elements that were made by It, of necessity does the Divine introduce to us the Only- Begotten as Maker and Creator by Nature, saying that all tlmigs wei'e made hy Hmi and that without Him nothing passed into being, that he might close for the future the entrance for their deceits, and might shew to them that know Him not the Creator of all things, and by the very words wherein Chap. V. ho says that the creation was made, might clearly teach that other than it is He Who called it into being, and by His Ineffable Power brought things that are from not being unto birth. For thus at length was it possible hy the beauty Wisdom of the creatures proportio7iahly to see the Maher, and to recognize Him Who is in truth God, through Whom all things have been already made, and made are preserved. Against the false-worship then of the Greeks do I deem that he thus well arrayed the Gospel word, and for this cause do wo believe that the Only-Begotten was introduced by the voice of the saint as Maker and Creator.

But since it is meet to consider the crooked inventions of the heretics, I think that we ought looking to their ways too to say again a little.

All things, says he, were made hy Him, and without Him was not anything made.

This God-befitting dignity too does he put about the Son, on all sides shewing that He is Consubstantial with God Who begat Him and saying that all things that belong to Him by Nature are in His Offspring: that He may be conceived of as truly God of God, not (as we) having the appellation adventitious and accruing to us by grace alone, according to the words, I have said, Ye are gods and all o/Ps.lxxxii. you are children of the most High. For if all things were made hy Him, He will be Other than they all. For in this, All things, there is nothing which is not seen among all things. As the blessed Paul too is found to have understood the all things: for when in one of his Epistles he was discoursing of our Saviour and said that all things were put in subjection Heb, ii. 8. under His feet, excellently does he subjoin. For in that he saith all, he left nothing that is not put under Him. Therefore since we believe that all things were made by the Son, we will not think that He is one of all, but will conclude that He is external to all, and severing Him from the nature and kin of things originate, will at length confess that He is none else save God of God by Nature. For what will intervene between

Book I. God and the creature? I do not mean in regard of essence, for mucli intervenes, but only in regard to the position of anything that is, in conception. Or what other position will the Son have, Who surpasses the nature of things made, yea rather is Himself the Maker? For all things were made by Him, as by the Power, as by the Wisdom of God the Father, not hidden in the Nature of Him Wlio begat Him, as in man is for instance his innate wisdom and power, but existing separately and by Himself, yet proceeding according to the ineffable mode of Generation from the Father, that the Wisdom and Power of the Father may be conceived of as trulyexisting Son.

But though the blessed Evangelist says that all things ivere made through Him, the saying will not I deem at all minister damage to the words concerning Him. For not because it is said that the things that are were made through Him, will the Son be introduced as an underwork er, or a minister of others' wills, so that He should be no longer conceived of as being by Nature Creator, nor will He be one given the power of creation by some other, but rather being Himself Alone the Strength of God the Father, as Son, as Only-Begotten, He works all things, the Father and the Holy Ghost co-working and co-with Him: for all things are from the Father through the Son in the Holy Ghost. And we conceive of the Father as co-with the Son, not as though He were powerless to work ought of things that are, but as being wholly in Him, by reason of unchangeableness of Essence, and His entire kin and the absence of any medium towards His Natural Procession from Him. As though one were to say that to the sweet scent of a flower, the flower itself was co-present for the operation of the sweet scent, since it proceeds from it naturally. But the force of the example is slight and the Nature That is above all will overpass this too, receiving of it little im- Infrav. presses of ideas. Since how shall we understand, My Father ivorheth hitherto and I ivorh? For not separately and by Himself does the Son say that God the Father works ought regarding things that are, and that Himself again likewise works apart from the Father, the Essence

Whence He is after some sort resting: for so the Creator Chap. V. would be two and not One^ if Either work apart and separately. Moreover the Father will be recipient of the power of not having the Son ever in Him, and the Son likewise will be seen to not have the Father ever in Him, if it were possible that Either should work apart and separately with regard to things that are, as we said before, and the Son will not be true, when He says, I am in the Father and the Father Infra xiv. in Me. For it is not, I suppose, merely after likeness of Essence, that we see the Son in the Father as Express Image, or again the Father in the Son as Archetype; but we hold that the Son beams forth by Generation from the Essence of the Father, and is and subsists in It and of It in distinct Being, God the Word: and that the Father again is in the Son, as in Consubstantial Offspring, Connaturally, yet severally, according to simply the difference of being, and being conceived of as that which He is. For the Father remains that which He is, even though He be Connaturally in the Son, as we say that the Sun is in its brightness. And the Son again will be conceived of, as not other than He is, even if He be Connaturally in the Father, as in the sun its brightness. For thus, the Father being conceived of and being in truth Father, the Son again being and conceived of as Son, the Holy Ghost having His place with them, the number of the Holy Trinity mounts to One and the Same Godhead.

For how will God be at all conceived of as One, if Each of the Persons mentioned withdraw into a complete individuality, and, while wholly removed from Connature and Essential participation with the Other, be called God? Therefore let us conceive of Father, Son and Spirit, according to the mode of individual being, not mixing up the difference of the Persons or names in regard to That Which Each IS: but while we reserve severally to each the being and being called what He IS, and thus believe, referring them still of Nature to One Godhead, and refusing to hold a complete severance, because the Son is called the Word and Wisdom and Brightness and Express Image and Might of the Father. For He is Word and

Book I. Wisdom^ by reason of these being, immediately and without any intervention, of the mind and in the mind, and because of the reciprocal interpassing into one another so to say of both. For the mind is seen in word and wisdom, and word in its turn in the mind, and there is nought that intervenes, or severs the one from the other. He is called Power again, as being a quality inherent without any interval in those who have it, and that can nowise be severed from them in the manner of an accident, apart from the destruction of the subject: Express Image again, as being even connate, and unable to be severed from the essence of which it is the express image.

Hence since Either is naturally and of necessity in Other, when the Father works the Son will work, as being His Natural and Essential and Hypostatic Power. Likewise when the Son works, the Father too works, as the Source of the Creating Word, Naturally In-existent in His Own Offspring, even as the fire too in the heat that proceeds from it.

It is clear then, that vainly has been iterated the accusation of the opponents against the Only-Begotten, who introduce Him to us as creator by having learnt, yea rather as minister too; because of the Blessed Evangelist saying. All things were made through Him andivithout Him ivas not anytliing made. Much do I marvel at the unholy heretics: for whatever seems any way to undo the Dignity of the Only-Begotten and to shew Him second to Him Who begat Him, according to their own view, this they hunt with much zeal, and from all sides bring to it the drugs of their own stubbornness; whatever again are healthfully and rightly said and bring the Son up to the Glory of the Father, these things they bury most surely in deep silence, as having one sole aim, to in vain revile Him Who is glorified of all the creation. For when they hear that All things were made throtigh Him, they hotly bring on Him the name of service, dreaming that the Son is bond instead of free, and worshipper rather than Lord. But when they learn that without Him ivas not anything made, they do not mount up to think ought great and marvellous of Him. For since it is not in God the Father to create otherwise than by His own Offspring, Which is His Wisdom without Him. For therefore is the Only-Begotten the Glory of Grod the Father (for He is glorified as Creator through the Son); for He worketh all things and bringeth into being things that are not.

And well will one conceive of the words, ivithout Him was not anything made, if he consider with himself what was said at the creation of man. For Let us make m,an, says he. Gen. i. 26. in Our image after Our likeness. For here specially one can behold in the Son of a truth nought that is lowly, as in a minister according to their phrase. For God the Father does not command the Word, Make man, but as Cowith Him by Nature and His inseparably so to say In-existing Co-worker, He made Him also Partaker of His Counsel respecting man, not anticipating the knowledge that is in the Son in regard to any conception, but as Mind inseparably and apart from time manifested in the in-imaged and in-existing Word.

Let God-befitting contemplations again be above the reach of the example. Yet we say that He co -works with the Son, not conceiving as of two severally, lest there be conceived to be two gods, nor yet as though both together were one, in order that neither the Son be compressed into Father, nor again the Father into Son, but rather in such sort as if one allowed to be co-existent in the brightness from light the light whence it flashed forth: for in such examples the generator seems to be separated in idea from the generated and that which springs forth from it indivisibly j yet are both one and the same by nature, and the one in no wise separate from the other. But above this too will God again be, inasmuch as He is both Super-substantial and has nothing wholly like Him in things originate, that it should be taken as a image of the Holy Trinity, without any difference, in exactness of doctrine. But if they deem that the word, through Whom, said of the Son, can bring down His Essence from Equality and Natural likeness to the Father, so as to be minister rather than Creator, let those insane consider and come forward and make answer, what we are to conceive of

Book I. the Father Himself also, and Wliom we are to suppose Him too ' ' * to be, seeing that Ho clearly receives the words through Wliom iCor. i.9. in the Divine Scripture: for God, says he, is faithful, through Whom ye ivere called unto the fellowship of His Son, and E^h^ i* i' -P^^^ ^^ Apostle of Jesus Christ through the ivill of God: and Gal.iv.7. again Paul writeth to some, Wherefore thou art no more a servant hut a son; and if a son, then an heir through God ^. All these then have reference to the Person of God the Father, and no one I suppose will rush to that extreme of madness (except perchance he hold with the above mentioned), as to say that the name and fact of service, is reasonably predicated of the very glory of the Father, because the word through Whom is applied to Him too. For the Divine Scripture is sometimes indifferent in regard to its words, in no wise wronging the subject thereby, but applying to the things signified in a less proper sense both the words themselves and those whereby it deems that they are well ex- Prov.xxv. plained. But it is well to say of those, that The glory of the LXX. Lord veileth speech. For httle in truth is all might of words unto the exact exposition of the Ineffable and God-befitting glory. Wherefore one must not be offended at the meanness of the things uttered, but must rather yield supremacy, and might in tongue, and keenness of every mind, to the Divine and unutterable Nature, for thus shall we be and not in small degree pious.

That the Son is hy Nature Life and therefore not oi-iginate, but of the Essence of God the Father.

Yet dotli tlie Blessed Evangelist make to us his discourse concerning God the Word, and lie seemetli to me profitably to go tlirough all that pertains to Him by Nature, that he may both put to shame the outrages of the heretics, and may fortify those who would fain excel in right faith, with reasonings thereunto tending, not providing from words of worldly wisdom unpersuasion, but in demonstration of the Sjnrit lCor.ii.4. marvelling at the beauty of the truth.

What he would then teach through the words before us, is this. He shewed us just now that the Son is by Nature Maker and Creator, saying that all tilings were made hy Him and that without Him not so much as one thing was called into being. But since on the creation He bestows not only to be called into being, but also holds it together when made through Himself, immingling in some way Himself vsdth those who have not by their own nature eternity of being, and becoming life to those that are, that having become they may abide, and that each may be preserved according to its own limit of nature;- — needs does he say. That which was Tnade, in it was life. Not only, says he, were all things made hy Him, but also whatever vjas made, in it was the Life, that is, the Only-Begotten Word of God, the Beginning and Subsistence of all things both visible and invisible, heavenly and earthly and infernal. For Himself being the by-Nature Life, bestows manifoldly on things that are, being and life and Acts xvii. motion, not in any way of partition and change passing into each one of things that are by nature distinct: but their

Book I. nature, viewed by itself, is variously fashioned by tbe ineffable Power and Wisdom of tbe Creator, while One is the Life of all passing into each, in such sort as befits it, and it is able to partake thereof. But since that which is brought from not being into being must needs also decay, and that which has beginning surely hasteth unto its end (for to the Divine and All-superior Nature Alone beseemeth the being preceded by no beginning and being free from ending): the Creator wisely deviseth for the weakness that is in things made, and contriveth for them by His skill an eternity. For the perpetual succession unto each of its like, and the natural progression of things connatural or kin unto one another looking ever towards onward course, make the creation ever-visible and ever-co-enduring with God its Maker. And this (contrivance) is that every one of things that are, soweth seed in itself after its kind and after its likeness, according to the unspeakable sentence of its Creator. In all then was the Life; for this is our subject. But, excellent sir, may one with reason say to the heretic warring against the truth, what will you say to this too, when you hear him who bears within him the Spirit say, that in all things that were made was the Life, that is, the Word That is in the heginning? Will you dare to say now too, that the Son is not of the Essence of God the Father, that He may be deemed of as originate and created? How then will one not cry out against thine unlearning, 0 thou, and that with justice? For if in things that were made was the Word, as Life by Nature, immingling Himself by participation with things that are. He is then Other than those wherein He is believed to be. But He being by Nature Other than what the creation is, how will He not be the God over all? But if you remain shameless, and cease not to imagine that originate is the Son Who is in things made, as Life: — first of all He will be conceived of as being somewhat in Himself, then besides. He will Himself be partaker of Himself'', and

Life, if being in things made, He be conceived to be Himself ^"*^' too one of them. But the fighter against God sees surely cap. i. 4. himself too, how great the absurdity of thinking thus. Therefore if the Word Who quickens them is by participation in things originate. He will not be Himself too among the participators, but other than they. And if so, not originate, but in them as by Nature Life.

If the Son be not of the Essence of Grod the Father, but from without He have subordinated Him according to them. He is originate and made. How then does He quicken all things. Who is among things made? Or what distinction shall we find any longer in the Divine Nature? or how does the most wise Paul say, as something admirable of Him That is by Nature God, Who quiclceneth all things? For if the Son being i Tim. vi. originate, quickeneth all things, the creation quickeneth itself, " in no wise needing thereto God its Maker. There is then nothing in God more than in the creation; for it inworketh not less than God can do. But this is absurd. Not originate then is the Son, but God and therefore by Nature Life also.

Another. The Psalmist marvelleth exceedingly and that with reason at the Divine Nature, and in particular attributeth to It a most fair dignity saying, i^or with Thee is the Ps.xxxvi. Fountain of life. But if the Father have set the Son below ' Him, and have Him not of His own Nature, and He even being so, quickens things originate and is by Nature Life as quickening, why vainly strives the Psalmist saying that the fountain of life is with God Alone? For the nature of things originate also is recipient of this, if the Son, albeit not of the Divine Essence according to the uncounsel of some, quickens. But this is absurd. Therefore Life by Nature is the Son, as God of God, and Life of Life.

Another. If the Son being by Nature Life be originate and created, as not having His Being of the Essence of God the Father, according to their fantasy, the nature of things originate will be recipient of being and being called life, and

Book I. all tilings will be life in potential, even if they have not yet the exercise of the thing itself. For that which has the natural power of being ought, will surely be so I ween, even if it be not so as yet; for it has the power inherent in its nature. When then the being life is common to the creature, the special and alone prerogative Infra xiv. ^f none, why vainly does the Son vaunt of Himself, I am the Life? for He should, I suppose, have rather said, I am along with you the life. T^his would I suppose have been truer, if being indeed originate He is Life too. But since He puts about Himself Alone as His special good the being Life, it is at length clear that He classes Himself, not with things originate, but with the Divine Essence of the Father, whereto the being Life also pertains.

Another. That which is participate of life is not in its own right life, for it is clearly in it as other than itself. If then the Son is by participation in things originate as Life, He will be other than the things that are participate of Him and lack life. Therefore not originate is He, nor seeking to be quickened by another. He is therefore God as quickening; but if so. He will be confessedly of the Essence of the Father, if we worship One God, and serve none other than Him Who is.

Another. Accurately testing the nature of things that are, we see God and the creation and nought else besides. For whatever falleth short of being God by Nature, that is surely originate; and whatever escapeth the catalogue of creation, will surely be within the limits of Deity. Since then we have well estabhshed this, let them tell us who thrust forth the Son from the Essence of God the Father, how He can quicken as Life, seeing that the Divine Nature has this as its own property, and yields it to none else. But if being originate He can be Life also, the grace of the excellence will surely overtake all things that are originate, and aU will be by nature life. What need will they have therefore of participation of the Son, or what more will they gain hence? for they too possess the being by nature life. But this is not true, but they partake of necessity as need- ing life, of the Son. Alone then is the Only-Begotten by Chap. Nature Life, and therefore will He not be reckoned among cap. i. 4. things originate, but will mount up unto the Nature of Him Who begat Him: for Life by Nature is the Father too.

Another. The Son being by Nature Life, is either Other than the creation, I mean by nature, or con-natural with it. If then He be connatural and consubstantial, how will He not lie in saying, I am the Bread of Life Which cometh down Infra vi. frorn Seaven and giveth life unto the world? for the creation ' hath from its own the being hfe, but Hfe is imparticipate of life, that it may shew itself life. But if He is not connatural, He will also escape being originate, withdrawing from the creation together with Himself His own proper good also. For the creation will not be by nature Life, but rather lacking and participate of life.

Another. If the Son being by Nature Life is connatural with things made, by reason of not being of the Essence of God the Father, according to their speech, wherefore does the blessed Psalmist say that the heavens shall ^perish, and Ps.cii.26. shall wax old like a garment: but to Him did he attribute His own proper prerogative, crying aloud. But Thou art the lb. 27. Same and Thy years shall have no end? For either He will perish and fail along with us, as connatural, and will no longer be conceived of as Life, or our natural connection with Him will draw up us too to be ever the same and to unfailing number of years. But verily He shall be ever the same, and we shall fail: He is therefore not originate as we; but since He is of the Life by Nature He will also quicken as Life the things that lack life.

Another. If nought is participate of itself, but the creation partakes of the Son as Life; He is not the creation, nor yet is the creation Life, which the Son is.

Another. If to quicken is one thing, to be quickened another, as action and passion, and the Son quickens, the creation is quickened: therefore not the same is Son and creation, since neither is the inworker with the inwrought.

That the Son is by Nature Light and therefore not originate, but of the Essence of God the Father, as Very Light from Very Light.

And the Life was the light of men.

In these words too does the blessed Evangelist shew us that the Son is by Nature God and Essentially Heir of the good things of Him Who begat Him. For having taught before that being by Nature Life, He was in all things that were made by Him, holding them together and quickening them and granting them of His unutterable Power to pass from not being into being, and preserving them when made, he advances to another train of ideas, from all sides minded to lead us by the hand unto the apprehension of the truth, as was right. Therefore in things made was the Word, as Life. But since the rational Hving creature among them on earth recipient both of mind and knowledge and participant of the wisdom that is from God, is man, needs does the Spiritbearer shew us clearly the Word as Bestower of the wisdom that is in man, that God the Father may be conceived of being all things in all through the Son; — life in them that lack life, light again and life in them that lack life and light. And therefore he says, And the Life loas the light of men, that is, God the Word Who quick eneth all things, the Life in all that are, both enlighteneth the rational creature, and lavisheth understanding upon those who are recipient of understanding: that so that may be kept and have full force 1 Cor. iv. that is said to the creature, foviuhat hast thou that thou didst not receive? For nought of wealth from itself hath the originate and created nature, but whatever it is seen to possess, this is surely of God, Who bestoweth both being, and

how one ought to be. And well was the was put of the life, that Chap. it might signify in every way the eternal Being of the Word, cap. i. i. and might cut off the triflings of those void of understanding, who introduce to us the Son, of the things that are not, which manifestly warreth against the whole of Divine Scripture.

In regard then of the Eternity of the Word with the Father; — having already sufficiently gone through it both in the present Book, and in that called the Thesaurus, we deem that we may be silent. But what the mind of the words before us introduces, this with all readiness examining to the extent of our power, we will be diligent to profit both ourselves and those who shall hereafter read it, God again opening to us both doors and a mouth to our words. xxlis."^''

What then will the fighter against Christ say to us, when he learns that the Life, that is, the ever-living God the Word, is the Light of men? What arguments will he sling at us, when we come forward and say. If the Son be not by Nature God, and Fruit of the Essence That begat Him, if He have not beamed forth to us Very Light from Very Light, but Himself too being from without is subordinated according to your unlearning: He is connatural with things made, and will in no wise escape being originate. How then, O ye filled full of all folly, doth He illuminate, they receive illumination from Him? For is not that which illuminates one thing, that which is illuminated another? but this is plain and clear to every one. For if we grant that they are the same, as regards kind of essence and the mode of existence, what is there more in that which has power of illumining, what again less in that which lacketh light? For whatsoever cometh, will come to both of them, and apart to each, and that which is in need of fight will be light, and the light will not differ from the illumined. But great is the confusion of ideas manifest herein, and necessity of reason severs each of the things named and puts in its own proper nature the supplier herein apart from the supplied. Not therefore connatural with things made is the Son, but He will abide in the Essence of the Father, being Very Light of Very Light.

Book I, And it were nothing hard, by transferring the method * ' ' of reasoning in the foregoing, which we made concerning the Son being by Nature Life, and demonstrated that He is Other than the things wherein He is, to give clear proof in this chapter too. — But in order not to leave the labour of this to others, nor to appear overmastered by sloth, I myself will endeavour, so far as I can, to transfer the form of argument used in the foregoing reasonings. For as in those. He being Life by Nature, is shewn to be Other than those wherein He is, so here too, said to be and in verity being the Light of men. He will be found to be Other than things that lack light and partake thereof; as we shall see more clearly in the following.

Proofs by demonstrations, that the Son who illumineth is Other than the creation that is ilhirained.

If the Word was in the things spoken of, as Light by Nature, immingling Himself by means of participation in things that are. He is then Other than the things wherein He is believed to be. But He That is by Nature Other than what the creation participant of Him and by Him illumined is, how will He not needs be the God Wlio is over all?

Another. If the fighter against God says that the Son being by Nature Light is in things originate as originate, illumining things that lack light: — first of aU He will be conceived of as being in Himself, then besides. He will Himself be partaker of Himself and Light, if being in things originate. He one and the same be conceived to be of Ps.xc.i2. them. But he that has appHed his heart unto wisdom, as it is written, sees surely how great the absurdity of thinking thus. Therefore if the Word Who illuminateth them is by participation in things originate. He will not Himself be among the participants and illumined, but Other therefore than they. And if so. He is then not originate, but as Light by Nature and God in things that lack Light.

Another. If the Son be not of the Essence of God the Father, but being from without He have subordinated Him according to them, He is then originate and created: how then is He in things made, enlightening them? or what ^tY" special shall we find any longer in the Divine Essence? or cap. i. 4. how does the most wise Psalmist say as something marvellous of Him Who is by Nature God, In Thy Light shall tve see light? Ps.xxxvi. For if the Son being originate illumines all things, the creation will illumine itself, having no wise need thereto of God its Maker. There is then nothing more in God than in the creature, and it iuworks no less than God could do. But this is absurd. The Son then is not originate, but God rather, and therefore Light by Nature, as is the Father.

Another of the same. If the Son being the Light of God the Father (as is said, In Thy Light shall we see Light and, lb. 0 send out Thy Light and Thy Truth), is originate and Ib.xliii.3. brought into being, there is no longer ought to hinder, by equal analogy, all things originate from being called the Light of God the Father, For if the nature of things created at all admits this, it will be in potential common to them all, and not the own property of the One Son. But this is absurd: for to the Son Alone will it pertain to be called and to be the Light of God the Father. Not therefore originate is He, but Light, as God from God Who illumineth through Him things lacking light.

Another. If the Son being by Nature Light is not of the Essence of the Father, but being from without is subordinated, according to the uninstructed speech of the fighters against God, it follows that He is connatural and kin to things created, as having forsooth fallen away from the Divine Essence. How then is He called and is Light, but of the holy Baptist it is said, He was not the Light, albeit Infra ver. the blessed Baptist is hght in potential, and not he alone, if it be once granted that the Son being originate, can be by Nature Light? For that which has once had place in the nature, is I suppose common to each that partakes of such nature, according to the law of consequence. But John was not Light, the Son Light. Other therefore by Nature is He and not connatural with things made.

Another of the same. If the Son being by Nature Light is originate and created, as not possessing forsooth the being

nature of things originate will admit of being and being called light; it will be altogether light according to the law of potential. For that which has in its nature to be anything, will I suppose surely be so, even if it have not yet been. Since then the being light is common to the nature of things originate, and the property in aloneness of none, why in vain does the Son vaunt of Himself, saying, I am the Light? for He ought I suppose to say, I am with you the Light. But since He puts it about Himself Alone as His own proper good, joining to Himself no one else, He clearly classes Himself, not with things originate, but with the Divine Essence of God the Father, whereto belongs the being by Nature Light.

Another. That which is participate of light is not in its own right the Light; for it is clearly one thing in another. If then the Son be by participation in things originate, as Light; He will be other than those that partake of Him and lack Light. Therefore not originate is He, nor seeking, as things originate, to be illumined by another: it remains therefore that He is God and able to illuminate. If so. He will be conceived of also as sprung of the Essence of the Father, if we worship One God, and serve none other than the True God.

Another. Accurately testing the nature of things that are, we behold God and the creature, and nought else besides. For whatever faileth of being by Nature God, is wholly originate, and whatever escapeth the category of being made, is wholly and entirely within the Hmits of Divinity. Since then we have established this, let them tell us who thrust forth the Son from being of the Essence of God the Father, how He can illumine as Light, seeing the Divine Nature retaineth this as Its own, and yields it to none else. But if the Son being originate, can be also Light, the grace of thig excellence will surely overtake all things originate, and all will be by nature light. What further need then have they of participation with the Son, or what more will they gain hence, having themselves too the being by

God then by Nature is the Son, and therefore Light, as able to illumine things that lack Light.

Another. The Son being by Nature Light, is either Other than the creature, in regard that is of the mode of being, or connatural with it. If then He be cognate and consubstantial, vainly, as it seems, did He come to us saying, I am come a L'ujht Into the ivorld; for the creation has Infra xii. of its own itself also the being light: but light is imparticipate of light, that it may be understood to be light. But if He be not connatural, but the creature lack light to whom belongs, What Itast tJiou that thou didst not receive? needs i Cor. iv. will the Son escape being originate, withdrawing from the creation together with Himself His own proper good. For the creature will not be by nature light, but rather lacking and participate of light.

Another. If nought be participate of itself and the creature partake of the Son as Light: He is not a creature, nor yet the creature Light, which the Son is.

Another. If to illumine be one thing, to be illumined another, as action and passion, and the Son illumines, the creature is illumined; therefore not the same is Son and creature, since neither is the inworker with the inwrought.

5 A)id the Light shineth in darkness, and the darkness comprehended It not.

Needs does the most wise Evangelist hasten to expand to us by this too that is now before us the thought expressed above. For he did not think, I suppose, that it would suffice to the hearers unto being able to think unerringly of God the Word, that He is verily the Light of men, by only saying. And the Life was the Light of men. For it was like I suppose that some would arise who should hear the things uttered without weighing them, and should moreover set forth or try to teach others also that the Word of God is indeed verily Light, but not Giver of light to all, but in whomsoever He will

Book I, ought to receive it and is worthy of so bright a gift: and that the nature of the rest of therationalcreationeithergetsthepowerof understanding from its natural seed, or God the Father ingrafts into it mind and understanding, as though the Son were unable to do this. In order then that God the Word, Who was in God the Father, may be clearly shewn to be both Life and Light, not of some individually, of others not, but by some ineffable mode of participation, as wisdom and understanding (which is what is called light in things rational), immingling Himself in all things that are, that the things rational may become rational, and things recipient of sense may have sense, which in no other way they could have had: — needs does he say, And tJie Light shineth in darkness and the darkness comprehended it not.

As though he with all exactitude crieth aloud to his hearers after this sort: I said, sirs, teaching the truth with all my power, that the Life was the Light of men, not that any should suppose from these words that they who shew themselves righteous and good receive from another, as the reward of their conduct, the illumination from Him, but that ye might learn, that as the Word is Life in all things that have been made, quickening things recipient of life; so He is in them Light also, rendering things recipient of understanding and sense, what they are. For God the Father through the Son in the Spirit is all things in all.

Darkness he calls the nature that lacks illumination, i. e. the whole originate nature. For since he calls Him the Light, to shew that the rational creation which lacks and is imparticipate thereof is other than It, he turns the force of the epithet used to the very contrary, doing this also, after my judgment, not without an aim, but considering in himself this above all, that the nature of things originate, producing nothing whatever from its own self, but receiving its whole being and well-being such as it is from its Creator, has 1 Cor. iv. rightly said to it, What hast thou that thou didst not receive? And since along with the rest, it has light itself also Godgiven, not possessing it does it receive it: but that which has not of itself light, how will it not be the contrary, or how will it not be called darkness? For that the Liqht shineth in Chap.

ing from very necessity), that the creation is darkness, the Word of God Light. For if the nature of things originate receive the Word of God by participation, as Light, or as of Light^: it receives it thenas itself darkness, and the Son shineth \ ^,^ t^^ vn it, as the light doth in darkness, even though the darkness ^(»t6s know not a whit the Light. For this, I suppose, is the meaning of The darkness comprehended it not. For the Word of God shineth upon all things that are receptive of His Irradiance, and illumineth without exception things that have a nature receptive of illumining. But He is unknown of the darkness. For that which is the rational nature upon earth, I mean man, served the creature more than Rom. i. the Creator: it comprehended not the Light, for it knew not the Creator, the Fountain of wisdom, the beginning of understanding, the root of sense. Things originate possess nevertheless, of His love to man, the light, and are provided with the power of perception implanted concurrently with their passing into being.

But we must again note here, that no argument will permit to suppose that the Son of God is originate or created, but in every way does He surpass our measure, and rise above the nature of the creature, and is wholly Other than they are and far removed as regards quality of essence, even as the light is not the same as darkness, but soothly contrary and parted by incomparable diversity into physical alieniety.

Having now sufficiently gone through the method of reasoning hereupon in the foregoing, we will go on to what follows.

6 7 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light. Having before explained about God the Word, and most accurately gone through the things whereby He is shewn to be by Nature Son of God the Father, he fortifies their faith in what they had already heard by his words. And since (according to what was said by God through Moses), At Deut.xix.

Book 1. tJte inouth of tivo and three witnesses shall every word he cAP.i.C 7.. *.

' * ' ' established, wisely does he bring in addition to himself the blessed Baptist, and introduces him along with himself a most noteworthy witness. For he did not suppose that he ought, even if of gravest weight, to demand of the readers in his book concerning our Saviour credence above that of the law, and that they should believe him by himself when declaring things above our understanding and sense. Tlierefore the blessed Evangelist himself testifies that

Supra 1,2. j'j^^q Wovd was in the beginning and the Word ivas God and lb. 3. toas in the beginning ivith God and that all things ivere lb. 4. made by Him, and He ivas in the things made as Life, and that the Life was the Light of men, that by all these he might shew that the Son is by Nature God. And the Divine Baptist too testifies in addition to him, crying aloud,

U&.sX.Z. Prepare ye the ivay of the Lord, make straight the pi^iths of our God. For soothly one will say that He is Very God, in Whom is by Nature inherent the dignity of lordship and it

1 Cor.viii. accrues not to any other rightly and truly, since to us there is one God the Father, and one Lord Jesus Christ, as Paul

I^-5- saithj and though there he many called gods by grace and lords both in heaven and earth, yet the Son is One with the Father Very God.

Therefore, most noteworthy is the pair of holy witnesses, and credence no longer capable of blame is due to the things said, both as having received the fulness of the law, and supported by the notability of the persons. For the blessed Evangelist then to say ought concerning himself, and to take hold of his own praises, were in truth burdensome and moreover ill-instructed. For he would rightly have

Infra viii. heard, Thmo bearest record of thyself, thy record is not true. Therefore he commits to those who know him to form their opinion of him, and goes to his namesake, doing well in this too, and says that he was sent by God. For it behoved him to shew that not of his own accord nor with self-invited zeal does the holy Baptist come to his testimony respecting our Saviour, but yielding to the commands from above, and ministering to the Divine Will of the Father.. Wherefore he

says, Thrre was a man sent from God, whose name was Chap.

But we must notice how unerringly and fitly he expressed himself as to each, and correspondently to the nature of the things indicated. For in the case of God the Word, vjas is fitly introduced indicating every way His Eternity, and His being more ancient than all beginning that is in time, and removing the idea of His having been created. For that which always is, how can it be conceived of as originate?

But of the blessed Baptist, befittingly does he say. There was a man sent from Qod, as of a man having an originate nature. And very unerringly does the Evangelist herein seem to me not merely to say that Tliere was, but by adding the word a man, to overthrow the most unadvised surmise

For already was there a report bruited of many, commonly saying that the holy Baptist was not really a man by nature but one of the holy angels in heaven, making use of human body and sent by God to preach. And the plea for this surmise they found in its being said by God, Behold I send S. Matth. Mij messenger before Thij Face, which sltall prejjare Thy way Mai. iii. before Thee. But they err from the truth who imagine thus, ' not considering that the name of Angel is indicative of ministry rather than of essence, even as in the history of the blessed Job messengers ^ one after the other run to announce Job i. his manifold sufferings and ministering to those incurable afflictions. Something like this does the most wise Paul himself define respecting the holy angels, writing thus: Are Heb. i. they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall he heirs of salvation?

John the blessed Baptist then is called an angel by the mouth of the Lord, not as being actually by nature an angel, but as sent to announce and crying aloud. Prepare ye the way of the Lord. Very profitably does he declare moreover that the angel ^ was sent hy God, shewing that his witness is most ' rhf sure. For he that was sent by God to preach, would not anjei "r messeii- » &yye\oi. The Greek word" angel" in classic Greek in that meaning. gei-_

Book I. utter anything in his teaching that was not wholly according 'to the will of Him Who put the mission on him. True therefore is the witness as being God-taught. For the most wise Gal. 1. 1. Paul also telling us that he was sent by Jesus Christ, affirmed that he learned the power of the mystery not of any other^ lb. 12. ]3u^ ly revelation of Him Who sent him^ signifying the re- 2 o-uj/TjM- velation in sum so to say and briefly ^, in saying that he was KOI aSia- ' sent by Jesus Christ. Hence the being God-taught wholly ararws foHows ou being sciit hij God. And that freedom from lying is wholly the aim of the ministers of the truth is undoubted. The man^s name he says tvas John. It needed that he who was sent should be recognized by the mark of the name, which introduces, as I suppose, great authenticity to what is said, S. Luke For an angel (namely Gabriel that stand in the presence of God, as himself says) when he declared toZacharias the good tidings of his birth of Elizabeth, added this to what he said, namely lb. 13. ^jiat his name shall be John. It is I suppose clear and confessed by all that he was so named of the angel according to the Divine purpose and appointment. How then will not he who was crowned by God with so great honour be conceived of as above all praise? Wlierefore the mention of his name is profitably and necessarily brought in.

But since the Evangehst has added that the holy Baptist was sent by God /or a witness that all men through him might believe, we will further say when our opponents fall foul and say, „ Why did not all believe the God -sent? how came „ he who was fore-appointed by the decree from above to be „ powerless to persuade any?^^ — It is meet, sirs, that we should not blame John for want of zeal herein, but should exclaim against the obstinacy of those who disbelieved. For so far as pertains to the aim of the herald, and the mode of his apostolate from above, none would have been found imparticipate in the teaching, nor would have remained in unbeHef: but since there was diversity of disposition in the hearers and each has power over his own free-choice, some receiving not the faith missed what was profitable. Wherefore we must Ezek. iii. say to them (as it is in the prophet). He that heareth, let him hear; o.nd he that forbeareth, let him forbear.

This man came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light. Chap.

The word This is full of declaration of virtue and praise of cap. i. s. person. For he that was sent, he says, from God, he that with reason struck with astonishment the whole of Judgea, by the gravity of his life and its marvellous exercise in virtue ^, ^''"^ '^"'"^ he that is fore-announced by the voice of the holy Prophets: o-lu v-iref)- called by Isaiah, The voice of him that crieth in the ivilderness, isa. xl. 3. and by the blessed David, a lamj) fore-ordained for Christ^; Ps-cxxxn. This man came for a luitness to hear loitness of the Light. He here calls God the Word Light, and shews that He is One and strictly * the very actual Light, with Whom there is ■* '^"P''^* by nature nought else that has the property of illumining, and that is not lacking light. Therefore foreign and, so to say^ of other nature than the creature is the Word of God, since verily and truly is He strictly Light, the creature participate of light. He then that is unclassed with things made, and conceived of therefore as being of other nature than they, how will He be originate, rather how will He not be within the limits of Deity and replete with the Good Nature of Him who begat Him?

8 He was not the Light, but was sent to bear witness of the Light. The Baptist having esteemed desert-abodes above the haunts of the cities, and having shewn forth an unwonted persistence in exercise of virtue, and having mounted to the very summit of the righteousness attainable by man, was most rightly wondered at, and even by some imagined to be Christ Himself. And indeed the rulers of the Jews led by his achievements in virtue to some such notion, send some to him bidding them to inquire if he be the Christ. The blessed Evangelist then not ignorant of the things that were by many bruited of him, of necessity puts, He ivas not the Light, that he might both uproot the error as to this, and again build up some weight of credence to him who was sent from God for a witness. For how is he not eminent exceedingly, how is he not every way worthy of marvel, who is so clad with great virtue and so illustrious in righteousness as to imitate >> " Mine Anointed," E. V. " My Christ," LXX.

Book I. Christ Himself, and by the choice beauty of his piety, to be even imagined to be the Light Itself?

He ivas not then, says he, the Light, but sent to hear witness of the Light. In saying the Light, with the addition of the article, he shews that it is really one: for so it is in truth. For that both the blessed Baptist and each of the other saints, may be rightly called light we will not deny, seeing that it

Ps.cxxxii. And again it is said of the holy Baptist, I have ordained a

^^' and ye were ivilling for a season to rejoice in his light. But even though the saints be light, and the Baptist a lamp, we are not ignorant of the grace that was given them and of their supply from the Light. For neither is the light in the lamp its own, nor the illumination in the saints, but they are rendered bright and lightsome by the enlightening of the

Phil. ii. Truth and are lights in the world, holding forth the word of life. And what is the Life, whose word they holding forth are

Infra xiv. called light, save surely the Only-Begotten, Who saith, lam the Life? Therefore, One of a truth is That Which is verily Light, lighting, not enlightened: and by participation of the One, whatever is called light, wiU be so deemed of by imitation of It.