For they say: 'That which is in God is to be believed to be interior; but that which is with God is to be esteemed exterior. Wherefore, if that which is with God and is exterior is not to be believed to be of one nature with God, it follows that that which is in God and is interior is to be believed to be of one substance with God.' To this conclusion, therefore, is this reasoning led: that just as the Word, on account of the fact that it is with God, is separated from His nature; so the creature, on account of the fact that it is in God, is believed to be of one nature with God. Whence they are convicted of holding those things by which they dare to prefer us even to the Son, and endeavor to equal us to the Father. Thus they confound everything who dissent from the truth. Behold by what sentences the unfaithful error is asserted.
Behold by what inventions the truth of faith is assailed. CHAPTER 4. 'They said within themselves, thinking not rightly.' To say 'within oneself' is the same as to say 'inside oneself.' Likewise it is the same to say 'inside oneself' and to think 'within oneself'; finally, it is the same to think 'within oneself' and to think 'in one's heart.' But by whatever battering-rams the heretics strive to shake the holy Church, we are certain concerning the Lord our God, that they will not be able to overthrow the city set upon a mountain. Nay rather, they utterly overthrow and destroy themselves, who exasperate the true God, the only Son of God, with insulting assertions. Nor do they refrain from injury even to the Father, while they render ingratitude to the grace of the Saviour.
Wherefore it seems fitting that the understanding of this word be sought from other passages of the Scriptures, so that it may appear whether whatever is said to be with someone we ought, according to their opinion, always to esteem exterior. In the book of Wisdom we read it said of certain men: 'They said within themselves, thinking not rightly' (Wisd. 2:1); of this passage we demand from the Arians a reason: whether he who thinks within himself thinks inside himself or outside himself—since the thought of man is not only not outside the body of man, but is not even an action of the body.
For truly, since that very thing which is called thought is found not only not outside a man, but not even in the man's body itself, who does not see that thought belongs to the soul alone, to which the power to think has been divinely given through the faculty of reason? Indeed, in a man the mind rules when it thinks, but when it acts the body renders its service. There is thought given to a man where the discernment of good and evil has been implanted. It is therefore the interior man who performs the office of thought, who also, created in the image of God, received the power of understanding. When, then, a man thinks within himself, he thinks not outside himself but within himself; whereas he would not be thinking outside himself even if thought pertained to the exterior man.
How much more, then, does he think within himself, seeing that it is not the exterior man but the interior man that thinks. And yet, according to the testimony of Scripture, he is said to think 'with himself,' which surely is found to be the office not of the exterior but of the interior man. For Scripture says, as has already been set down above: 'They said with themselves, thinking not rightly.' But what is it to say 'with oneself,' if not to say in one's heart? For which reason it is said elsewhere: 'The things you say in your hearts, be sorry for them upon your beds' (Ps. IV, 5). This, then, is to say 'with oneself,' which is to say within oneself.
Hence that Pharisee also, who had invited the Lord to dine, when a sinful woman came in and bathed the Savior's feet with her tears and wiped them with her hair, he who was thinking within himself was surely also saying within himself what he was saying by thinking. For the evangelist says: 'But the Pharisee who had invited him, seeing this, said within himself, saying...' (Luke VII, 39). For what is 'he said within himself' but 'he thought within himself'? Yet by the teaching of Scripture we know that he who thinks within himself thinks with himself. Therefore it is indeed said: 'They said with themselves, thinking not rightly.'
But lest the Arians should wish to join this phrase 'with themselves' not to the preceding clause but to the following one, so that it be read not 'they said with themselves,' but 'they said,' and afterward be added 'thinking with themselves'—let them also hear from this the testimonies of the divine Scriptures, and let them recognize that the office of human thought pertains not to the exterior but to the interior man. The evangelist says that when a paralytic was brought before the Lord, 'the Lord, seeing the faith of those who had let him down through the tiles, said: Take heart, son, your sins are forgiven you; and behold, certain of the scribes said within themselves: This man blasphemes. And when Jesus saw their thoughts, he said: Why do you think evil in your hearts?' (Matt.
IX, 5; Mark II, 4, 5; Luke V, 18, 19)? Those whom the evangelist said had spoken within themselves, these the Lord says had thought evil in their hearts. But what is it to think evil in one's heart, if not to think 'with oneself' not rightly? However, then, the Arians may distinguish the sense of this passage, they must necessarily find there the confusion of their own perversity. And would that they might be so confounded by their error that they might be converted to the truth. For if they say that this verse of Scripture is to be divided thus—that which is written, 'They said with themselves, thinking not rightly'—so that they join the very phrase 'with themselves' to the preceding clause, distinguishing it thus:
'They said with themselves,' so that afterward they add 'thinking not rightly'—they are at once refuted by the words of David, that 'to say with oneself' is nothing else than 'to say in one's heart.' For he says: 'The things you say in your hearts' (Ps. IV, 5). But if they wish to distinguish it otherwise, so as to join the phrase 'with themselves' not to the preceding clause but to the following one, so that, having put first 'they said,' with a silence interposed, they afterward bring in what was said, 'With themselves thinking not rightly' (Wisd. II, 1)—let them from this too hear the rebuke of the Savior, and acknowledge that thought belongs to the heart; for he says: 'Why do you think evil in your hearts?' (Luke V, 22). In another place also the same Lord teaches: 'For out of the heart come evil thoughts' (Matt. XV, 19).
And again he says: 'For a good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth good things, and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart brings forth evil things' (Matt. XII, 35). Do they not now recognize in how great an error they are entangled, who strive to assert that the Word is 'with God' outwardly and not inwardly? CHAPTER V. His memory is known both with God and with men. I will come in to him, and we will come to him and make our abode with him. Thus the Word is both with God and in God. Thus the same is in God, and with God there is no iniquity. One and the same Spirit was in Moses, David, and Paul. Again, in the same book we read this written concerning wisdom: 'For the memory of her is immortal, because she is known both with God and with men' (Wisd. IV, 1).
But how is she known with men, if she is not within men but outside men? Since unless she has entered into the soul of a man, she cannot be known to a man. For of her it is thus said: 'And remaining in herself she renews all things, and throughout the nations she conveys herself into holy souls' (Wisd. VII, 27). And that it may not be understood to be anything other to convey herself into souls than to enter into souls, again the text of holy Scripture recalls this concerning her: 'She delivered a righteous people and a blameless seed from the nations that oppressed it. She entered into the soul of the servant of the Lord, and stood against dreadful kings in portents and signs' (Wisd. X, 15). This entrance of hers, whereby she enters into souls, she also intimates in the Apocalypse of John, saying:
'Behold, I stand at the door and knock: if anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in to him, and I will sup with him, and he with me' (Rev. III, 20). By this entrance the Father and the Son come to the one who loves them, and make their abode with him: as the Son himself says: 'If anyone loves me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our abode with him' (John XIV, 23). But if the Father and the Son, coming to him with whom they make their abode, are not within but outside, let it be told us where they come to him and make their abode with him? Meanwhile that Christ dwells inwardly in his faithful ones, we have learned by Paul's preaching, who says:
'That Christ may dwell by faith in your hearts, in the inner man' (Eph. III, 17). Or perhaps they will say that Christ dwells by faith in our inner man in one way, and comes with the Father to make his abode with the one who loves him in another way—so that Christ meanwhile could dwell alone in our inner man, while the Father, remaining outside the one with whom he makes his abode, not only could not himself remain within, but could even prevent the Son by the fellowship of his coming from being able to dwell in the inner man. The Son of God likewise promised the Holy Spirit to his faithful ones, that he might remain with them and be in them. For he says:
'If you love me, keep my commandments, and I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Paraclete, that he may remain with you forever, the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it does not see him nor know him; but you will know him, because he will remain with you, and will be in you' (John XIV, 15-17). Behold, with those with whom he remains, in them is the Holy Spirit. Let it be told, then, what difference there can be here between his remaining with them and his being in them? For in one place both prepositions are used, and to the Holy Spirit is assigned the possibility of both things, that with those with whom he remains, in them he may be. Is it then that the Holy Spirit so remains with the faithful that he can be in the faithful themselves,
yet the Word who is God is so 'with God' that it cannot be in God? What shall I say to those who desire so to argue from the Scriptures that they in no way seek the way of spiritual understanding, and, turning their eyes away from the true light, delight to wander perpetually in darkness? That to be 'with God' is this very thing which is to be 'in God,' holy Scripture shows in other places also. For Moses says: 'A faithful God, in whom there is no iniquity, just and holy is the Lord' (Deut. XXXII, 4). David also sings: 'For the Lord our God is just, and there is no iniquity in him' (Ps. XCI, 16). And the apostle Paul says that there is no iniquity with God. For thus he says: 'Is there iniquity with God? By no means' (Rom. IX, 14).
Let the Arians choose in this place what they will, and, that they may plainly display their wisdom, let them pass judgment on the sayings of the Law, the Prophets, and the Apostles. Moses says: 'A faithful God, in whom there is no iniquity.' David also says: 'The Lord our God is just, and there is no iniquity in him.' Paul indeed says: 'Is there iniquity with God? By no means.' Either, then, let them confess that the apostolic sense agrees with the legal and prophetic sense, or let them say that the apostle Paul disagrees with the legal and prophetic understanding. Paul the apostle indeed says that he has the same spirit of faith which blessed David had, and which holy Moses also received, as he himself testifies, saying:
'But having the same spirit of faith, as it is written: I believed, therefore I have spoken; we too believe, therefore we speak' (2 Cor. IV, 13). But how did they have one spirit of faith, if concerning the faithful God they held differing views? Great, however, is the diversity of understanding, if what Paul says—that there is no iniquity 'with God'—differs from what Moses and David say—that there is no iniquity 'in God.' And if, though Paul says he has the same spirit of faith which the prophets also had, there is a differing sense in their faith, then the Apostle is declared a liar (which God forbid), he who testifies that Christ speaks in him? For he says: 'Do you seek a proof of Christ speaking in me?' (2 Cor. XIII, 3).
But since Christ truly spoke in Paul, Paul surely is no liar. And since, when he says he has the same spirit of faith, he does not lie, each sense is found to be in agreement: so that what Moses and David said—that there is no iniquity in God—is this, which Paul also says: that there is no iniquity with God. But if perhaps it seems to them that they say something contrary, this remains for them: to contradict either the prophets or the Apostle. CHAPTER VI. With whom there is no change. Many examples where 'with' is put for 'in.' And although the opinion of the heretics is known to be refuted by so many and so great testimonies, and to rest on no truth, let them nevertheless answer what they think of that passage of the apostle James, where he says:
'Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no change, nor shadow of turning' (James I, 17). But with whom there is no change, there is assuredly no mutability; and with whom there is no mutability, there is immutability. Let them say, then, whether this immutability, which is 'with God,' is outside or inside; for if it is inside, behold, this is what it is to be 'in God,' namely to be 'with God.' Let them therefore cease to think perversely, and hasten to consent to catholic rectitude. But if this immutability, which is with God, is believed to be not inside but outside, then assuredly it is not believed to be in God.
And if immutability is not believed to be in God, then consequently God himself is proclaimed mutable. And lest they dare (or wish) to assign this to the Son, let them hear that in the same passage the Father of lights is named. Accordingly, when we hear that 'with God there is no change,' let us understand this according to the truth of the catholic faith, namely that there is no change in God. And when it is said, 'The Word was with God,' let us understand nothing other than 'The Word was in God'; and when Wisdom says in the Proverbs, 'I was with him arranging' (Prov. VIII, 30), let us understand nothing other than 'I was in him arranging.' And when it is said to God, 'With you is the fountain of life' (Ps. XXXV, 10 [al. III, 5]), let us understand nothing other than 'In you is the fountain of life.' And when John says:
'We announce to you eternal life, which was with the Father, and was made manifest to us' (1 John I, 2)—let us understand nothing other than eternal life which was in the Father: for truly the Word God is with God, because the Word God is in God. And truly with the wise God is wisdom, because in the wise God is wisdom. And truly with the living God is life, because in the living God is God the life. And truly with the true God is God the truth, because in the true God is God the truth. And truly with the strong God is God the power, because in the strong God is God the power. But what wonder is it, if for the Son to be with the Father is this very thing which is for him to be in the Father, since indeed, naturally born of the Father, he remains always in the Father—
since even concerning men we read (as far as pertains to the substance by which they are naturally men) that it is nothing other, when something is said to be with them, than to be in them? Whence we shall bring forth most manifest testimonies. In the book of Isaiah is contained the prayer of King Hezekiah, which he poured out to God after fifteen years had been added to his life, where among other things he says thus: 'My spirit is made with me, like a weaver drawing near to cut off the web' (Isa. XXXVIII, 12). But what else is here understood by 'My spirit is with me,' if not 'My spirit is in me'? Or shall it here too be said that the spirit of a man is with a man, but is not in the man? Whereas the Apostle plainly says:
'For who among men knows the things of a man, except the spirit of the man which is in him?' (1 Cor. II, 11). But also that which we set down above as written—'They said with themselves, thinking not rightly' (Wisd. II, 1)—what else is it than 'they said within themselves'? Again, in the book of Wisdom it is said: 'Thinking these things with myself, and pondering in my heart, that immortality is in kinship with wisdom' (Wisd. VIII, 17). What one thinks 'with oneself,' this one ponders in one's heart; and in saying both, one surely showed that that thought and that pondering are present in oneself not outwardly, but inwardly. It is also said in the Proverbs:
'My son, let not evil thought lay hold of you, which forsakes the teaching of youth, and has forgotten the divine covenant; for it has placed its house with death, and its axles with the underworld among the earth-born' (Prov. II, 16). If, then, the evil thought which has placed its house 'with death' is outside death, not in death, then surely it lives. And if, placed 'with the underworld,' it is not in hell, it remains that that which is neither in death nor in hell should be said to have life in heaven. For this reason it is said to God: 'Because you have snatched my soul from death' (Ps. CXIV, 8), because he granted life to the soul through faith, saying: 'But my just one lives by faith' (Rom. I, 17). And again for this reason it is said to him:
'You have snatched my soul from the lower hell' (Ps. LXXXV, 13), because souls are snatched from hell by the grace of God for this purpose, that they may dwell in the heavens. Whence the Apostle says: 'But our citizenship is in heaven' (Phil. III, 20). Further, how has the soul, which through evil thought was 'with death,' been freed from death, if it was not in death? And how has it been snatched from hell, if, though set 'with the underworld,' it was not in hell? Since surely, if it were not in death, it would not have been dead. And through evil will, that is, through sin, who does not know that the soul dies? Since God says: 'The soul that sins, it shall die' (Ezek. XVIII, 20).
It is certain, therefore, that the soul which thinks evil, when it is 'with death,' is in death, and when it is 'with the underworld,' is in hell. What of the fact that the Savior also says: 'The things which are impossible with men are possible with God' (Matt. XIX, 26; Luke XVIII, 27)? Shall we then say that all things are possible with God in such a way that this very possibility, which we say is 'with God,' we should say is not 'in God'? But what power does God have 'with himself,' if he does not have that very power in himself? CHAPTER VII. Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father is in me? The Word is with God, as the word is in the mind.
By these and testimonies of this kind it is clear that, when it is said, 'The Word was with God,' nothing else ought to be understood than 'The Word was in God.' For the Son himself, who is the Word God, testifies that not only is the Father in him, but that he too is in the Father, saying: 'Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father is in me?' (John XIV, 10). But this being of the Son 'with the Father,' and his being 'in the Father,' should not be regarded as such as when one man is with another man, whether by right of hospitality or by the affection of charity. For the apostle Paul also says that he remained with the apostle Peter fifteen days (Gal.
I, 18), namely by the right of hospitality and by the purity of love; and although through the unity of faith and charity their soul was one and their heart one, yet Paul did not so remain with Peter as the Word remains with God, because a man cannot be with a man as the Word God is with God the Father: for a man is so with a man that not only can he be not with him, but also, when he is with him, he cannot substantially be in him. For truly he who is so with another is outside him, because when he is with him, in sincerity of love, he is separated by place, however greatly each is joined to the other in affection. But the Word is so with God as the word is in the mind, as counsel is in the heart:
for when the mind has a word with itself, it surely has it by thinking, because to say 'with oneself' is nothing other than to think 'with oneself.' When, then, the mind thinks, and by thinking generates a word within itself, it generates the word out of its own substance, and so generates that word out of itself that it may have what is begotten with itself. Nor does the word which is born from the mind have anything less than is the mind from which it is born, because as great as is the mind that generates the word, so great is also the word itself. For as the word is born from the whole mind, so it remains, once born, within the whole.
And because, when the mind thinks, there is no part of it where the word is not, therefore the word is as great as is the mind itself from which it is; and when it is with it, it is in it, and what the mind itself is, this is the word which is from it and in it; and as great as it is, so great also is the word, because it is from the whole and in the whole. And the word itself is as great as is at once the mind itself together with the word, for the word is not so born from it as to be locally separated from it.
For that birth, which shows what it is and from what it is, itself shows that it cannot be outside that from which it was born, nor be in any respect less, but so be from it that it is with it and in it, and be as much from it as it is in it, and as much in it as it is with it. CHAPTER VIII. We are not in God as the Word God is in God. God begot us in one way, the Word in another. The blasphemies of the heretics against the Son of God. And indeed Scripture says in a certain manner that we too both are in God and are with God, but not in the way in which the Word God, who is the only-begotten Son, is with God and in God: for it is said of us that in God we live and move and are. And it is said to God himself: 'If we have not sinned,
we know that we are counted as with you.' Yet when this is said of us, our natural unity with God is not shown, but either the power of the Creator is understood, or the mercy of the Redeemer. For we who believe are so in God and with God as, being born of God, we are sons of God. For it is written: 'Beloved, now are we the sons of God' (1 John III, 2). And again: 'Of his own will he begot us by the word of truth' (James I, 18). We, then, God begot by the word of truth, but that Word he begot as the truth. To us he gave the power to become sons of God; but he was made Son of God not out of power, but is born naturally of God as the Son of God. Us God begot of his own will, because will preceded the generation;
but in the generation of the Only-begotten, no will of the one generating preceded, where without beginning the eternal nativity remains natural. As, then, we have been begotten, but not as the only-begotten God; and we are sons of God, but not as the one and true Son; and we are gods, but not as the Word, who is the true God: so we are in God, and we are with God, but not as the Word God, who is naturally born of God, is with God and in God:
for although he is called Son and we are called sons, and he is God and we are gods, and he is begotten and we are begotten, yet there is a great difference in reality in that which seems to sound as one in name; because he, in that he is God, that he is Son, that he is Only-begotten, is so naturally, because he is born of the nature of the Father; but we, in that we are gods, that we are sons, that we are begotten, are so not by nature but by grace, because whereas we did not have it in our nature that we could be this, it was freely given to us that we should be made this. If the heretics, God mercifully granting it, should perceive this distinction, they will see the true light and will refrain from the insults against the only-begotten Son:
for they not only detract from him in that which is 'with God,' but also strive to deny in him a human soul. The Son of God himself designated these men in a single verse of a psalm, saying: 'This is the work of those who detract from me with God, and who speak evil against my soul' (Ps. CVIII, 20). For who detracts more grievously from Christ 'with God' than he who, hearing that the Word God is with God, says that the same Word is not in God? Or who speaks more evil against Christ's soul than he who denies a human soul in Christ?
since that Word, which is God, is so with God, of whom he is, that through the unity of nature he is in God, and through the same unity of nature he is one God with him; and that soul, together with the flesh, was assumed by the only-begotten God, so that at once in Christ both our soul and flesh might be saved. From whom, without doubt, that man will obtain everlasting salvation who has recognized in him the full truth of the divine and human nature.