Page images
PDF
EPUB

is incognisable by those who dwell in our weak and fleshly body. The answer is given by the Lord, Who asserts that under the flesh, which, in a mystery, He had taken, His Father's nature dwells within Him. He sets the facts in their due order thus ;-If ye know Me, ye know My Father also; and from hence forth ye shall know Him, and have seen Him. He makes a distinction between the time of sight, and the time of knowledge. He says that from henceforth they shall know Him, Whom they had already seen; and so shall possess, from the time of this revelation onwar 1, the knowledge of that nature, on which, in Him, they long had gazed.

35. But the novel sound of these words disturbed the Apostle Philip. A Man is before their eyes; this Man avows Himself the Son of God, and declares that when they have known Him they will know the Father. He tells them that they have seen the Father, and that, because they have seen Him, they shall know Him hereafter. This truth is too broad for the grasp of weak humanity; their faith fails in the presence of these paradoxes. Christ says that the Father has been seen already and shall now be known; and this, although sight, is knowledge. He says that if the Son has been known, the Father has been known also; and this though the Son has imparted knowledge of Himself through the bodily senses of sight and sound, while the Father's nature, different altogether from that of the visible Man, which they know, could not be learnt from their knowledge of the nature of Him Whom they have seen. He has also often borne witness that no man has seen the Father. And so Philip broke forth, with the loyalty and confidence of an Apostle, with the request, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us. He was not tampering with the faith; it was but a mistake made in ignorance. For the Lord had said that the Father had been seen already and henceforth should be known; but the Apostle had not understood that He had been seen. Accordingly he did not deny that the Father had been seen, but asked to see Him. He did not ask that the Father should be unveiled to his bodily gaze, but that he might have such an indication as should enlighten him concerning the Father Who had been seen. For he had seen the Son under the aspect of Man, but cannot understand how he could thereby have seen the Father. His adding, And it sufficeth us, to the prayer, Lord, shew us the Father, reveals clearly that it was a mental, not a bodily vision of the Father which he

9 Reading ab ea.

desired. He did not refuse faith to the Lord's words, but asked for such enlightenment to his mind as should enable him to believe ; for the fact that the Lord had spoken was conclusive evidence to the Apostle that faith was his duty. The consideration which moved him to ask that the Father might be shewn, was that the Son had said that He had been seen, and should be known because He had been seen. There was no presumption in this prayer that He, Who had already been seen, should now be made manifest.

36. And therefore the Lord answered Philip thus ;-Have I been so long time with you, and ve have not known Me, Philip? He rebukes the Apostle for defective knowledge of Himself; for previously He had said that when He was known the Father was known also. But what is the meaning of this complaint that for so long they had not known Him? It means this; that if they had known Him, they must have recognised in Him the Godhead which belongs to His Father's nature. For His works were the peculiar works of God. He walked upon the waves, commanded the winds, manifestly, though none could tell how, changed the water into wine and multiplied the loaves, put devils to flight, healed diseases, restored injured limbs and repaired the defects of nature, forgave sins and raised the dead to life. And all this He did while wearing flesh; and He accompanied the works with the assertion that He was the Son of God. Hence it is that He justly complains that they did not recognise in His mysterious human birth and life the action of the nature of God, performing these deeds through the Manhood which He had assumed..

37. And therefore the Lord reproached them that they had not known Him, though He had so long been doing these works, and answered their prayer that He would shew them the Father by saying, He that hath seen Me hath seen the Father also. He was not speaking of a bodily manifestation, of percep tion by the eye of flesh, but by that eye of which He had once spoken;-Say not ye, There are yet four months, and then cometh harvest? Behold, I say unto you, Lift up your eyes and look on the fields; for they are white to harvest. The season of the year, the fields white to harvest are allusions equally incompatible with an earthly and visible prospect. He was bidding them lift the eyes of their understanding to contemplate the bliss of the final harvest. And so it is with His present words, He that hath seen Me hath seen the Father also. It was not the carnal body,

St. John iv. 35.

that hath seen Me hath seen the Father also? This is no case of identity; the use of the conjunction also shews that the Father is named in addition to the Son. These words, The Father also, are incompatible with the notion of an isolated and single Person. No conclusion is possible but that the Father was made visible through the Son, because They are One and are alike in nature. And, lest our faith in this regard should be left in any doubt, the Lord proceeded, How sayest thou, Shew us the Father? The Father had been seen in the Son; how then could men be ignorant of the Father? What need could there be for Him to be shewn?

which He had received by birth from the Divine nature. For the Father is seen in the Virgin, that could manifest to them the image Son, and this could be the case neither if He and likeness of God. The human aspect which were a lonely Being, nor yet if He were unlike He wore could be no aid towards the mental the Son. It is through the Son that the vision of the incorporeal God. But God was Father is seen: and this mystery which the recognised in Christ, by such as recognised Son reveals is that They are One God, but Christ as the Son on the evidence of the not one Person. What other meaning can powers of His Divine nature; and a recog- you attach to this saying of the Lord's, He nition of God the Son produces a recognition of God the Father. For the Son is in such a sense the Image, as to be One in kind with the Father, and yet to indicate that the Father is His Origin. Other images, made of metals or colours or other materials by various arts, reproduce the appearance of the objects which they represent. Yet can lifeless copies be put on a level with their living originals? Painted or carved or molten effigies with the nature which they imitate? The Son is not the Image of the Father after such a fashion as this; He is the living Image of the Living. The Son that is born of the Father has a nature in no wise different from His; and, because His nature is not different, He possesses the power of that nature which is the same as His own. The fact that He is the Image proves that God the Father is the Author of the birth of the Only-begotten, Who is Himself revealed as the Likeness and Image of the invisible God. And hence the likeness, which is joined in union with the Divine nature, is indelibly His, because the powers of that nature are inalienably His

own.

39. Again, the unity of Begetter and Bgotten, manifested in sameness of nature and true oneness of kind, proves that the Father was seen in His true nature. And this is shewn by the Lord's next words, Believe ye not that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me? In no other words than these, which the Son has used, can the fact be stated that Father and Son, being alike in nature, are inseparable. The Son, Who is the Way and the Truth and the Life, is not deceiving us 38. Such is the meaning of this passage, by some theatrical transformation of names Have I been so long time with you, and ye have and aspects, when He, while wearing Manhood, not known Me, Philip? He that hath seen Me styles Himself the Son of God. He is not hath seen the Father also. How sayest thou, falsely concealing the fact that He is God the Shew us the Father? Dost thou not believe Father2; He is not a single Person 3 Who Me, that I am in the Father, and the Father hides His features under a mask, that we may is in Me? It is only the Word of God, of imagine that Two are present. He is not Whom we men are enabled, in our discourse a solitary Being, now posing as His own Son, concerning Divine things, to reason. All else and again calling Himself the Father; trickthat belongs to the Godhead is dark and diffi- ing out one unchanging nature with varying cult, dangerous and obscure. If any man names. Far removed from this is the plain propose to express what is known in other honesty of the words. The Father is the words than those supplied by God, he must Father, and the Son is the Son. But these inevitably either display his own ignorance, names, and the realities which they represent, or else leave his readers' minds in utter per- contain no innovation upon the Divine nature, plexity. The Lord, when He was asked to nothing inconsistent, nothing alien. For the shew the Father, said, He that hath seen Me Divine nature, being true to itself, persists in hath seen the Father also. He that would alter being itself; that which is from God is God. this is an antichrist, he that would deny it The Divine birth imports neither diminution is a Jew, he that is ignorant a Pagan. If we nor difference into the Godhead, for the Son find ourselves in difficulty, let us lay the fault is born into, and subsists with, a nature that to our own reason; if God's declaration seem is within the Divine nature and is like to it, involved in obscurity, let us assume that our and the Father sought out no alien element want of faith is the cause. These words state with precision that God is not solitary, and yet that there are no differences within the iii. 23, v. 26.

2 Sabellianism.

3 Personalis occurs here for the first time; persona is found in

works. That the Father dwells in the Son proves that the Father is not isolated and alone; that the Father works through the Son proves that the Son is not an alien or a stranger. There cannot be one Person only, for He speaks not of Himself; and, conversely, They cannot be separate and divided when the One speaks through the voice of the Other. These words are the revelation of the mystery of Their unity. And again, They Two are not different One from the Other, seeing that by Their inherent nature Each is in the Other; and They are One, seeing that He, Who speaks, speaks not of Himself, and He, Who speaks not of Himself, yet does speak.

to be mingled in the nature of His Onlybegotten Son, but endowed Him with all things that are His own, and this without loss to the Giver. And thus the Son is not destitute of the Divine nature, for, being God, He is from God and from none other; and He is not different from God, but is indeed nothing else than God, for that which is begotten from God is the Son, and the Son only, and the Divine nature, in receiving birth as a Son, has not forfeited its Divinity. Thus the Father is in the Son, the Son is in the Father, God is in God. And this is not by the combination of two harmonious, though different, kinds of being, nor by the incorporating power of an ampler substance exercised upon a lesser; for | the properties of matter make it impossible that things which enclose others should also be enclosed by them. It is by the birth of living nature from living nature. The substance remains the same, birth causes no deterioration in the Divine nature; God is not born from God to be ought else than God. Herein is no innovation, no estrangement, no division. It is sin to believe that Father and Son are two Gods, sacrilege to assert that Father and Son are one solitary God, blas-own omnipotent energy, and not through the phemy to deny the unity, consisting in sameness of kind, of God from God.

And then, having taught that the Father both spoke and wrought in Him, the Son establishes this perfect unity as the rule of our faith;-But the Father that dwelleth in Me, He doeth His works. Believe Me, that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me; or clse believe for the very works' sake. The Father works in the Son; but the Son also works the works of His Father.

41. And so, lest we should believe and say that the Father works in the Son through His

Son's possession, as His birthright, of the Divine nature, Christ says, Believe Me, that 40. Lest they, whose faith conforms to the I am in the Father, and the Father in Me. Gospel, should regard this mystery as some- What means this, Believe Me? Clearly it refers thing vague and obscure, the Lord has ex-back to the previous, Shew us the Father. pounded it in this order;--Dost thou not Their faith-that faith which had demanded believe Me, that I am in the Father, and the Father is in Me? The words that I speak unto you I speak not of Myself, but the Father that dwelleth in Me, He aceth His works. In what other words than these could, or can, the possession of the Divine nature by Father and Son be declared, consistently with prominence for the Son's birth? When He says, The words that I speak unto you I speak not of Myself, He neither suppresses His personality, nor denies His Sonship, nor conceals the presence in Himself of His Father's Divine nature. While speaking of Himself--and that He does so speak is proved by the pronoun I-He speaks as abiding in the Divine substance; while speaking not of Himself, He bears witness to the birth which took place in Him of God from God His Father. And He is inseparable and indistinguishable in unity of nature from the Father; for He speaks, though He speaks not of Himself. He Who speaks, though He speak not of Himself, necessarily exists, inasmuch as He speaks; and, inasmuch as He speaks not of Himself, He makes it manifest that His words are not His own. For He has added, But the Father that dwelleth in Me, He doeth His

that the Father should be shewn-is confirmed by this command to believe. He was not satisfied with saying, He that hath seen Me hath seen the Father also. He goes further, and expands our knowledge, so that we can contemplate the Father in the Son, remembering meanwhile that the Son is in the Father. Thus He would save us from the error of imagining a reciprocal emanation of the One into the Other, by teaching Their unity in the One nature through birth given and received. The Lord would have us take Him at His word, lest our hold upon the faith be shaken by His condescension in assuming Humanity. If His flesh, His body, His passion seem to make His Godhead doubtful, let us at least believe, on the evidence of the works, that God is in God and God is from God, and that They are One. For by the power of Their nature Each is in the Other. The Father loses nothing that is His because it is in the Son, and the Son receives His whole Sonship from the Father. Bodily natures are not created after such a fashion that they mutually contain each other, or possess the perfect unity of one abiding nature. In their case it would be impossible that an Only

begotten Son could exist eternally, inseparable exists. This is the meaning of the words, from the true Divine nature of His Father. I and the Father are One, and He that hath Yet this is the peculiar property of God the seen Me hath seen the Father also, and I in the Only-begotten, this the faith revealed in the Father and the Father in Me. They tell us mystery of His true birth, this the work of the that the Son Who is born is not different or Spirit's power, that to be, and to be in God, inferior to the Father; that His possession, is for Christ the same thing; and that this by right of birth, of the Divine nature as Son being in God is not the presence of one thing of God, and therefore nothing else than God, within another, as a body inside another body, is the supreme truth conveyed in the mysterious but that the life and subsistence of Christ revelation of the One Godhead in Father and is such that He is within the subsisting God, Son. And therefore the doctrine of the generand within Him, yet having a subsistence of ation of the Only-begotten is guiltless of diHis own. For Each subsists in such wise theism, for the Son of God, in being born into as not to exist apart from the Other, since the Godhead, manifested in Himself the nature They are Two through birth given and re- of God His Begelter. ceived, and therefore only one Divine nature

BOOK VIII.

I. THE Blessed Apostle Paul in laying mischief. For it is of these that he says, down the form for appointing a bishop and hose word spreadeth like a cancer, tainting creating by his instructions an entirely new the health of the mind, invaded by it with type of member of the Church, has taught us a secret and stealthy contagion. For this in the following words the sum total of all reason, he wished that there should be in the virtues perfected in him:-Holding fast the bishop the teaching of sound words, the word according to the doctrine of faith a good conscience in the faith and expertthat he may be able to exhort to sound doc-ness in exhortation to withstand wicked and trine and to convict gainsavers. For there are false and wild gainsayings. For there are many unruly men, vain talkers and deceivers1. many who pretend to the faith, but are not For in this way he points out that the subject to the faith, and rather set up a faith essentials of orderliness and morals are only for themselves than receive that which is given, profitable for good service in the priesthood being puffed up with the thoughts of human if at the same time the qualities needful vanity, knowing the things they wish to know for knowing how to teach and preserve the and unwilling to know the things that are true; faith are not lacking, for a man is not straight- since it is a mark of true wisdom sometimes to way made a good and useful priest by a know what we do not like. However, this merely innocent life or by a mere knowledge will-wisdom is followed by foolish preaching, of preaching. For an innocent minister is pro- for what is foolishly learnt must needs be fitable to himself alone unless he be instructed foolishly preached. Yet how great an evil to also; while he that is instructed has nothing those who hear is foolish preaching, when to support his teaching unless he be innocent. they are nisled into foolish opinions by For the words of the Apostle do not merely conceit of wisdom! And for this cause the fit a man for his life in this world by pre- Apostle described them thus: There are many cepts of honesty and uprightness, nor on the unruly, vain talkers and deceivers 5. Hence other hand do they educate in expertness we must utter our voice against arrogant of teaching a mere Scribe of the Synagogue wickedness and boastful arrogance and seducfor the expounding of the Law: but the tive boastfulness,-yes, we must speak against Apostle is training a leader of the Church, such things through the soundness of our perfected by the perfect accomplishment of doctrine, the truth of our faith, the sincerity the greatest virtues, so that his life may be of our preaching, so that we may have the adorned by his teaching, and his teaching by purity of truth and the truth of sound dochis life. Accordingly he has provided Titus, trine. the person to whom his words were addressed, 2. The reason why I have just mentioned with an injunction as to the perfect practice this utterance of the Apostle is this; men of religion to this effect:—In all things shewing of crooked minds and false professions, void thyself an ensample of good works, teaching of hope and venomous of speech, lay upon with gravity sound words that cannot be con- me the necessity of inveighing against them, demned, that the adversary may be ashamed, because under the guise of religion they instil having nothing disgraceful or evil to say of us 3. deadly doctrines, infectious thoughts and corThis teacher of the Gentiles and elect doctor rupt desires into the simple minds of their hearof the Church, from his consciousness of Christ ers. And this they do with an utter disregard who spoke and dwelt within him, knew well of the true sense of the apostolic teaching, so that the infection of tainted speech would that the Father is not a Father, nor the Son, spread abroad, and that the corruption of Son, nor the Faith, the Faith. In resisting their pestilent doctrine would furiously rage against wild falsehoods, we have extended the course the sound form of faithful words, and infusing of our reply so far, that after proving from the poison of its own evil tenets into the inmost soul, would creep on with deep-seated

[blocks in formation]

the Law that God and God were distinct and that very God was in very God, we then shewed from the teaching of evangelists and

[blocks in formation]
« PreviousContinue »