|
{342} Chapter 19. Texts explained; sixthly, Proverbs viii. 22.
§ 44. 1. WE have gone through thus much before the passage in the Proverbs, resisting the insensate fables which their hearts have invented, that they may know that the Son of God ought not to be called a creature, and may learn rightly to read what admits in truth of a sound [Note 1] explanation. For it is written, The Lord created Me a beginning of His ways, for His works [Prov. viii. 22.] [Note A (not cited in text—NR.)]; since, however, these are proverbs and it is expressed in the way of proverbs, we must not expound them nakedly in their first sense, but we must inquire into the person, and thus religiously put the sense on it. For what is said in proverbs, is not said plainly but is put forth latently [Note B], as the Lord Himself has taught us in the Gospel according to {343} John, saying, These things have I spoken unto you in proverbs, but the time cometh when I shall no more speak unto you in proverbs, but openly [John xvi. 25.]. Therefore it is necessary to unfold the sense [Note C] of what is said, and to seek it as something hidden, and not nakedly to expound as if the meaning were spoken plainly, lest by a false interpretation we wander from the truth. 2. If then what is written be about Angel, or any other of things generate, as concerning one of us who are works, let it be said, created Me [Prov. viii. 23.]. But if it be the Wisdom of God, in whom all things generate have been framed, that speaks concerning Itself, what ought we to understand but that He created, means nothing contrary to "He begat?" Nor, as forgetting that He was Creator and Framer, or ignorant of the difference between the Creator and the creatures, does It number Itself among the creatures; but It signifies a certain sense, as in proverbs, not plainly, but latent; which It inspired the sacred writers to use in prophecy, while soon after It doth Itself give the meaning of He created [vid. supra.] in other but parallel expressions, saying, Wisdom hath made Herself a house [Prov. ix. 1.]. Now it is plain that our body is Wisdom's house [Note D], which It took on Itself to become man; hence consistently does John say, The Word was made flesh [John i. 14.]; and by Solomon Wisdom says of Itself with cautious exactness [Note 2], not "I am a creature," but only The Lord hath created Me a beginning of His ways for His works [Prov. viii. 23.] [Note E], yet not "created Me that I might have being," nor "because I have a creature's beginning and generation." § 45. 3. For in this passage, not as signifying the Substance of His {344} Godhead, nor His own everlasting and genuine [Note 3] generation from the Father, has the Word spoken by Solomon, but on the other hand His manhood and economy towards us. And, as I said before, He has not said "I am a creature," or "I became a creature," but only He created [Note F]. For the creatures, having a created substance, are generate, and are said to be created, and in short the creature is created; but this mere term He created does not necessarily signify the substance or the generation, but indicates something else as {345} coming to pass in Him [Note 4] of whom it speaks, and not simply that He who is said to be created, is at once in His Nature and Substance a creature [Note G]. And this difference divine Scripture recognises, saying concerning the creatures, The earth is full of Thy creation [Ps. civ. 24. Sept.], and the creation itself groaneth together and travaileth together [Rom. viii. 22.]; and in the Apocalypse he says, And the third part of the creatures in the sea died which had life [Rev. viii. 9.]; as also Paul says, Every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be refused if it be received with thanksgiving [1 Tim. iv. 4.]; and in the book of Wisdom it is written, Having ordained man through Thy wisdom, that he should have dominion over the creatures which Thou hast made [Wisd. ix. 2.]. And these, being creatures, are also said to be created, as we may further hear from our Lord, who says, He who created them, made them male and female [Mat. xix. 4. ho poiesas]; and from Moses in his Song, who writes, Ask now of the days that are past, which were before thee since the day that God created man upon the earth, and from the one side of heaven unto the other [Deut. iv. 32.]. {346} And Paul in his Epistle to the Colossians, Who is the Image of the Invisible God, the First born of every creature, for in Him were all things created that are in heaven, and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers; all things were created through, Him, and for Him, and He is before all [Col. i. 15-17.]. § 46. 4. That to be called creatures, then, and to be created belongs to things which have by nature a created substance, these passages are sufficient to remind us, though Scripture is full of the like; on the other hand that the single word He created does not simply denote the substance and mode of generation [Note 5], David shews in the Psalm, This shall be written for another generation, and the people that is created shall praise the Lord [Ps. cii. 18. Sept.]; and again, Create in me a clean heart, O God [Ps. li. 12.]; and Paul in his Epistle to the Ephesians says, having abolished the law of commandments contained in ordinances, for to create in Himself of two one new man [Eph. ii. 15.]; and again, Put ye on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness [Note 6]. For neither David spoke of any people created in substance, nor prayed to have another heart than that he had, but meant renovation according to God and renewal; nor did Paul signify any two created in substance in the Lord, nor again did he counsel us to put on any other man; but he called the life according to virtue the man after God, and by the created in Christ he meant the two people who are renewed in Him. Such too is the language of the book of Jeremiah; The Lord hath created a new salvation for a plantation, in which salvation men shall walk to and fro [Jer. xxxi. 22.] [Note H]; and in thus speaking, he does not mean any substance of a creature, but prophesies of the renewal of salvation among men, which has taken place [Note 7] in Christ for us. 5. Such then being the difference between "the creatures" and the single word He created, if you find any where in divine Scripture the Lord called "creature," produce it and make the most of it; but if it is no where written that He is {347} a creature, only He Himself says about Himself in the Proverbs, The Lord hath created Me, shame upon you both on the ground of the distinction aforesaid and for that the diction is like that of proverbs; and accordingly let He created be understood, not of His being a creature, but of that human nature which became [Note 8] His, for to this belongs creation. Indeed is it not evidently unfair in you, when David and Paul say He created, then indeed not to understand it of the substance and the generation, but the renewal; yet, when the Lord says He created, to number His substance with the creatures? and again when Scripture says, Wisdom hath built her an house, she hath hewn out her seven pillars [Prov. ix. 1.], to understand house allegorically, but to take He created as it stands, and to fasten on it the idea of creature? and neither His being Framer of all has had any weight with you, nor have you feared His being the sole and proper Offspring of the Father, but recklessly, as if you had enlisted against Him, do ye fight, and think less of Him than of men. § 47. 6. For the very passage proves that it is only an invention of your own to call the Lord creature. For the Lord, knowing His own Substance to be the Only-begotten Wisdom and Offspring of the Father, and other than things generate and natural creatures, says in love to man, The Lord hath created Me a beginning of His ways, as if to say, "My Father hath prepared for Me a body, and has created Me for men in behalf of their salvation." For, as when John says, The Word was made flesh [John i. 14.], we do not conceive the whole Word Himself to be flesh [Note 9], but to have put on flesh and become man, and on hearing, Christ hath become a curse for us [Gal. iii. 13.], and He hath made Him sin for us who knew no sin [2 Cor. v. 21.], we do not simply conceive this, that whole Christ has become curse and sin, but that He has taken on Him the curse which lay against us, (as the Apostle has said, Has redeemed us from the curse [Gal. iii. 13.], ( and has carried, as Esaias has said, our sins [Is. liii. 4.], and as Peter has written, has borne them in the body on the wood [1 Pet. ii. 24.];) so, if it is said in the Proverbs He created, we must not conceive that the whole Word is in nature a creature, but that He put on the created body [Note I] and that God created Him for our {348} sakes, preparing for Him the created body, as it is written, for us, that in Him we might be capable of being renewed and made gods [Note 10]. 7. What then has deceived you, O senseless, to call the Creator a creature? or whence did you purchase for you this new thought, to make a boast of [Note 11]? For the Proverbs say He created, but they call not the Son creature, but Offspring; and, according to the distinction in Scripture aforesaid of He created and "creature," they acknowledge, what is by nature proper to the Son, that He is the Only-begotten Wisdom and Framer of the creatures, and when they say He created, they say it not in respect of His Substance, but signify that He was becoming a beginning of many ways; so that He created is in contrast to Offspring, and His being called the Beginning of ways [Note K] to His being the Only-begotten Word. § 48. For if He is Offspring, how call ye Him creature? for no one says that He begets what He creates, nor calls His proper offspring creatures; and again, if He is Only-begotten, how becomes He beginning of the ways? for of necessity, if He was created a beginning of all things, He is no longer alone, as having those who were made after Him. 8. For Reuben, when he became a beginning [Note 12] of the children, was not only-begotten, but in time indeed first, but in nature and relationship one among those who came after him. Therefore if the Word also is a beginning of the ways, He must be such as the ways are, and the ways must be such as the Word, though in point of time He be created first of them. For the beginning [Note 13] {349} or initiative of a city is such as the other parts of the city are, and the members too being joined to it, make the city whole and one, as the many members of one body; nor does one part of it make, and another come to be, and is subject to the former, but all the city equally has its government and constitution from its maker. If then the Lord is in such sense created as a beginning of all things, it would follow that He and all other things together make up the unity of the creation, and He neither differs from all others, though He become the beginning of all, nor is He Lord of them, though older in point of time; but He has the same manner of framing and the same Lord as the rest. 9. Nay, if He be a creature, as you hold, how can He be created sole and first at all, so as to be beginning of all? when it is plain from what has been said, that among the creatures not any is of a constant [Note 14] nature and of prior formation, but each has its generation with all the rest, however it may excel others in glory. For as to the separate stars or the great lights, not this appeared first, and that second, but in one day and by the same command, they were all called into being [Note 15]. And such was the generation of the quadrupeds, and of birds, and fishes, and cattle, and plants; such too was that of the human race after God's Image; for though Adam only was formed out of the earth, yet in him were the means of the succession of the whole race. § 49. And from the visible creation, we clearly discern that His invisible things also, being understood by the things that are made [Rom. i. 20.], are not independent of each other; for it was not first one and then another, but all at once were constituted after their kind. For the Apostle did not number individually, so as to say "whether Angel, or Throne, or Dominion, or Authority," but he mentions together all according to their kind, whether Angels, or Archangels, or Principalities [vid. Col. i. 16.]: for in this way is the generation of the creatures. If then, as I have said, the Word were creature, He must have been brought into being, not first of them, but with all the other Powers, though in glory He excel the rest ever so much. For so we find it to be in their case, that at once they came to be, with neither first nor second, and they differ from each other in glory, some on the right of the throne, some all around, and some on the {350} left, but one and all praising and standing in service before the Lord [Note 16]. 10. Therefore if the Word be creature, He would not be first or beginning of the rest; yet if He be before all, as indeed He is, and is Himself alone First and Son, it does not follow that He is beginning of all things as to His Substance [Note L], for what is the beginning of all is in the number of all. And if He is not such a beginning, then neither is He a creature, but it is very plain that He differs in substance and nature from the creatures, and is other than they, and is Likeness and Image of the sole and true God, being Himself sole also. Hence He is not classed with creatures in Scripture, but David rebukes those who dare even to think of Him as such, saying, Who among the gods is like unto the Lord? [Ps. lxxxviii. 7.] and Who is like unto the Lord among the sons of God? and Baruch, This is our God, and another shall not be reckoned with Him [Bar. iii. 35.]. For the One creates, and the rest are created; and the One is the proper Word and Wisdom of the Father's Substance, and through this Word things which came to be, which before existed not, were made. § 50. Your famous assertion then, that the Son is a creature, is not true, but is your fantasy only; nay Solomon convicts you of having these many times misinterpreted him. For He has not called Him creature, but God's Offspring and Wisdom, saying, God in Wisdom hath established the earth, and Wisdom hath built her an house [vid. Prov. iii. 19. ix. 1.]. 11. And the very passage in question proves your irreligious spirit; for it is written, The Lord created Me a beginning of His ways for His works. Therefore if He is before all things, yet says He created Me (not "that I might make the works," but) for the works, unless He created relates to something later than Himself, He will seem later than the works, finding them on His creation already in existence before Him, {351} for the sake of which He is also brought into being. And if so, how is He before all things notwithstanding? and how were all things made through Him and consist in Him? for behold, you say that the works consisted before Him, for which He is created and sent. But it is not so; perish the thought! false is the supposition of the heretics. For the Word of God is not creature but Creator; and says in the manner of proverbs, He created Me when He put on created flesh. 12. And something besides may be understood from the passage itself; for, being Son and having God for His Father, for He is His proper Offspring, yet here He names the Father Lord; not that He was servant, but because He took a servant's form. For it became Him, on the one hand being the Word from the Father, to call God Father: for this is proper to son towards father; on the other, having come to finish the work, and taken a servant's form, to name the Father Lord. And this difference He Himself has taught by an apt distinction, saying in the Gospels, I thank Thee, O Father, and then, Lord of heaven and earth [Mat. xi. 25.]. For He calls God His Father, but of the creatures He names him Lord; as shewing clearly from these words, that, when He put on the creature [Note 17], then it was He called the Father Lord. For in the prayer of David the Holy Spirit marks the same distinction, saying in the Psalms, Give Thy strength unto Thy child, and help the Son of Thine handmaid [Ps. lxxxvi. 16.]. For the natural and true child of God is one, and the sons of the handmaid, that is, of the nature of things generate, are other. Wherefore the One, as Son, has the Father's [Note 18] might; but the rest are in need of salvation. (But if, because He was called child [Note 19], they idly raise a point, let them know that both Isaac was named Abraham's child, and the son of the Shunamite was called young child.) § 51. Reasonably then, we being servants, when He became as we, He too calls the Father Lord, as we do; and this He did from love to man, that we too, being servants by nature, and receiving the Spirit of the Son, might have confidence to call Him by grace Father, who is by nature Our Lord. But as we, in calling the Lord Father, do not deny that servitude which is by nature, (for we are His works, and it is He that hath made us, and not we ourselves [Ps. c. 2.],) so when {352} the Son, on taking the servant's form, says, The Lord hath created Me a beginning of His ways, let them not deny the eternity of His Godhead, and that in the beginning was the Word, and all things were made by Him [John i. 1, 3.], and in Him all things were created [Col. i. 16.]. {353} Chapter 20. Texts explained; sixthly, Proverbs viii. 22. continued
1. FOR the passage in the Proverbs, as I have said before, signifies, not the Substance, but the manhood of the Word; for if He says that He was created for the works, He shews His intention of signifying, not His Substance, but the Economy which took place [Note 20] for His works, which comes second to being. For things which are in formation and creation are made specially that they may be and exist [Note A], and next they have to do, whatever the Word bids them, as may be seen in the case of all things. For Adam was created, not that he might work, but that first he might be man; for it was after this that he received the command to work. And Noe was created, not because of the ark, but that first he might exist and be a man; for after this he received commandment to prepare the ark. And the like will be found in every case on inquiring into it;—thus the great Moses first was made a man, and next was entrusted with the government of the people. Therefore here too we must suppose the like; for thou seest, that the Word is not created in order to be, but, In the beginning was the Word, and He is afterwards sent for the works and the economy towards them. For before the works were made, the Son was ever, nor was there yet need that He should be created; but when the works were created and need arose afterwards of the Economy for their restoration, then it was that the Word took upon Himself {354} this condescension [Note 21] and assimilation to the works; which He has shewn us by the word He created. And through the Prophet Esaias willing to signify the like, He says again: And now thus saith the Lord, who formed Me from the womb to be His servant, to gather together Jacob unto Him and Israel, I shall be brought together and be glorified before the Lord [Isai. xlix. 5. Sept.]. § 52. 2. See here too, He is formed, not that He may have being, but in order to gather together the tribes, which were in existence before He was formed. For as in the former passage stands He created, so in this He formed; and as there for the works, so here to gather together; so that in every point of view it appears that He created and He formed are said after the Word was. For as before His forming the tribes existed, for whose sake He was formed, so does it appear that the works exist, for which He was created. And when in the beginning was the Word, not yet were the works, as I have said before; but when the works were made and the need required, then He created was said; and as if some son, when the servants were lost, and in the hands of the enemy by their own carelessness, and need was urgent, were sent by his father to succour and recover them, and on setting out were to put over him the like dress [Note 22] with them, and should fashion himself as they, lest the capturers, recognizing him [Note B] as the master, should take to flight and prevent his descending to those who were hidden under the earth by them; and then were any one to inquire of him, why he did so, were to make answer, "My Father thus formed and prepared me for his works," while in thus speaking, he neither implies that he is a servant nor one of the works, nor speaks of the beginning of his generation [Note 23], but of the subsequent charge given him over the works,—in the same way the Lord also, having put over Him our flesh, and being found in fashion as a man, if He were questioned by those who saw Him thus and marvelled, would say, The Lord created {355} Me the beginning of His ways for His works, and He formed Me to gather together Israel. 3. [supr. 20. in margin unattached—NR.] This again the Spirit foretels in the Psalms, saying Thou didst set Him over the works of Thine hands [Heb. ii. 7.]; which elsewhere the Lord signified of Himself, I am set as King by Him upon His holy hill of Sion [Ps. ii. 6. Sept.]. And as, when He shone [Note 24] in the body upon Sion, He had not His beginning of existence or of reign, but being God's Word and everlasting King, He vouchsafed that His kingdom should shine in a human way in Sion, that redeeming them and us from the sin which reigned in them, He might bring them under His Father's Kingdom, so, on being set for the works, He is not set for things which did not yet exist, but for such as already were and needed restoration. § 53. He created then and He formed and He set, having the same meaning, do not denote the beginning of His being, or of His substance as created, but His beneficent renovation which came to pass [Note 25] for us. Accordingly, though He thus speaks, yet He taught also that He himself existed before this, when He said, Before Abraham was made, I am [John viii. 58.]; and when He prepared the heavens, I was present with Him; and I was with Him disposing things [Prov. viii. 27, 30.]. And as He Himself was before Abraham was made, and Israel was made after Abraham, and plainly He exists first and is formed afterwards, and His forming signifies not His beginning of being but His taking manhood, wherein also He collects together the tribes of Israel; so, as being always with the Father, He himself is Framer of the creation, and His works are evidently later than Himself, and He created signifies, not His beginning of being, but the economy which took place for the works, which He effected in the flesh. For it became Him, being other than the works, nay rather their Framer, to take upon Himself their renovation [Note 26], that, whereas He is created for us, all things may be now created in Him. For when He said He created, He forthwith added the reason, naming the works, that His creation for the works might signify His becoming man for their renovation. 4. And this is usual with divine Scripture [Note C]; for when it signifies {356} the fleshly generation of the Son, it adds also the cause [Note 27] for which He became man; but when He speaks or His servants declare any thing of His Godhead, all is said in simple diction, and with an absolute [Note 28] sense, and without reason being added. For He is the Father's Radiance; and as the Father is, but not for any reason, neither must we seek the reason of that Radiance. Thus it is written, In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God [John i. 1.]; and the wherefore it assigns not [Note 29] but when the Word was made flesh, then it adds the reason why, saying, And dwelt among us [John i. 14.]. And again the Apostle saying, Who being in the form of God, has not introduced the reason, till He look on Him the form of a servant; for then he continues, He humbled Himself unto death, even the death of the cross [Phil. ii. 6-8.]; for it was for this that He both became flesh and took the form of a servant. § 54. And the Lord himself has spoken many things in proverbs; but when giving us notices about Himself, He has spoken absolutely [Note 30]; I in the Father and the Father in Me, and I and the Father are one, and He that hath seen Me, hath seen the Father, and I am the Light of the world, and I am the Truth [John xiv. 6. 9. 10. x. 30. viii. 12.]; not setting down in every case the reason, nor the wherefore, lest He should seem second to those things for which He was made. For that reason would needs take precedence of Him, without which not even He Himself had been brought into being. Paul, for instance, separated an Apostle for the Gospel, which the Lord had promised afore by the Prophets [Rom. i. 1, 2.], was thereby made subordinate to the Gospel, of which he was made minister, and John, being chosen to prepare the Lord's way, was made subordinate to the Lord; but the Lord, not being made subordinate to any reason why He should be Word, save only that He is the Father's Offspring and Only-begotten Wisdom, when He becomes man, then assigns the reason, wherefore He is about to take flesh. 5. For the need of man preceded His becoming man, apart from which He had not put on flesh [Note D]. And what the need {357} was for which He became man, He Himself thus signifies, I came down from heaven, not to do Mine own will, but the will of Him that sent Me. And this is the will of Him which hath sent Me, that of all which He hath given Me, I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day. And this is the will of My Father, that every one which seeth the Son and believeth on Him may have everlasting life, and I will raise him up at the last day [John vi. 38-40.]. And again; I am come a light into the world, that whosoever believeth on Me, should not abide in darkness [John xii. 46.]. And again He says; To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth [John xviii. 37.]. And John has written; For this was manifested the Son of God, that He might destroy the works of the devil [1 John iii. 8.]. § 55. To give a witness then, and for our sakes to undergo death, to raise man up and loose the works of the devil [Note E], the Saviour came, and this is the reason of His incarnate presence [Note 31]. For otherwise a {358} resurrection had not been, unless there had been death; and how had death been, unless He had had a mortal body? 6. This the Apostle, learning from Him, thus sets forth, Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, He also Himself likewise took part of the same; that through death He might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil, and deliver them who through fear of death were all their life-time subject to bondage [Heb. ii. 14, 15.]. And, Since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead [1 Cor. xv. 21.]. And again, For what the Law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God, sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin condemned sin in the flesh; that the righteousness of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit [Rom. viii. 3, 4.]. And John says, For God sent not His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved [John iii. 17.]. And again, the Saviour has spoken in His own person, For judgment am I come into this world, that they who see not might see, and that they which see might be made blind [John ix. 39.]. Not for Himself then, but for our salvation, and to abolish death, and to condemn sin, and to give sight to the blind, and to raise up all from the dead, has He come; but if not for Himself, but for us, by consequence not for Himself but for us is He created. But if not for Himself is He created, but for us, then He is not Himself a creature, but, as having put on our flesh, He uses such language. 7. And that this is the sense of the Scriptures, we may learn from the Apostle, who says in his Epistle to the Ephesians, Having broken down the middle wall of partition between us, having abolished in His flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances, to create in Himself of twain one new man, so making peace [Eph. ii. 14, 15.]. But if in Him the {359} twain are created, and these are in His body, reasonably then, bearing the twain in Himself, He is as if Himself created; for those who were created in Himself hath He made one, and He was in them, as they. And thus, the two being created in Him, He may say suitably, The Lord hath created Me. For as by receiving our infirmities, He is said to be infirm Himself, though not Himself infirm, for He is the Power of God, and He became sin for us and a curse, though not having sinned Himself, but because He himself bare our sins and our curse, so [Note F], by creating us in Him, let Him say, He created Me for the works, though not Himself a creature. § 56. 8. For if, as they hold, the substance of the Word being of created nature, therefore He says, The Lord created Me, being a creature, He was not created for us; but if He was not created for us, we are not created in Him; and, if not created in Him, we have Him not in ourselves but externally; as, for instance, as receiving instruction from Him as from a teacher [Note 32]. And it being so with us, sin has not lost its reign over the flesh, being inherent and not cast out of it. But the Apostle opposes such a doctrine a little before, when he {360} says, For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus [Eph. ii. 10.]; and if in Christ we are created, then it is not He who is created, but we in Him; and thus the words He created are for our sake. For because of our need, the Word, though being Creator, endured words which are used of creatures; which are not proper to Him, as being the Word, but are ours who are created in Him. And as, since the Father is always, so is His Word, and always being, always says, I was daily His delight, rejoicing always before Him [Prov. viii. 30.], and I am in the Father and the Father in Me [John xiv. 14.]; so, when for our need He became man, consistently does He use language, as ourselves, The Lord hath created Me, that, by His dwelling in the flesh, sin might perfectly be expelled from the flesh, and we might have a free mind [Note G]. For what ought He, when made man, to say? "In the beginning I was man?" this were neither suitable to Him nor true; and as it beseemed not to say this, so it is natural and proper in the case of man to say, He created and He made Him. 9. On this account then the reason of He created is added, namely, the need of the works; and where the reason is {361} added, that reason happily explains the passage. Thus here, when He says He created, He sets down the cause, the works; on the other hand, when He signifies absolutely [Note 33] the generation from the Father, straightway He adds, Before all the hills He begets Me [Prov. viii. 25.]; but He does not add the "wherefore," as in the case of He created, saying, for the works, but absolutely [Note 33], He begets Me, as in the passage, In the beginning was the Word [John i. 1.]. For, though no works had been created, still the Word of God was, and the Word was God. And His becoming man would not have taken place, had not the need of men become a cause. The Son then is not a creature. FootnotesA.
Athanasius follows the Sept. in translating the Hebrew [knt] by [ektide] created, as it is also translated in Gen. xiv. 19,
22. Such too is the sense given in the Chaldee, Syriac, and Arabic
versions, and by the great majority of primitive writers. On the other
hand, Aquila translates [ektesato], and so read Basil.
contr. Eunom. ii. 20 fin. Nyssen contr. Eunom. i. p. 34. Jerome in Is.
xxvi. 13. and the Vulgate translates possedit. [knt]
is translated "gotten," Gen. iv. 1. after the Sept. and Vulg. in the
sense of generation, vid. also Deut. xxxii. 6; The Hebrew sense is
appealed to by Eusebius, Eccles. Theol. iii. 2, 3. S. Epiphanius, Hær.
69, 25. and S. Jerome in Isai. xxvi. 13. Vid. Petav. Trin. ii. 1. Huet.
Origenian. ii. 2. 23. C. B. Michael. in hoc. Prov. B.
This passage of Athan. has been used by S. Cyril. Thesaur. p. 155, d.
vid. also Epiph. Hær. 69, 21. Basil. contr. Eunom, ii. 20. Didym. de
Trin. iii. 3. p. 334, (ed. 1769.) Nyss. contr. Eunom. p. 83. App. vid.
infr. 73 and 77. but it would be an endless labour to refer to such
parallel passages in later Fathers. C.
Here, as in so many other places, he is explaining what is obscure or
latent in Scripture by means of the Regula Fidei. "Since the canon of
Scripture is perfect," says Vincentius, "and more than sufficient for
itself in all respects, what need of joining to it the ecclesiastical
sense? because from the very depth of Holy Scripture all men will not
take it in one and the same sense, &c. Commonit. 2. Vid.
especially the first sentence of the following paragraph, [ti dei
noein k.t.l.]. vid. supr. p. 341, note I. D.
Ut intra intemerata viscera ædificante sibi Sapientiâ domum, Verbum
caro fieret. Leon. Ep. 31, 2. Didym. De Trin. iii. 3. p. 337. (ed.
1769.) August. Civ. D. xvii. 20. Cyril. in Joann. p. 384, 5. Max.
Dial. iii. p. 1029. (ap. Theodor. ed. Schutz.) vid. supr. p. 196, note
D. Hence S. Clement. Alex. [ho logos heauton gennai]. Strom. v.
3. E.
The passage is in like manner interpreted of our Lord's human nature
by Epiph. Hær. 69, 20-25. Basil. Ep. viii. 8. Naz. Orat. 30, 2. Nyss.
contr. Eunom. i. p. 34. et al. Cyril. Thesaur. p. 154. Hilar. de Trin.
xii. 36-49. Ambros. de Fid. i. 15. August. de Fid. et Symb. 6. F.
He seems here to say that it is both true that "The Lord created," and
yet that the Son was not created. Creatures alone are created, and He
was not a creature. Rather something belonging or relating to Him,
something short of His substance or nature, was created. However, it
is a question in controversy whether even His Manhood can be called a
creature, though many of the Fathers, (including Athan. in several
places.) seem so to call it. The difficulty may be viewed thus; that
our Lord, even in His human nature is the natural, not the adopted Son
of God, (to deny which is the error of the Adoptionists,) whereas no
creature can be His natural and true Son; and again that His human
nature is worshipped, which would be idolatry if it were a creature.
The question is discussed in Petav. de Incarn. vii. 6. who determines
that the human nature, though in itself a created substance, yet
viewed as deified in the Word, does not in fact exist as a creature.
Vasquez, however, considers that our Lord may be called creature,
viewed as man, in 3 Thom. Disp. 66. and Raynaud Opp. t. 2. p. 114.
expressing his opinion strongly. And Berti de Theol. Disc. xxvii. 5.
who adds, however, with Suarez after S. Thomas (in 3 Thom. Disput. 34.
Opp. t. 16. p. 489.) that it is better to abstain from the use of the
term. Of the Fathers, S. Jerome notices the doubt, and decides it in
favour of the term; "Since," he says, "Wisdom in the Proverbs of
Solomon speaks of Herself as created a beginning of the ways of God,
and many through fear lest they should be obliged to call Christ a
creature, deny the whole mystery of Christ, and say that not Christ,
but the world's wisdom is meant by this Wisdom, we freely declare,
that there is no hazard in calling Him creature, whom we confess with
all the confidence of our hope to be "worm," and "man," and "crucified,"
and "curse." In Eph. ii. 10. He is supported by Athan. infr. 46. Ep.
Æg. 17. Expos. F. 3. ad Serap. ii. 8. fin. Naz. Orat. 30, 2. fin. 38,
13. Nyss. in Cant. Hom. 13. t. i. p. 663. init. Cyr. Hom. Pasch. 17,
p. 233. Max. Mart. t. 2. p. 265. Damase. F. O. iii. 3. Hil. de Trin.
xii. 48. Ambros. Psalm. 118. Serm. 5. 25. August. Ep. 187, n. 8. Leon.
Serm. 77, 2. Greg. Mor. v. 63. The principal authority on the other
aide is S. Epiphanius, who ends his argument with the words, "The Holy
Church of God worships not a creature, but the Son who is begotten,
Father in Son, &c." Hær. 69, 36. And S. Proclus too speaks of the
child of the Virgin as being "Him who is worshipped, not the creature,"
Orat. v. fin. On the whole it would appear, (1.) that if "creature,"
like "Son," be a personal term, He is not a creature; but if it
be a word of nature, He is a creature; (2.) that our Lord is a
creature in respect to the flesh (vid. infr. 47.); (3.) that since the
flesh is infinitely beneath His divinity, it is neither natural nor
safe to call Him a creature, (according to St. Thomas's example, "non
dicimus, quod Æthiops est albus, sed quod est albus secundum dentes")
and (4.) that, if the flesh is worshipped, still it is worshipped as
in the Person of the Son, not by a separate act of worship. "A
creature worship not we," says Athan. "perish the thought ... but the
Lord of creation made flesh, the Word of God; for though the flesh in
itself be a part of creation, yet it has become God's body ... who so
senseless as to say to the Lord, Remove out of the body, that I may
worship Thee?" ad Adelph. 3. Epiph. has imitated this passage, Ancor.
51. introducing the illustration of a king and his robe, &c. G.
[to legomenon ktizesthai tei physei kai tei ousiai
ktisma]. also infr. 60, b. Without meaning that the respective
terms are synonymous, is it not plain that in a later phraseology this
would have been, "not simply that He is in His Person a creature," or "that
His Person is created?" vid. Note, p. 147-176. Athan.'s use of the
phrase [ousia tou logou] has already been noticed, supr. p.
244, note K. and passages from this Oration are given in another
connexion in the translation of his Hist. Tracts p 300. note m. The
term is synonymous with the Divine Nature as existing in the Person of
the Word. In the passage in the text the [ousia] of the Word is
contrasted to the [ousia] of creatures; and it is observable
that it is implied that our Lord has not taken on Him a created [ousia].
"He said not," Athan. remarks, "I became a creature, for the creatures
have a created substance;" he adds that "He created" signifies, not
substance, but something taking place in Him [peri ekeinon],
i.e. some adjunct or accident, (e.g. pp. 38, 9. notes Y and Z.) or as
he says supr. p. 291. envelopement or dress. In like manner he
presently p. 346. speaks of the creation of the Word like the new
creation of the soul, which is not in substance but in qualities,
&c. And infr. p. 353. he contrasts the [ousia] and the [anthropinon]
of the Word; as in Orat. i. 41. [ousia] and [he anthropotes];
and [physis] and [sarx], iii. 34. init. and [logos]
and [sarx], 38. init. And He speaks of the Son "taking on Him
the economy," infr. 76, d. and of the [hypostasis tou logou]
being one with [ho anthropos], iv. 25, c. It is observed
p. 291, note K. how this line of teaching might be wrested to the
purposes of the Apollinarian and Eutychian heresies; and, considering
Athan.'s most emphatic protests against their errors in his later
works, as well as his strong statements in Orat. iii. there is no
hazard in this admission. We thus understand how Eutyches came to deny
the "two natures." He said that such a doctrine was a new one; this is
not true, for, not to mention other Fathers, Athan. infr. Orat. iv.
fin. speaks of our Lord's "invisible nature and visible," (vid.
also contr. Apoll. ii. 11, a. infr. 70. iii. 43, c.) and his ordinary
use of [anthropos] for the manhood might quite as
plausibly be perverted on the other hand into a defence of
Nestorianism; but still the above peculiarities in his style may be
taken to account for the heresy, though they do not excuse the
heretic. Vid. also the Ed. Ben. on S. Hilary, præf. p. xliii. who
uses natura absolutely for our Lord's Divinity, as contrasted
to the dispensatio, and divides His titles into naturalia
and assumpta. H.
vid. also Expos. F. 3. where he notices that this is the version of
the Septuagint, Aquila's being "The Lord bath created a new thing in
the woman." Our own "a new thing in the earth, a woman shall compass a
man," is with the Hebrew, as is the Vulgate. Athan. has preserved
Aquila's version in three other places, in Psalm xxx. 12. lix. 5. lxv.
18. I.
Here he says that, though our Lord's flesh is created or He is created
as to the flesh, it is not right to call Him a creature. This is very
much what S. Thomas says, as referred to in p. 344, note F. in the
words of the Schools, that Æthiops, albus secundum dentes, not est
albus. But why may not our Lord be so called upon the principle of the
communicatio Idiomatum, (infra note on iii. 31.) as He is said
to be, born of a Virgin, to have suffered, &c.? The reason is
this:—birth, passion, &c. confessedly belong to His human
nature, without adding "according to the flesh;" but "creature" not
implying humanity, might appear a simple attribute of His Person. if
used without limitation. Thus, as S. Thomas adds, though we may not
absolutely say Æthiops iste albus, we may say "crispus est," or in
like manner, "he is bald." Since crispus, or bald, can but refer to
the hair. Still more does this remark apply in the case of "Sonship,"
which is a personal attribute altogether; as is proved, says Petav. de
Incarn. vii. 6 fin. by the instance of Adam, who was in all respects a
man like Seth, yet not a son. Accordingly, we may not call our Lord,
even according to the manhood, an adopted Son. K.
[archen hodon], and so in Justin's Tryph. 61. The
Bened. Ed. in loc. refers to a similar application of the word to our
Lord in Tatian contr. Gent. 5. Athenag. Ap. 10. Iren. Hær. iv. 20. n.
3. Origen. in Joan. tom. 1. 39. Tertull. adv. Prax. 6. and Ambros. De
Fid. iii. 7. L.
He says that, though none could be "a beginning" of creation, who was
a creature, yet still that such a title belongs not to His essence. It
is the name of an office which the Eternal Word alone can fill.
His Divine Sonship is both superior and necessary to that office of a "Beginning."
Hence it is both true (as He says) that "if the Word is a creature, He
is not a beginning;" and yet that that "beginning" is "in the number
of the creatures." Though He becomes the "beginning," He is not "a
beginning as to His substance," vid. supr. p. 251, note F. And
infr. p. 367, where he says "He who is before all, cannot be a beginning
of all, but is other than all," which implies that the beginning
of all is not other than all. vid. p. 292, note M. on the Priesthood,
and p. 303, note E. A.
He says in effect, "Before the generation of the works, they were not;
but Christ on the contrary," (not, "was before His
generation," as Bull's hypothesis, supr. p. 272, would require, but) "is
from everlasting," vid. p. 363, note A. B.
Vid. the well-known passage in S. Ignatius, ad Eph. 19, where the
devil is said to have been ignorant of the Virginity of Mary, and the
Nativity and the Death of Christ; Orig. Hom. 6. in Luc. Basil (if
Basil.) Hom. in t. 2. App. p 598. ed Ben. and Jerome in Matt. i. 18.
who quote it. vid. also Leon. Serm. xxii. 3 August. Trin. ix. 21.
Clement. Eclog. Proph. p. 1002. ed. Potter. C.
[ethos esti tei theiai graphei]. and so Orat.
iii. 18, b. And [tes graphes ethos echouses],
ibid. 30, d. D.
It is the general teaching of the Fathers that our Lord would not have
been incarnate had not man sinned. "Our cause was the occasion of His
descent, and our transgression called forth the Word's love of man. Of
His incarnation we became the ground." Athan. de Incarn. V.D. 4.
vid.Thomassin. at great length de Incarn. ii. 5-11. also Petav. de
Incarn. ii. 17, 7-12. Vasquez. in 3 Thom. Disp. x. 4 and 5. E.
Two ends of our Lord's Incarnation are here mentioned; that He might
die for us, and that He might renew us, answering nearly to those
specified in Rom. iv. 25. "who was delivered for our offences and
raised again for our justification." The general object of His coming,
including both of these, is treated of in Incarn. 4-20. or rather in
the whole Tract, and in the two books against Apollinaris. It is
difficult to make accurate references under the former head, (vid.
infr. note on 65 and 67.) without including the latter. "Since all men
had to pay the debt of death, on which account especially He came on
earth, therefore after giving proofs of His Divinity from His works,
next He offered a sacrifice for all, &c." the passage then runs on
into the other fruit of His death. ibid. 20. Vid. supr. p. 291. where
he speaks of our Lord offering both Himself and us to God, and "offering
our flesh," p. 294. and p. 23. Also infr. Orat. iv. 6. "When He is
said to hunger, to weep and weary and to cry Eloi, which are human
affections, He receives them from us and offers to His Father,
interceding for us, that in Him they may be annulled." And so
Theodoret, "Whereas He had an immortal nature, He willed according to
equity to put a stop to death's power, taking on Him first from those
who were exposed to death a first-fruit; and preserving this
immaculate and guiltless of sin, He surrenders it for death to seize
upon as well as others, and satiate its insatiableness; and then on
the ground of its want of equity against that first-fruit, He put a
stop to its iniquitous tyranny over others." Eran. iii. p. 196, 7.
Vigil. Thaps. contr. Eutych. i. p. 496. (B. P. ed. 1624,) and S. Leo
speaks of the whole course of redemption, i.e. incarnation, atonement,
regeneration, justification, &c. as one sacrament, not drawing the
line distinctly between the several agents, elements, or stages in it,
but considering it to lie in the intercommunion of Christ's and our
persons. Thus he says that our Lord "took on Him all our infirmities
which come of sin without sin;"' and "the most cruel pains and death,"
because "none could be rescued from mortality, unless He, in whom our
common nature was innocent, allowed Himself to die by the hands of the
impious;" "unde," he continues, "in se credentibus et sacramentum
condidit et exemplum, ut unum apprehenderent renascendo,
alterum sequerentur imitando." Serm. 63, 14. He speaks of His
fortifying us against our passions and infirmities, both sacramento
susceptionis and exemplo. Serm. 65, 2. and of a "duplex remedium
cujus aliud in sacramento, aliud in exemplo." Serm. 67, 5. also
69, 5. Elsewhere he makes the strong statement, "The Lord's passion is
continued on [producitur] even to the end of the world; and as in His
Saints He is honoured Himself, and Himself is loved, and in the poor
He Himself is fed, is clothed Himself, so in all who endure trouble
for righteousness' sake, does He Himself suffer together [compatitur],
Serm. 70, 5. vid. also more or less in Serm. pp. 76. 93. 98, 9. 141.
249. 257, 8. 271. fin, and Epist. pp. 1291, 1363, 4. At other times,
however, the atonement is more distinctly separated from its
circumstances, pp. 136, 198, 310. but it is very difficult to draw the
line. The tone of his teaching is throughout characteristic of the
Fathers, and very like that of S. Athanasius. F.
The word [autos] "Himself," is all along used, where a later
writer would have said "His Person;" vid. Note, p. 165. and p. 345,
note G; still there is more to be explained in this passage, which,
taken in the letter, would speak a language very different from Athan.'s,
as if the infirmities or the created nature of the Word were not more
real than His imputed sinfulness. (vid. on the other hand infr. iii.
31-35.) But nothing is more common in theology than comparisons which
are only parallel to a certain point as regards the matter in hand,
especially since many doctrines do not admit of exact illustrations.
Our Lord's real manhood and imputed sinfulness were alike adjuncts to
His Divine Person, which was of an Eternal and Infinite Nature; and
therefore His Manhood may be compared to an Attribute, or to an
accident, without meaning that it really was either. The Athan. Creed
compares the Hypostatic Union to that of soul and body in one man,
which, as taken literally by the Monophysites became their heresy.
Again S. Cyril says, "As the Bread of the Eucharist, after the
invocation of the Holy Ghost, is mere bread no longer, but the Body of
Christ, so also this holy ointment is no more simple ointment, &c."
Catech. xxi. 3. O. T. but no one contends that S. Cyril held either a
change in the chrism, or no change in the bread. Hence again we find
the Arians arguing from John xvii. 11. that our union with the Holy
Trinity is as that of the Adorable Persons with Each Other;
vid. Euseb. Eccl. Theol. iii. 19. and Athan. replying to the argument,
infr. Orat. iii. 17-25. And so supr. "As we receiving the
Spirit, do not lose our own proper substance, so the Lord, when
made man for us and bearing a body, was no less God;" p. 23. yet He
was God made man, and we are but the temple of God. And again
Athanasius compares the Incarnation to our Lord's presence in the
world in nature. Incarn. 41-42. There are comparisons, however, which,
from incidental expressions or clauses, outrun this remark, as in the
celebrated letter to Cæsarius, considered to be S. Chrysostom's, or
in Gelasius's Tract de Duabus naturis. G.
[eleutheron to phronema]. vid. also beginning of the
paragraph, where sanctification is contrasted to teaching, vid. also
note on 79, infr. "Idly do ye imagine to be able to work in yourselves
newness of the principle which thinks ([phronountos]) and
actuates the flesh, expecting to do so by imitation ... for if men
could have wrought for themselves newness of that actuating principle
without Christ, and if what is actuated follows what actuates, what
need was there of Christ's coming?" Contr. Apoll. i. 20. fin. And
again, "Ye say, 'He destroyed [the works of the devil] by not sinning;'
but this is no destruction of sin. For not in Him did the devil in the
beginning work sin, and so by His coming into the world and not
sinning sin was destroyed; but whereas the devil had wrought sin by an
after-sowing in the rational and spiritual nature of man, therefore it
became impossible for nature, which was rational and had voluntarily
sinned, and fell under the penalty of death, to recover itself into
freedom ([eleutherian]). Therefore came the Son of God by
Himself to establish [the flesh] in His own nature from a new
beginning ([arche]) and a marvellous generation." ibid.
ii. 6. also Orat. iii. 33. where vid. note, and 34, b. vid. for [arche]
supr. p. 250, note D. Also vid. infr. Orat. iii. 56, a. iv. 33, a. Naz.
Epp. ad Cled. 1 and 2. (101, 102. Ed. Ben.) Nyssen. ad Theoph. in
Apoll. p. 696. Generatie Christi origo est populi Christiani, says S.
Leo; "for whoso is regenerated in Christ," he continues, "has no
longer the propagation from a carnal father, but the germination of a
Saviour, who therefore was made Son of man, that we might be Sons of
God." Serm. 26, 2. Multum fuit a Christo recepisse formam, sed plus
est in Christo habere substantiam. Suscepit nos in suam proprietatem
illa natura, &c. &c. Serm. 72, 2. vid. Serm. 22, 2. ut corpus
regenerati fiat caro Crucifixi. Serm. 63, 6. Hæc est nativitas nova
dum homo nascitur in Deo; in quo homine Deus natus est, carne antiqui
seminis susceptâ, sine semine antiquo, ut illam novo semine, id est,
spiritualiter, reformaret, exclusis antiquitatis sordibus expiatam.
Tertull. de Carn. Christ. 17. vid. supr. p. 254, note K. and note on
64. infr. 65 and 70. and on iii. 34. Margin Notes1. [orthen],
p. 341, note I. 2.
p. 298, note A. 3.
[gnesian]. 4.
[peri ekeinon]. 5.
[genesin]. 6.
vid. Cyr. Thes. p. 156. 7.
[genomenen]. p. 268. twice. p. 347, r. 1. p. 353, r. 1. 8.
[genomenon]. p. 346, r. 3. 9.
p. 295, note O. 10.
[theopoiethevai]. 11.
[pompeuete], infr. 82. 12.
[arche teknon], Gen. xlix. 3. Sept. 13.
[arche]. 14.
[emmonon], p. 18, note P. 15.
pp. 263, 319. 16.
pp. 267, 318. 17.
[to ktiston], i.e. [soma], p. 347. fin. 18.
[patrikon]. 19.
[pais], i.e. servant. 20.
[genomenen], p. 347, r. 1. 21.
[sunkatabenai]. 22.
p. 291. 23.
[archen tes geneseos], p. 304, r. 3. 24.
[epelampse]. Vid. of the Holy Spirit. Serap. i. 20, c. 25.
[genomenon], p. 353, r. 1. 26.
p. 251, note F. infra 75, a. 27.
vid. Naz. Orat. 30. 2. 28.
[apolelumenei]. 29.
Naz. ibid. 30.
[apolelumenos], infr. 62. 31.
[ensarkou parousias]. 32.
note on iii. 19. 33.
[apolelumenos]. Newman Reader — Works of John Henry Newman |