Chapter IV.
Yesterday we endeavoured to interpret to your love, according to our ability and in a succinct manner, the things said by our blessed Fathers concerning the Divinity of the Only Begotten, while we kept the remainder of them for another day. In our commentary we reached, as you remember, the sentence in which it is said: Born of His Father before all the worlds, and not made, and there we ended our speech. If you wish, let us now begin by the grace of our Lord with this sentence. We were stating that in saying: Born of His Father before all the worlds they showed us that He is a Son truly and not figuratively only, as the heretics pretend that He is a Son only in a borrowed name like those who were called sons by grace. He is indeed alone the true Son of God the Father because He is the Only Begotten and is alone born of God His Father. This is the reason why they added: Born of His Father before all the worlds.
This was due to the Only Begotten Son of God, who is a true Son and not in name only. And He is from the nature of the Father and eternally from Him and with Him. It is not possible for us to imagine that there is anything between God the Father and God the Son, as God is high above everything. He who is above everything is also above the time and from eternity. If, therefore, God the Father is eternal, and if the Son is God, He is also eternal, God from God, and Eternal from Eternal, and there is nothing between God and God. As it is not possible to imagine that either times or worlds precede God, so there is nothing before the Son as He also is God, because He is born of His Father before everything, and is eternal, born of the One who is eternal. |44
For a perfect faith to those who have the good-will of religion this name of "Only Begotten" would have been sufficient, and they would have agreed to say that He was a true Son. (Our Fathers), however, added to it the sentence: Born of Him before all the worlds. Both phrases demonstrate how the Only Begotten is the Son of God, and it is with justice that they added for the refutation of the haters of truth: And not made. We confess that He is the Only Begotten, the Son of God, born of the Father before all the worlds, and that He is consubstantial with the Father; and we completely reject the opinion held by the ungodly people who said that the Son of God is created. He is indeed born of God and He is not made, and He is of the same nature as God and not a creature. A Son is very different from a creature.
If He is a Son He is not a creature, and if He is a creature He is not a Son. If He is a Son He is from Him and not from outside Him, and if He is a creature He is from outside Him. If He is a Son He is from Him and like Him, and if He is a creature He is from outside Him and not from Him and like Him. The natural law teaches us also these things, because we call sons those who are born of us; as to creatures they are made outside us while they were not. Likewise we understand that there are many creatures of God, but the Son is One whom we also call Only Begotten.
The Son is one alone, and He is eternally from Him; as to creatures they are many and exceed all numbering, and are composed of many natures which came into existence later according to the will of their Maker, both individually and collectively. He knew that diversity was useful to the creature because it is created, and some parts of it came into existence earlier, some later and some others later still; parts of it came into existence at the same time, and parts after many others. Since all the created things were to come into existence it was justifiable that some should come earlier and some later.
As there is a beginning to the existence of all created things, those which came into existence later are like those which came into existence earlier. As to the Son, because He did not come into existence to His Father later but was in the beginning from Him and was from eternity with Him, is alone Son. It was not possible that the one |45 who was similar to the one who is from eternity should have come into existence later, nor was it possible that the one who has a beginning should have been similar to the one who is from eternity. Indeed there is a great difference between one who is from eternity and one who began his existence later; the difference is so great that the two cannot exist concomitantly. What possible relation can exist between one who is eternal and another who was at one time nonexistent and began his existence later?
It is well known that the one who is eternal and the one whose existence has a beginning are greatly separated from each other, and the gulf found between them is unbridgeable. The one who is eternal has no limits, while the one whose existence has a beginning, his very existence is limited, and the one the beginning of whose existence is limited, the time that elapsed before he came into existence is also limited. It is not possible to limit and define the chasm that exists between the one who is from eternity and the one who began to exist at a time when he was not. What possible resemblance and relation can exist between two beings so widely separated from each other? And because the Son is from eternity, and from a Father who is from eternity, no other son like Him came into existence later. He remained Son alone because He is from eternity from one who is from eternity. It was fitting that such a one should be alone the Son from the Father.
In this way our Fathers warned us concerning the knowledge of the Son, and wrote to us the true doctrine to the effect that when we believe in the Only Begotten Son we should understand that He is from the Father. They taught us also to flee from the impiety of the heretics and reject their contention that the Son is made, as this is very remote from the truth. The Son should not be thought of as a made being nor as a creature, but we ought to profess concerning Father and Son what is congruous to both of them, namely that the Son is from the nature of the Father and is not a being made by the Father and created outside Him from nothing.
Our blessed Fathers taught us these and added something that fits the sequence of the sentence: True God of true God. Indeed what else were we justified in thinking of the one who is from God and not from outside Him but from the very nature of the Father, except that He was what God is by nature, that is to say a true God? |46
In this they followed the teaching of the Gospel in which it is said: "And the Word was with God, and the Word was God," as if the evangelist had said, "And God was with God, and He was what He was, as He was with Him and from Him." In this way our Fathers said also: True God of true God. They added to the sentence, "God from God" that of, "True from true" because of the wickedness of those who wish to show contention and insolence even concerning heavenly things.
The sentence which they used does not differ from that found in the Gospel, as it is clear that the one who says, "God with God" says also "A true one with a true one." The (Gospel) does not say "And He is called God," like those who are called gods by men, nor, "He was with the one who was called God by name only," but, He was God with the one who was God, and God by nature with the one who was God by nature. Men are called gods, but are not assumed to be gods by nature: "I have said, Ye are gods, and all of you children of the Most High, but ye shall die like men, because I only called you so to bestow honour upon you, as you are not gods by nature; you are mortal men by nature, which is very different from Divine nature; this is evident from the nature of things, because if you had been gods by nature you would not have been entangled in sin for which you received death."
God is not only called God by name, but He is in reality by nature that which is implied by His name; and God the Word who is with Him is not only called God figuratively, but is also God by nature; and he who is God by nature what else can he be except true God? What is there truer than nature, and how is it possible that the one who is (God) by nature should not be so in truth? If He is not God by nature, He is neither God in truth. Indeed this name "god" is either applied to demons, who falsely and insolently dare to call themselves by it in their arrogance, or to men who are called so by God's gracious permission as an honour. As to the Son He is God by nature like the Father.
Although the heretics dare to call the Only Begotten, "Son of God" in a different sense, yet since He is God by nature it is evident that He is also God in truth, as there is nothing truer than the one who is what he is by nature. It is indeed evident that the one who is God by nature is also God in truth. And there is nothing truer than |47 a true one—(and this contrary to) the new wisdom of the heretics— when each of them is a true (God) by nature. Indeed they say that God the Father is God by nature and that God the Son is also God by nature, but they refuse to admit that the Son is God in truth, in spite of the fact that they admit that He is God by nature, and in this they introduce a new law to us in their innovations to the effect that He is a true God but not like God His Father. If each one of them is God by nature, how is it possible for us to understand that one of them is higher and the other lower while both of them are assumed to have an identical nature? It is impossible to find an addition or a diminution in the one whom the Sacred Books and those who followed their doctrine teach us that He is God by nature.
Our blessed Fathers also followed the Books and warned us against the unholy opinion and the ineptitude of the heretics, in saying: True God of true God. The Books had already stated that He was "God," and they (our Fathers) added prudently the word "true" so that we might believe that the Son is a true God like the Father, because like the Father He is a true God by nature. And as the Father was confessed as God for the confutation of the error of the multiplicity of gods—who were falsely called gods by the peoples of the earth—so also is the case with the Son of God, because we believe that God the Father and God the Son are one God, inasmuch as the Divine nature of the Father and of the Son is one.
To this our blessed Fathers added that the Son was "consubstantial" with His Father, a word that confirms (the faith of) the children of faith and rebukes the unbelievers. Although this is not explicitly written in Holy Writ yet its meaning is found therein. They explained here by means of a clear word the meaning of that which they had previously stated, because the sentence: Consubstantial with the Father is not different from that of: True God of true God. They did not wish to insinuate by this sentence "Consubstantial with the Father any other thing than that the being who, as previously stated by them, was God and born of His Father before all the worlds and not made— is God. Indeed, if He is born of Him before all the worlds and is not made, and if He is not a creature but a true Son of His Father, it is evident that He is from Him and not from outside Him, and that He is born of the nature of the Father and consubstantial with Him; and if He is true God of true God, it is |48 evident that He is consubstantial with Him, because any one who is truly God in nature is consubstantial with one who is truly God in nature.
The meaning of the sentence "consubstantial with His Father" is clearly found in the Book. When it says: "In the beginning He was with God and He was God," it shows by means of these two phrases that He is God in nature and that He is consubstantial with God. This is also the meaning of the sentence: "My Father and I are one." If the Son is one with His Father in power and in nature, He is consubstantial with Him. By His statement: "My sheep hear my voice and follow me, and I give unto them eternal life, and no man shall pluck them out of my hand," He bore witness to His omnipotence and to the fact that no man can prevail against Him; and because this sentence conveyed higher things than the simple man who was seen in Him, He added: "My Father who gave them me is greater than all, and no man is able to pluck (them) out of my Father's hand." He lowered the significance of the sentence by the addition: "He gave me." What He said of Himself to the effect that no man can prevail against Him, He said it of His person; and to show that He did make use of such words for the purpose of showing that the power of both (the Father and the Son) was identical and that no man was able to prevail against Him in the same way as no man was able to prevail against the Father who was believed to be higher than all, He said: "My Father and I are one."
He made clear in this (sentence) that which He had implicitly insinuated in the meaning of the preceding words which He had uttered; it is as if He had said, "my power is identical with that of my Father and higher than all like His power, and no man can prevail against me even as no man can prevail against my Father, because my Father and I are one, and have one power and one dominion that is higher than all." This is the reason why the Jews called Him a blasphemer. Indeed they did not know the Divine nature that was dwelling in Him, but knew only that which was visible in Him, and wished to stone Him like a man making use of blasphemous words.
To the same effect is the sentence: "He that hath seen me hath |49 seen my Father," and: "I am in my Father and my Father in me." If the Father is seen in the Son it is evident that both have one nature, and each of them is seen and known in the other. In this way their mutual equality shows also the unity of their nature, and the consubstantiality of the Son with the Father. This is likewise the meaning of the sentence: "No man knoweth the Son but the Father, neither knoweth any man the Father save the Son." If each of them is not known and seen except by the other, it is evident that they are invisible to all men because of their equality in nature, each of them only knowing the other. If this is so then the Son is consubstantial with the Father.
In spite of the fact that all these things are manifestly evident in the Sacred Books, those who incline towards evil, to the condemnation of their souls, and are not upright, dared to say that the nature of the Son is different from that of the Father, a saying which also implies that He is not a Son. It is known that he who is truly a son is of the same nature as his father. Our blessed Fathers were well advised, therefore, to make use of this expression the meaning of which was implicitly found in many words of the Sacred Books, in order to warn the faithful of their time and to rebuke the heretics; and they wished also to make it known in condensed words. If the blessed Paul did not hesitate to quote in his teaching sentences that were used by Greek philosophers, such as: "we are of the offspring of gods," and: "The Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, slow bellies," and if he did not shrink from writing them for the reproval of his adversaries, it was all the more right for our blessed Fathers to make use in the profession of faith of the expression that the Son was Consubstantial with the Father, and although this word is not explicitly written in the Sacred Books, its meaning was implicitly found in many passages.
After this they said: By Whom the worlds were made and all things were created.
As in the section of the faith which deals with the Father, after the word "Father" they added "Creator of all things," so also in the section which deals with the Son, after stating that He was born of the Father and was consubstantial with Him, they rightly added that He was the creator of all things, because a true Son |50 who is consubstantial with His Father is also a true creator like Him. In this same way the blessed John the evangelist, after having said "in the beginning He was with God, and He was God" added: "All things were made by Him and without Him was not anything made," in order to show us that He was a creator like God His Father.
In this same way after our blessed Fathers had said that the Son was from the Father, that He was true God from true God and that He was consubstantial with His Father, they added: By whom the worlds were made and all things were created. They said this because as He is with His Father before all the worlds, He is the creator of all things like God His Father. And since the worlds were made by Him, He is the creator of all creatures, and He is before all the worlds, because He is from eternity and did not begin to exist later, but was in the beginning and is the creator of all the worlds, as the blessed Paul said: "By Him He made the worlds."
Our blessed Fathers also after saying like him: "By Him the worlds were made," added that He was the creator of all things. In this way they taught us the divinity of the Only Begotten while stating something which was in harmony with the Sacred Books; and gave also encouragement to those who are zealous in their religion, and confuted those who deny the divinity of the Only Begotten.
As to us we have explained to your love the meaning of the (profession of) faith in a succinct manner, according to our ability. If you wish it let the measure of the things which we said suffice for our teaching of to-day, and let us praise the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit for ever and ever. Amen.
Here ends the fourth chapter.