Commentary on John 1 part 10/94

For we are all somehow naturally disposed and accustomed, so to speak, in our accounts of necessary matters to make mention also of the places in which they happened to occur.

That the Holy Spirit is not in the Son by participation nor as something adventitious, but dwells in him essentially and by nature; on the proposed text: 'And John bore witness, saying, I have beheld the Spirit descending as a dove from heaven, and it abode upon him.'

That the Son is not among created things, but above all, as God and from God; on the proposed text: 'He who comes from above is above all.'

That the Son is God and from God by nature; on the proposed text: 'He who receives his testimony has set his seal that God is true.'

That the properties of God and the Father are in the Son not by way of participation, but essentially and by nature; on the proposed text: 'The Father loves the Son and has given all things into his hand.'

That the Son is not among those who worship, inasmuch as he is Word and God, but rather is worshiped together with the Father; on the proposed text: 'You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know.'

That the Son is not less than the Father either in power or in operation upon anything, but is equal in strength and consubstantial, as being from him and by nature.

On the proposed text: 'The Son can do nothing of himself, unless he sees the Father doing something.'

'For whatever things that One does, these also the Son does likewise.'

That of the God-befitting dignities—or rather prerogatives—none is in the Son as from participation or as adventitious; on the proposed text: 'For neither does the Father judge anyone, but he has given all judgment to the Son.'

That the Son, being God and from God by nature and the exact image of the one who begot him, has honor and glory equal to his; on the proposed text: 'That all may honor the Son even as they honor the Father.'

That the Son is in no respect less than God and the Father, but is equal in strength in his operation upon all things, as God from God; on the proposed text: 'I can of my own self do nothing.'

On the next day he sees Jesus coming toward him.

In a very brief span of time the Baptist is shown to be at once prophet and apostle.

For the one whom he proclaimed beforehand as about to come, this one he now points out as already present.

For this reason he even leaped beyond the measure of the prophets, as the Savior himself somewhere says, discoursing with the Jews concerning him: 'What did you go out into the wilderness to see? A prophet? Yes, I say to you, and more than a prophet.' For the others prophesied from time to time that the Christ would be manifested, but he, crying aloud that he would come, has also shown him present.

For 'on the next day,' he says, 'he sees Jesus coming toward him.'

And he says: 'Behold the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world.'

No longer does 'Prepare the way' have its fitting occasion, since now the one for whose sake the preparation is made is seen and is before their eyes.

The nature of the matter required different words.

It was necessary to explain who was present, and on what terms he who had come to us from the heavens made his descent.

'Behold, then,' he says, 'the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world, whom the prophet Isaiah signified to us, saying: As a sheep was he led to the slaughter, and as a lamb dumb before its shearer; whom also of old the Law given through Moses prefigured.'

But then it saved only in part, not extending its mercy to all.

That there might come to human nature the release from every evil brought in, the loosing of the corruption that had entered, the provider of eternal life, the ground of the transformation into God, the beginning of piety and righteousness, the way into the kingdom of heaven.

For one Lamb died on behalf of all, restoring the whole flock upon earth to God and the Father; one on behalf of all, that he might subject all to God; one on behalf of all, that he might gain all.

That henceforth all might no longer live to themselves, but to him who died and rose again on their behalf.

For since we were in many sins, and on this account owed a debt to death and corruption, the Father gave the Son as a ransom on our behalf—one on behalf of all, since indeed all things are in him, and he is greater than all.

One died on behalf of all, that we all might live in him.

For when death had swallowed up the Lamb on behalf of all, it vomited forth all in him and together with him.

For we all were in Christ, who died and was raised for us and on our behalf.

And now that sin is done away, how was it possible that death, which comes from it and on account of it, should not by all means also be done away? And when the root has died, how could the shoot that comes from it any longer be preserved? For what cause were we still to die, once sin is taken away? Therefore, keeping festival over the slaughter of the Lamb of God, we say: 'Where is your penalty, O death? Where is your sting, O Hades?' For all iniquity, as the psalmist somewhere said in his song, 'shall stop her mouth,' being no longer able to accuse those who have sinned out of weakness.

'For it is God who justifies; who is he that condemns?' Christ redeemed us, becoming a curse for us, from the curse of the Law, that we might escape the curse that comes from transgression.

He brings his hearers to remembrance of his own words, and yields to Christ the greater place in glory, fulfilling a work not of love only, but rather of truth and even of necessity.

In what manner Christ was after John, yet became before him because he was first—as he himself confesses—we have said sufficiently in what has gone before.

'And I did not know him; but that he might be made manifest to Israel, for this cause I came baptizing in water.'

He who leaped in the womb of his own mother at the voice of the holy Virgin while she was still bearing the Lord, the prophet before his birth pangs, the disciple while yet an embryo, says concerning the Savior, 'I did not know him'; and he speaks the truth when he says it.

For God knows all things of himself and without being taught, but the creature knows by being taught.

But the Spirit, dwelling in the saints, supplies what is lacking, and bestows upon human nature its own proper good—I mean the knowledge of things to come, and the knowledge of hidden mysteries.

Therefore the blessed Baptist, in saying that he did not know the Lord, will in no way be lying, according to what belongs to humanity and the measure fitting to the creature; and he will ascribe to God alone the knowing of all things—to God who through the Holy Spirit enlightens man unto the apprehension of hidden things.

And very usefully he says that of himself he did not know Christ, but that he had come precisely for this purpose: to make him manifest to Israel; lest he should appear to have run to the testimony as a deserter of his own accord, or be thought by some to be a servant of his own wishes, but rather a workman of the divine dispensation, a minister of the counsel from above, which revealed to him the Lamb who takes away the sin of the world.

Therefore, in order that the Jews might more readily proceed to believe in Christ the Savior, and might hold a most worthy conception concerning him, he says that he came to know him though he did not know him—so that henceforth they might consider the God who revealed him, and, growing numb toward the judgment from above, might receive the word concerning him; and seeing the servant to be so great, might proportionately measure the dignity of the one who reigns.

That the Holy Spirit is not in the Son by participation nor as something adventitious, but dwells in him essentially and by nature.

'And John bore witness, saying, I have beheld the Spirit descending as a dove from heaven, and it abode upon him. And I did not know him; but he who sent me to baptize in water, that one said to me: Upon whomever you see the Spirit descending and abiding upon him, this is he who baptizes in the Holy Spirit.'

Having said in the foregoing passages that he did not know him, he now usefully pursues the matter further: he lays bare the divine mystery, both by showing that it was God the Father who made him known, and by openly setting forth the manner in which the disclosure came about.

And through all these things he profits the mind of his hearers; and by declaring that it was from God that the mystery concerning Christ was taught to men, he shows that those who set themselves against him are warring against the decrees from on high, and are recklessly opposing the great purpose of the Father.

And this was the work of one skilfully persuading them to abstain from their vain counsel, and to receive him who, by the Father's good pleasure, came to sojourn among us for the salvation of all.

He therefore bears witness that he beheld the Spirit descending from heaven in the form of a dove, and that it remained upon him.

Then, besides this, he says that he heard with his own ears from him who sent him to baptize with water, that this is he who baptizes with the Holy Spirit—he upon whom, when the Spirit came, it would abide.

Most trustworthy, then, is the witness; supernatural is the sign; and above all is the Father who made the revelation.

But perhaps the contentious heretic will leap up, and, laughing broadly, will say: What again, good sirs, do you say to this? Or what argument will you weave, quibbling over what is written? Behold, he says that the Spirit descends upon the Son;

for whence, as you say, must he of necessity possess perfection? And how will he not, according to your teaching, be brought down to that diminution proper to a created offspring, and be imperfect—since the divine substance would then, once for all, have admitted in the Son the capacity of not possessing perfection, according to your ignorant and untaught doctrine? For surely we shall not parcel out that great and undefiled nature into differing accounts, so that it should be, say, imperfect in this one, yet again perfect in that one;

since even the definition of humanity is one and the same over all, and equal in all of us;

and who is less a man in so far as he is by nature a man? Nor will one be apprehended as more so than another; and one angel, I think, will differ in nothing from another angel, at least as regards being that very thing which angels are—that is, by reason of their sameness of kind with one another, all being bound together into one nature.

How then could the divine nature, which is above all things, be seen as inferior to created beings in the goods that belong to itself? And how could it undergo a suffering which the creation itself knows not how to suffer? And how, in short, will it be both simple and uncompounded, if within it there should appear both the perfect and the imperfect? For it would then be composed of both, if the imperfect is not like the perfect.

For if it is alike, and there is nothing differing between them, then everything that is perfect will indifferently also be imperfect;

and again, if anything is imperfect, this too is perfect, and there is no such predicate in the Son—even though, in your notions, he does not appear to possess perfection;

the Father himself pleads on behalf of the Son, bearing witness to his perfection, and once more the question is resolved for us;

but if abundant argument walls off the imperfect from the perfect, and yet the divine nature admits both alike, then it is composite and not simple.

But perhaps someone will say that contraries are unable to grow together and to co-exist at the same time in one and the same subject—as, say, white and black colour together in a body.

Well said, my friend, and most keenly have you contended on behalf of our arguments;

for if the divine nature is one, and there is no other beside it, how, tell me, could it be receptive of contraries? And how, in one and the same subject, could things unlike one another come together? But since the Father is by nature God, the Son also is by nature God.

In nothing, then, will he differ—at least as regards being perfect—from the Father, having sprung from his divine and most perfect substance;

for is it not of necessity that he who is from a perfect begetter be altogether perfect—if indeed he is his unchanging image and the impress of his substance, as it is written? But I think everyone will agree with us and concur.

Or let him again come forward into the midst and say in what manner the Son will be the unchanging impress of the perfect Father, if he does not possess in his own nature the being perfect, according to the ill-counsel of certain persons.

But since he is both impress and image, he too is therefore perfect, even as he whose image he also is.

But John, he says, saw the Spirit descending from heaven upon the Son, and he has his sanctification from without; for he receives it, as though, plainly, not possessing it.

It is high time, then, openly to call him a thing made, honoured with but a slight and grudging superiority, brought to perfection and sanctified in equal rank with the rest, and possessing the supply of good things as something acquired from without.

Then how will the Evangelist not be speaking falsely when he says: 'Of his fulness have we all received'? For how will he be full in his own nature, if he himself receives from another? Or how will God at all be conceived as Father, if the Only-begotten is a thing made and not rather a Son? For he too will be, if it be so, falsely named Father, and the Son in no way truth, having upon himself a spurious dignity and a title that reaches no further than bare words.

Thus the whole will come to nothing for us: neither is the Father in truth a father, nor indeed is the Son by nature that which he is said to be;

but if God is truly a father, then he assuredly has that of which he is also father—namely, a Son who is from himself.

Then how will the by-nature holy Godhead bring forth from itself an offspring bereft of holiness, and render to us its own fruit stripped of the properties that belong to it? For if he has sanctification from without, as those triflers say, then again all necessity compels them, even unwilling, to confess together that he was not always holy;

but he came to be so afterwards, when the Spirit also descended upon him, as John says.

How then was the Son holy even before the incarnation? For thus the Seraphim glorified him, ascending in order to the third number from the first, uttering the 'Holy' in succession.

If, then, he was holy even before the incarnation—or rather, being ever with the Father—how did he stand in need of one to sanctify him, and that in later times, when he became man? But I marvel how this too escapes them, keen enquirers though they are;

for is it not of necessity to conceive that the Son could at some time even spit out his sanctification, if it is not essential in him, but befell him as it does us and any other of the rational creatures? And that which has fallen from holiness—will it not altogether come under the bonds of sin, and sink toward the worse, no longer keeping that which makes one to be outside baseness? Then the Son will not be found by us unchangeable, and the psalmist too will be proved false when he cries in the Spirit, 'But thou art the same,' as though addressing him.

And in addition to what has been said, let this too be considered, for it brings in a kindred line of contemplation;

that the thing partaken of is by nature something other than the partaker—compelling reasoning will constrain everyone whatsoever to grant this.

For how could anyone be conceived as partaking of himself? But if the aforesaid things stand altogether in a natural otherness one toward another, and a necessary argument divides them apart, let those who say that the Only-begotten is given the Spirit by way of participation see into how great an impiety they slip without perceiving it.

For if the Son is a partaker of the Spirit, and the Spirit is holy by nature, then he himself will not be holy by nature, but this was shown to accrue to him only through his conjunction with another—being transformed by grace toward the better than he was in the beginning.

But again let the God-fighter see into how great an impiety his propositions turn back upon himself.

For first, some alteration and change, as I have already said, will be found in the Son; and having, according to you, been altered and advanced to the better, he will be shown not merely not to be less than the Father, but already somehow even to have come to be among things greater;

and how, we shall say, taking it from the divine Scripture.

The all-wise Paul somewhere says concerning him: 'Let each of you have this mind in yourselves, which was also in Christ Jesus, who, being in the form of God, counted it not a thing to be grasped to be equal with God, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men; and being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself.' Since, then, even before the incarnation he was in the form and equality of the Father, but at the time of the incarnation, having received the Spirit from heaven, he was—according to those men—sanctified, and has thereby been shown at once both better and greater than himself for this cause, he plainly thenceforth also transcends the measure of him who begot him.

And if, by receiving the Spirit, he has ascended to a dignity beyond even the Father, then the Spirit is greater even than the Father himself, bestowing upon the Son a superiority over him.

Who then would not shudder at the mere hearing of this? For it is truly grievous even to proceed through such arguments;

yet there is no other way to ward off the harm that comes from the perversity of those men.

Therefore we shall again say to them: If, when the Word of God became man, then also he is sanctified by receiving the Spirit;

but before the incarnation he was in the form and equality of the Father, not yet, according to those men, sanctified—then it is high time, daring the utterance, to say that God and Father is not holy, if indeed the Word who is of one form with him and in all things equal to him was not holy in the beginning, but only in later times scarcely came to be so.

And again, if it is properly he, the Word of God, who receives the Spirit and is sanctified in his own nature, let those on the opposing side tell us: did he at some time become greater than himself, or less, or did he, having undergone this, remain in identity?

For if he has nothing more from the Spirit, but remains thus the same as he was, do not be offended in learning that it descended upon him.

But if he was wronged by receiving, and came to be among lesser things, you will be introducing to us a passible Word, and you will be accusing the substance of the Father as one wronging rather than sanctifying.

And if he was shown to be better by receiving the Spirit—yet was also in the form and equality of the Father even before he was, according to you, improved—then the Father has not ascended to the summit of glory, but will be in those measures in which the Son, being of one form with him and equal, was together with him, the Son who leaped up to what is greater.

It is fitting, then, I think, to say concerning the untaught heretics: 'Behold, a foolish people and without heart; they have eyes and see not, they have ears and hear not.' For truly the god of this age hath blinded the minds of the unbelieving, that the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ should not shine forth upon them; over whom, indeed, it is right rather to grieve than to be angered.

For they know not the things which they read.

That the argument is true will from this point be made plain to us, if indeed—and most especially—through the things already exercised beforehand we have made the demonstration not inelegant;

'being made, and being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself.' Behold, he marvels greatly at the Son, as being equal and of one form with God and Father, yet not having grasped at this because of his love toward us, but having descended into humiliation through the form of the servant, being emptied for the sake of the humanity.

But if, good sirs, by receiving the Spirit he was rather sanctified when he became man, and was shown to be better than himself through the sanctification, into what humiliation shall we see him as having descended? How was that which was exalted humbled? Whither did that which was sanctified descend? Or how did he not rather ascend and get exalted to the better? What emptying has the fulfilment through the Spirit? And how could he be conceived at all as having become man for our sake, when he underwent in his own case so great a gain?

How did the rich one become poor for our sake—he who enriched us for our sake? And how was he rich even before his sojourning among us—he who, according to those men, received in it that which he did not have, namely the Spirit? Or how would he not rather justly render up to us thanksgivings for the things wherein he was profited on our account? 'The heaven was amazed at this,' according to what is written, 'and shuddered exceedingly, saith the Lord.'

For the people of the heterodox have done two things, and truly wicked ones: understanding neither what they say nor concerning what they make their affirmations, and yet thinking it no grievous matter thus to run into danger in the most necessary things;

for otherwise they too, pouring down bitter tears from their eyelids and lifting up their voice on high, would come forward saying: 'Set a watch, O Lord, before my mouth, and a door of enclosure about my lips;

incline not my heart to words of wickedness.' For words of wickedness are truly those which, coming from themselves, travail to bring forth for their hearers the final ruin.

But we, having driven their nonsense out from our own heart, shall walk in the upright word of the faith, keeping in mind that which is written: 'Casting down reasonings and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought unto the obedience of Christ.' Come, then, and let us too, bringing into captivity our mind in the theorems set before us, subject it to the glory of the Only-begotten, wisely carrying all things unto obedience to him—that is, unto the manner of the incarnation.

That man was made according to the image and likeness of the God who is over all, the divine Scripture bears witness.

And indeed, he who composed for us the first book—

this Moses, who was known to God beyond all others—

'And God made man,' he says, 'according to the image of God he made him.' And that it was through the Spirit that he was sealed unto the divine image, he himself again taught us, saying: 'And he breathed into his face a breath of life.' For at the same time the Spirit both implanted life in the moulded thing, and stamped upon it in a manner befitting God his own characters;

thus, when the supremely skilful Artificer God had fully fashioned the rational living being upon earth, he gave the commandment that preserves;

and he was in paradise, as it is written, still guarding that which had been given, and conspicuous by the divine image of his Maker through the Holy Spirit that dwelt within him;

but when the human race was extended into a multitude of greater number, and sin prevailed over all, plundering in manifold ways the soul of each one, the nature was stripped of its ancient grace;

and the Spirit departs utterly, and the rational being falls into the uttermost irrationality, having become ignorant even of him who created it.

But he purposed once more to transform humanity into the ancient image through the Spirit;

for there was no other way for the divine characters to shine forth anew within it, just as they had been also before.

What, then, he devises for this, and how he planted grace inviolate within us, or how the Spirit was rooted again in men, and in what manner the nature was reformed unto its ancient state—it is fitting to tell in what follows.

The first man, being of the dust and from the earth, and having within his own power the choice of good and evil, and being master of an inclination toward either, was seized by a bitter deceit; and turning aside into disobedience, he fell back into the earth, the mother from which he had sprung, and being now held fast by corruption and death, he transmitted the penalty to the whole race.

But as the evil grew and multiplied within us, and as the mind within us was ever descending toward what is worse, sin reigned; and thus at length the nature of man was shown to be stripped bare of the Holy Spirit who once dwelt in it.

For 'the Holy Spirit of wisdom will flee from deceit,' as it is written, 'and will not dwell in a body enslaved to sin.' Since therefore the first Adam did not preserve the grace given him by God, God the Father devised for us the second Adam from heaven.

For He sends His own Son, who in likeness with us is by nature unchangeable and unalterable and knows no sin at all, so that just as through the disobedience of the first we came under divine wrath, so through the obedience of the second we might both escape the curse and the evils arising from it might be brought to nought.

But since the Word of God became man, He receives the Spirit from the Father as one of us, not taking anything for Himself in a private manner;

for He Himself was the giver of the Spirit;

but that He might preserve it for the nature, receiving it as man, and might root again in us the grace that had departed—He who knew no sin.

For it is on account of this reason, I think, that the holy Baptist usefully added, 'I have beheld the Spirit descending from heaven and abiding upon Him.'

For the Spirit had flown away from us because of sin, but He who knew no sin became as one of us, so that the Spirit might be accustomed to abide in us, having in Him no occasion for withdrawal or holding back.

Therefore He receives the Spirit for us through Himself, and renews for the nature the ancient good;

for so also He is said to have become poor for our sakes.

For being rich, as God, and in need of none of the good things, He became man in need of all things; concerning whom it has somewhere been said, and very rightly, 'For what hast thou that thou didst not receive?' Just therefore as, being Life by nature, He died according to the flesh for our sakes, that He might conquer death on our behalf and raise up the whole nature together with Himself;

for we were all in Him, inasmuch as He became man;

so also He receives the Spirit for our sakes, that He might sanctify the whole nature.

For He came not to benefit Himself, but that He might become for us all both a door and a beginning and a way of the heavenly good things.

For if He had not seemed to receive as man, or even to suffer as one of us, how could anyone have shown that He humbled Himself? Or how would the form of the servant have been rightly preserved, unless something befitting a servant were also written concerning Him? Let not, then, the all-wise word of the economy be torn to pieces—that word which even the inspired Paul himself fittingly marvels at, crying out: 'That now unto the principalities and powers in the heavenly places might be made known through the Church the manifold wisdom of God, according to the purpose of the ages which He made in Christ Jesus our Lord.' For truly a wisdom befitting God is the great mystery of the Incarnation, which is seen therein.

I consider that those who have chosen to be godly and who rejoice in the correctness of doctrine ought to hold such an understanding concerning the Saviour;

for just as the Holy Spirit is the Father's, so also is He the Son's;

so also we have read in the divine Scriptures: 'For coming down by Mysia,' it says, 'they attempted to go into Bithynia, and the Spirit of Jesus did not permit them.' But if it seems good to anyone to contend more contentiously with the arguments concerning these matters, and again to insist that the Spirit is in the Son by participation, or that it then first came to be in Him, not previously existing therein, when He was also baptized, at the time of the Incarnation—let him again see into how many and how great absurdities he will fall.

For first of all, the Saviour says that among those born of women there has not arisen one greater than John the Baptist;

yet we see him, who had ascended to the very summit of the glory and virtue that is among us, honouring Christ with incomparable pre-eminence;

for 'I am not worthy,' he says, 'to stoop down and loose the strap of His sandals.'

Then, how is it not absurd—rather indeed already impious—to believe that John, while yet in his mother's womb, was filled with the Holy Spirit, because it has been so written concerning him;

for concerning John it says that 'he shall be filled with the Holy Spirit'—for the Holy Spirit was in him as something given, and not essentially;

but concerning the Saviour it no longer says 'He shall be filled';