CHRYSOSTOM . (Hom. lxxiii. 2) If the Jews, who wished to be separated from Christ, asked whither He was going, much more would the disciples, who wished never to be separated from Him, be anxious to know it. So with much love, and, at the same time, fear, they proceed to ask: Thomas saith unto Him, Lord, we know not whither Thou goest; and how can we know the way?
AUGUSTINE . (Tr. lxix. 1) Our Lord had said that they knew both, Thomas says that they knew neither. Our Lord cannot lie; they knew not that they did know. Our Lord proves that they did: Jesus saith unto Him, I am the way, the truth, and the life.
AUGUSTINE . (de Verb. Dom. s. liv) As if He said, I am the way, whereby thou wouldest go; I am the truth, whereto thou wouldest go; I am the life, in which thou wouldest abide. The truth and the life every one understands (capit); but not every one hath found the way. Even the philosophers of the world have seen that God is the life eternal, the truth which is the end of all knowledge. And the Word of God, which is truth and life with the Father, by taking upon Him human nature, is made the way. Walk by the Man, and thou wilt arrive at God. For it is better to limp on the right way, than to walk ever so stoutly by the wrong.
HILARY . (vii. de Trin) For He who is the way doth not lead us into devious courses out of the way; nor does He who is the truth deceive us by falsehoods; nor does He who is the life leave us in the darkness of death.
THEOPHYLACT . When thou art engaged in the practical, He is made thy way; when in the contemplative, He is made thy truth. And to the active and the contemplative is joined life: for we should both act and contemplate with reference to the world to come.
AUGUSTINE . (Tr. lxix. 2) They knew then the way, because they knew He was the way. But what need to add, the truth, and the life? Because they were yet to be told whither He went. He went to the truth; He went to the life. He went then to Himself, by Himself. But didst Thou leave Thyself, O Lord, to come to us? (c. 3.). I know that Thou tookest upon Thee the form of a servant; by the flesh Thou camest, remaining where Thou wast; by that Thou returnedst, remaining where Thou hadst come to. If by this then Thou camest, and returnedst, by this Thou wast the way, not only to us, to come to Thee, but also to Thyself to come, and to return again. And when Thou wentest to life, which is Thyself, Thou raisedst that same flesh of Thine from death to life. Christ therefore went to life, when His flesh arose from death to life. And since the Word is life, Christ went to Himself; Christ being both, in one person, i. e. Word-flesh. Again, by the flesh God came to men, the truth to liars; for God is true, but every man a liar. When then He withdrew Himself from men, and lifted up His flesh to that place in which no liar is, the same Christ, by the way, by which He being the Word became flesh, by Himself, i. e. by His flesh, by the same returned to Truth, which is Himself, which truth, even amongst the liars He maintained unto death. Behold I myself1, if I make you understand what I say, do in a certain sense go to you, though I do not leave myself. And when I cease speaking, I return to myself, but remain with you, if ye remember what ye have heard. If the image which God hath made can do this, how much more the Image which God hath begotten? Thus He goes by Himself, to Himself and to the Father, and we by Him, to Him and to the Father.
CHRYSOSTOM . (Hom. lxxiii. 2) For if, He says, ye have Me for your guide to the Father, ye shall certainly come to Him. Nor can ye come by any other way. (c. 6:44) Whereas He had said above, No man can come to Me, except the Father draw him, now He says, No man cometh unto the Father but by Me, thus equalling Himself to the Father. The next words explain, Whither I go ye know, and the way ye know. If ye had known Me, He says, ye should have known My Father also; i. e. If ye had known My substance and dignity, ye would have known the Father’s. They did know Him, but not as they ought to do. Nor was it till afterwards, when the Spirit came, that they were fully enlightened. On this account He adds, And from henceforth ye know Him, know Him, that is, spiritually. And have seen Him, i. e. by Me; meaning that he who had seen Him, had seen the Father. They saw Him, however, not in His pure substance, but clothed in flesh.
BEDE . How can our Lord say, If ye had known Me, ye should have known My Father also; when He has just said, Whither I go ye know, and the way ye know? We must suppose that some of them knew, and others not: among the latter, Thomas.
HILARY . (vii. de Trin) Or thus: When it is said that the Son is the way to the Father, is it meant that He is so by His teaching, or by His nature? We shall be able to see from what follows: If ye had known Me, ye should have known My Father also. In His incarnation asserting His Divinity, He maintained a certain order of sight and knowledge: separating the time of seeing from that of knowing. For Him, who He saith must be known, He speaks of as already seen: that henceforward they might from this revelation have knowledge of the Divine Nature which they had all along seen in Him.
14:8–11
8. Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us.
9. Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?
10. Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.
11. Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works’ sake.
HILARY . (vii. de Trin) A declaration so new startled Philip. Our Lord is seen to be man. He confesses Himself to be the Son of God, declares that, if He were known, the Father would be known, that, if He is seen, the Father is seen. The familiarity of the Apostle therefore breaks forth into questioning our Lord, Philip saith unto Him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us.He did not deny He could be seen (non visum negavit), but wished to be shewn him; nor did he wish to see with his bodily eyes, but that He whom he had seen might be made manifest to his understanding. He had seen the Son in the form of man, but how through that form He saw the Father, he did not know. This he wants to be shewn him, shewn to his understanding, not set before his eyes; and then he will be satisfied: And it sufficeth us.
AUGUSTINE . (i. de Trin. c. viii) For to that joy of beholding His face, nothing can be added. Philip understood this, and said, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us. But he did not yet understand that he could in the same way have said, Lord, shew us Thyself, and it sufficeth us. But our Lord’s answer enlightens him, Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long with you, and yet hast thou not known Me, Philip?
AUGUSTINE . (Tr. lxx. 1) But how is this, when our Lord said that they knew whither He was going, and the way, because they knew Him? The question is easily settled by supposing that some of them knew, and others not; among the latter, Philip.
HILARY . (vii. de Trin) He reproves the ignorance of Philip in this respect. For whereas his actions had been strictly divine, such as walking on the water, commanding the winds, remitting sins, raising the dead, He complained that in His assumed humanity, the Divine nature was not discerned. Accordingly to Philip’s request, to be shewn the Father, Our Lord answers, He that hath seen Me, hath seen the Father.
AUGUSTINE . (Tr. lxx) When two persons are very like each, we say, If you have seen the one, you have seen the other. So here, He that hath seen Me, hath seen the Father; not that He is both the Father, and the Son, but that the Son is an absolute likeness of the Father.
HILARY . (vii. de Trin) He does not mean the sight of the bodily eye: for His fleshly part, born of the Virgin, doth not avail towards contemplating the form and image of God in Him; but the Son of God being known with the understanding, it follows that the Father is known also, forasmuch as He is the image of God, not differing from but expressing His Author1. For our Lord’s expressions do not speak of one person solitary and without relationship, but teach us His birth. The Father also excludes the supposition of a single solitary person, and leaves us no other doctrine but that the Father is seen in the Son, by the incommunicable likeness of birth.
AUGUSTINE . (Tr. lxx. 3) But is he to be reproved, who, when he has seen the likeness, wishes to see the man of whom he is the likeness? No: our Lord rebuked the question, only with reference to the mind of the asker. Philip asked, as if the Father were better than the Son; and so shewed that He did not know the Son. Which opinion our Lord corrects: Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me? as if He said, If it is a great wish with thee to see the Father, at any rate believe what thou dost not see.
HILARY . (vii. de Trin) For what excuse was there for ignorance of the Father, or what necessity to shew Him, when the Father was seen in the Son by His essential nature2, while by the identity of unity, the Begotten and the Begetter are one: Believest thou not that I am in the Father and the Father in Me?
AUGUSTINE . (i. de. Trin. 8) He wished him to live by faith, before he had sight, and therefore says, Believest thou not? Spiritual vision is the reward of faith, vouchsafed to minds purified by faith.
HILARY . (vii. de Trin) But the Father is in the Son, and the Son in the Father, not by a conjunction of two harmonizing essences3, nor by a nature grafted into a more capacious substance as in material bodies, in which it is impossible that what is within can be made external to that which contains it; but by the birth of a nature which is life from life; forasmuch as from God nothing but God can be born.
HILARY . (v. de Trin) The unchangeable God follows, so to speak, His own nature, by begetting unchangeable God. Nor does the perfect birth of unchangeable God from unchangeable God forsake His own nature. We understand then here the nature of God subsisting in Him, since God is in God, nor besides Him who is God, can any other be God.