John — Chapter 2

Let me add here what S. Augustine says (Serm. 38 de Verb. Dom.) “ The Word of God is, as it were, a Form, but not formed. It is the Form of all forms, over all things, and exist- ing in all things. But some ask, How could the Son be begotten coeternal with the Father ? As if fire were eternal, would not its brightness be coetemal with it? Is it not the same with the reflection in a mirror, or in water ? As, for example, a shrub would always have its reflection in the water beside which it grew.” And S. Chrysostom says, “ He said not Word simply, but by the article distinguished it from all others. For it is an Hypostasis, proceeding forth impassibly from the Father. This is the mean- ing of was in the beginning, that it always existed, and with an infinite existence. For it is not said of the heaven and the earth, 22 S. JOHN, C. L that they were in the beginning, but that they were made in the beginning. And the Word was with God . S. John meets an objection. Some one may say, “ Where was the Word in the beginning, from eternity, when as yet there was no place, and no created nature of things ? ” He answers, “ The Word had no need of place, because It is spiritual, and divine ; but It was with the Father, aa with that from which It derived Its origin.” As it is said in the 18th verse, It was in the bosom of the Father. Or, as we might say, It was in the Father's House, which is God Himself, and His immensity. The preposition with denotes — i. Distinction of person, because indeed the Son is a different Person from the Father, not one and the same, as the Sabellians say. “ For how should that which is one numerically be understood to be with itself?” says S. Cyril. “ Before all things,” says Tertullian (lib. 5 cont. Prax.) “God alone was Himself to Himself both universe and space and everything. But in this respect only was He alone, that He had nothing external to Himself for not even then was He alone ; for He had with Himself what he had in Himself, His Reason, or that which the Greeks call His Logos" 2. With denotes the loving and perfect union of the Son with the Father, by which it comes to pass that it is impossible for Him to be separated from the Father. So Nonnus. 3. With denotes the equality of the Son with the Father. For to be with God, or near to (juxtd) God, means to sit at the right hand of God, as it were God of the same substance as the Father. Wherefore Christ is said after His Ascension to have returned to the right hand of the Father (Mark xvL) As Nonnus expounds, “ the Son is sunthronos with the Father,” a term which cannot be expressed by a single word in English, but which means an associate in the same throne, an assessor in the same seat And the Word was God. The order of the words in the Greek is, And God was the Word. Lest the Axians should bring forward the objection, “ If the Word was with God, then the Word was not God, John confutes them by anticipation, saying The Word was God. GOD THE WORD. 23 For the Arians placed the interior and essential Word of God, that is, the Intelligence of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost (as the orthodox faith is) in one Person of Godhead, coetemal with Him- self. They said that God began to be a Father in time, when He produced the Word ( Vcrbum notional*) distinct from Himself, as it were the first of creatures, and by him all other creatures. John refutes this by saying, And God was the Wordy meaning that the Word already spoken of was God. He said this lest any one should suppose that the Word was not God, because he had said that He was with God. He means that the Word was with God in such sort that He Himself was God. The Arians object that the Greek word M, God, has not the article in this clause as it had in the preceding clause, and the Word was with God ( apud rh 0ik). Therefore, say they, the Word was not true God. I reply by denying the conclusion. For the reason of the difference is that the word God (hh) in the preceding clause, with Gody denotes a distinct Person, namely, the Person of the Father with whom the Word was. But in this latter clause it denotes not a Person but the essence of the Godhead common to each Person. For the Word is one God with the Father, so far as relates to Essence and Godhead, but not as regards Person. And the article in this place signifies a distinct Person, not the nature common to both. Again, the Greeks prefix the article to the subject, not the predicate ; and in this place God is the predicate, the Word is the subject. Observe that John in this sentence with three clauses, by the first clause unfolds the when of the Word : it was eternity. Secondly, the where of the Word, and His distinction from the Father. In this third clause, the essence of the Word, and His identity in essence with the Father. S. John unfolded this threefold sentence of His Gospel in the Creed which, at the bidding of the Blessed Virgin, he delivered to S. Gregory Thaumaturgus, as & Gregory of Nyssa relates in his life. For this symbol is as follows, “There is one Father of the living Word, the substantial Wisdom and Power, and eternal Image, the perfect Father of the perfect and only begotten 24 S. JOHN, C. I. Son. One Lord, alone from the Only One, God of God, the form and image of the Godhead, the efficacious Word, the comprehensive Wisdom by which all things were made, and the effectual power of the whole creation. True Son that cannot be seen, of the true Father that cannot be seen, incorruptible, immortal, and eternal Son of the incorruptible, immortal, and eternal Father. The same was in the beginning with God. He compendiously repeats and confirms this proposition of this clause by a sentence of a single clause. Thus, 44 This Word, which I have said is God, was in the beginning, that is, from eternity, with God.” For it is difficult to understand how the Word can be with God, and yet the same be God. Therefore John writes and inculcates both together, that he may signify at one and the same time the unity of essence and the diversity of persons, and that he may teach that in the Godhead there is a Trinity of Persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. For this is the deepest and most obscure mystery of our faith, and the most difficult to be believed. Maldonatus gives a second reason for this repetition, derived from the third clause, the Word was God , that is to say, forasmuch as the Word was God, therefore it follows that He was in the beginning with God the Father, that is, coeternal and of one substance with the Father. S. Hilary gives a third reason (lib. i de Trin.), lest any one should suppose because he said the Word was God, and the same was in the beginning with God, there were therefore two Gods, one which was the Word, and the other with whom the Word was, as the Manichaeans held two Principles, or Gods, one of which was the Creator of all things corporeal, the other the Creator of angels and things spiritual, John declares that the Word was so with God the Father as to be the same God with Him. All things were made by Him, that is, by the Word. All things which were not God were created by the Word. 44 All things, from an angel to a worm,” says S. Augustine ; who adds, 44 between God who speaks, and the creature which was made, what is there by which it was made, but the Word, by whom God said, Let it be made . THE WORD THE CREATOR. *5 and it was made. As the Apostle says, M By Him,” ue., the Word, “were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers : all things were created by Him, and for Him ” (Col. i 16). From these words of S. John the Macedonians falsely denied that the Holy Ghost is God, arguing that He was made by the Word, and therefore that He was a creature, and not the Creator. But it is plain that the words refer to things created, not things uncreated, such as the Spirit, who is One God with the Father and the Son, and the Creator of all things. For if you were to take the word all absolutely, you might infer that the Father also had been created by the Word, which would be ridiculous, as S. Gregory Nazianzen learnedly teaches against the Macedonians ( Oral l . de Sp . Sanet.) S. John does not in this place make mention of the Holy Ghost, because he is only treating of the generation and incarnation of the Word. Wherefore, after he had said that the Word was Himself God, that is, coeternal, and of one substance with the Father, he now in this third verse describes the relation of the same Word to all created things, asserting that they were made by Him. Then in the ninth and following verses he cdmes down to man, showing the relation of the Word to man. He asserts that He took upon Him the nature of man, that He might illuminate and save him. This is the scope and object of the whole passage. Observe that when it is said by Him , the preposition by does not signify an instrumental cause, or a minister, as though the Word were the instrument, or minister of God, by which He created all things, as Origen supposed, and also the Arians, but it signifies an original, or chief (principalem ) cause, as in Prov. viil 15, “By . me kings reign,” and 1 Cor. i. 9, “ Faithful is God, by whom ye have been called” (Vulg.) The preposition by in this and other places is referred to God the Father, who is the First Cause of all things. And by here means that the Word with the Father is the original Cause of the creation of all things. So S. Chrysostom, Theophylact, and Euthymius on this passage, and SS. Athanasius, 2 6 S. JOHN, C. I. Basil, and others against the Arians. Wherefore also S. Paul (Heb. L io) interprets Psalm cii 26, “ Thou Lord in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the work of Thy hands,” of the Word, or Son. “ Never, certainly, would he have said this,” says S. Chrysostom, “ unless he had believed the Son to be the Founder, not a minister, and that the Father and the Son were equal in dignity.” You will ask, Why then does S. John use the preposition dth (fer i or through) instead of u* 4 , by, when he says that all things were made through (&a) Him ? 1. That he might signify that the Word proceeds from the Father, and is begotten of Him. “ Lest any one should suppose,” says S. Chrysostom, “that the Word was unbegotten.” 2. That he might signify that the Word is the Idea of created things, according to which the Father with the Son created all things. For an artificer makes all the works of his art by an ideal, or conception, or mental word, or plan. AU these similitudes are transferred to the Divine Word, who is the Begotten but Uncreated Wisdom. And without Him was made nothing (Vulg.) Nothing : is., evil, as corruptible things, whose constant tendency is to nothingness, from whence they came forth, as the Manichseans say. For they thought that things corporeal and corruptible were not created by God, but by a demon, or evil god. But that this interpretation of the words is false and foolish is shown by the Greek for nothing (oufe ft), not even one thing, meaning that everything, without one single exception, was created by the Word So the Arabic clearly translates, All things were made by Him, and without Him was there not made anything of the things which were made. 3. By nothing, S. Augustine understands sin : that all things were made by the Word, nothing, i.e., sin being excepted, the author of which is the devil, and an evil will, not God. But this idea is shown to be untenable in this place by the Greek, ou 3 ' b, not even one thing. Which was made. Here there are three ways of pointing, and in LIFE IN THE WORD. consequence a threefold interpretation and meaning. The iist is, without Him was nothing made , which was made in. Him : then the stop, after which begins a mew sentence, There was lifty &c* So read and punctuate SS. Hilary and Epiphanius, and some others. But this reading is generally rejected as containing a manifest tautology. A second reading is, without Him was made nothing: then a full stop, after which a new sentence is commenced, That which was made in Him was life. Thi» is the pointing and reading of S. Austin, Tertulhan (coni. Hermog.), S. Ambrose (lib. 3 de fide, c. 3), and the Latin Fathers passim. And among the Greeks are Clement of Alexandria (lib. 1 Pa. c. 6.) and S. Cyril in loc. S. Augus- tine expounds as follows, “Everything made and created by the Word was in the same Word vitally and intellectually, before it was made and created.” It was in the ideas and eternal plans which exist in the Word. It was therefore life , i.e.> it lived in the mind and idea of the Word. S. Cyril explains differently, “ Everything was made life in the Word, that is, it received, and continues to receive life, *>., vigour and the preservation of its being, as long as it exists, from the Word.” The third reading is that of the Syriac, Arabic, and Greek texts of S. Chrysostom, Nonnus, Euthymius, and Tertius (in catena) '. Without Him was nothing made that was made ; then the stop, and then a fresh sentence, In Him was life. This is by far the best reading, and in conformity with it the Bible has been corrected at Rome, and most of the other Latin copies. S. John adds this sentence against the Macedonians, who argued as we have seen above. As if he said, “When I say that all things were made by the Word, I mean, not the Holy Spirit, but only such things as were created and made.” In Him was life> &c Life is the thing which is most excellent, as death is the worst. S. John here ascribes to the Word the Fountain of life : for in Him “ we live, and move, and have our being ” (Acts xvii.) Hence the Greeks call their God Zeus, from to live , because he breathes life into all living things. S. John’s 28 S. JOHN, C. L meaning therefore is, “ Our true life of grace and glory was in the Word as its origin and fountain. And that He might communicate Himself as this life and light to men, He came down to them, and became man. That as by the Word this macrocosm or great universe was created, so also by the same might the microcosm, or little world of man, be re-created, and called back from the death of sin to the life of grace and righteousness.” S. John explains himself by adding, And the life was the light of men . In his first Epistle he speaks thus of the Word of Life (chap. i. ver. 2). “ For the Life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal Life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us.” And in chap, v., the la6t verse, “that we may know the true God, and may be in His true Son. This is the true God, and life eternal” (Vulg.) And this is why S. John con- stantly calls Christ The Life . The Fathers expound this Life of the Word in various ways. 1. Of Formal Life . In Him was Life : that is, life is the very substance of the Word. The Word Himself is substantial Life. So says (Ecumenius on 1 John i. The Word Himself is essentially Life. For Life and to live are His very essence. 2. In the Word is Life ideal \ or exemplar , because in the Word, as in Idea, the eternal plans of all things exist, as S. Austin says. For the Word is the Idea of all creatures, but the Idea is itself the essence and life of God. Thus therefore the Word is the life of all creatures, even of things inanimate, for all live in the Word, inasmuch as He is all Life. 3. In the Word is efficient natural Life , because the Word is the efficient Cause of all living things, and He gives them their life. To plants He gives vegetable life , to animals animal life , to men rational life , to angels angelic life, Jansen expounds thus, “The natural life of living things depends upon the Word.” 4. and last You may here take life to mean, supernatural efficient Life , and explain as follows, “ In the Word, as in a Fount and prime Cause, was our supernatural life, that is to say, of grace and glory ; and therefore that He might impart this life to us, He THE WORD THE LIGHT. 29 became Incarnate, as I have before said. For supernatural life is twofold. It is begun by grace, by which a just man serves God in faith, hope, and charity, and lives the supernatural life, believing in, hoping in, and loving God above all things, supernaturally. The other supernatural life is that which is consummated in glory, wherein the blessed enjoy God, and are eternally beatified. There is an allusion to Psalm xlvi., “ With Thee is the Well of Life, and in Thy light shall we see life.” “ This is,” says Theodoret, “ 4 With Thee is the Word Eternal, the fountain of life ; and in the light of the Holy Spirit shall we behold the light of Thy Only Begotten Son.’ ” The light of man, by which men are spiritually illuminated through faith and grace. For he is speaking, not of natural and corporeal, but of spiritual and supernatural light, as is plain from what follows. The meaning is, Our life, which I have just said was in the Word, was this illumination of the Word, by which He has illuminated men with the knowledge of God and His salvation— externally, by words and holy examples ; internally, by heavenly light infused into the soul. This was why the Word was made flesh. So Clement of Alexandria ( Exhort ; ad. Gent.) says, u The Word which was with God appeared as a Teacher — the Word by which all things were made, and which, with Him who made them, gave them at the same time life as their Maker, and taught them to live well when He appeared as their Teacher, that He might hereafter, for the time to come, supply them with the means of living for ever.” And the light shineth in darkness , &c. The meaning is, As the natural light by its illumination dispels the darkness, so likewise has Christ, forasmuch as He is light, done His part ; but the darkness, that is, men by reason of their ignorance and unbelief, have closed the eyes of their soul, that they should not admit this light Observe, that Christ, as He is God, is the uncreated, efficient light : as man also He is the efficient light, because He is to men the Author of all wisdom, grace, and glory, not only giving them the natural light of reason, as Origen and Cyril explain, but still more as giving them the supernatural light of faith and wisdom. Where- fore Christ is called in Mai iv. 2, “ The Sun of righteousness.” 30 S. JOHN, C. I. Observe : Christ as man is here called light, because He chiefly gave light after His Incarnation. He was indeed light before, even from the first beginning of the universe. For as the sun, before it ascends above the horizon, sends forth some rays of its dawning, with which it gives light to the world, so likewise does Christ This is what the Father says to Christ : “ I have given Thee for a light unto the Gentiles, that Thou mayest be My salvation unto the ends of the earth.” Admirably does S. Augus jne say {Horn. 43), “ Christ therefore came to give light to the eyes, because the devil had blinded them.” And the same saint says ( Epist . 120, ad. Honor), “The Son of God is not absent even from the minds of the wicked, although they see Him not, just as no light is seen when it is presented to the eyes of the blind.” The light of the Word shines in the dark- ness of wicked men by the light of reason, by the voices of crea- tures, which all cry aloud that there is a Creator, and that He ought to be worshipped and loved. It shines by the law of nature written in the soul, by the New Law, by the Scriptures, by doctors and preachers, by holy inspirations, and by many such things. Where- fore, the same Augustine says ( TVaet \ 2. in Joan), “ Fall not into sin, and this sun shall not go down upon thee. If thou shalt fall into sin, it will set, and darkness will fall upon thee.” “ If thou wilt see light, be thou also thyself light. But if thou lovest dark- ness, and the lusts of darkness, then will they overshadow thee, yea, make thee blind.” Observe in holy Scripture, and especially in S. John, both in his Gospel and his Epistles, the faith and grace of Christ are compared to light, and sin to darkness, on account of many apposite analo- gies between them. For light is heavenly, and is the most noble, the swiftest and most pure of natural things. It is impassible and most active. It cannot be defiled by any impurities, even though they be commingled with it It brings warmth, glory, and joy. It causes all things to be seen, and brings life and power to every living thing. Such also is God, and His grace. The contrary to all this is found in sin, whose symbol is darkness. Besides all this, grace THE WITNESS OF JOHN. 31 leads to everlasting light and glory, sin to the lowest and most extreme darkness. Comprehended it not: Greek, ou xartka />., as Vatablus translates, did not receive it The meaning is, so great was the blindness and depravity of unbelieving and wicked men, that when the Light offered itself to them of its own accord, they would not embrace, nor receive it ; for they closed their eyes that they might not admit it ; for " their works were evil,” as S. John says (iii. 19). There was a man sent from God> &c. He was sent, as Luke says, (iii. 1), 11 in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar : and the Word of God came to him in the wilderness.” 11 Thou, then,” says Chrysostom, “ when thou understandest that he was sent from God, do not think that anything merely human is being announced, but that all is Divine. He does not declare anything of his own, but the secrets of Him who sends him. Therefore he, John, is called an angel, that is, a messenger. It is the office of a mes- senger to know nothing of himself.” The same came for a witness , &c. Namely, that he might bear witness that Jesus is the true Light of the world, and that we must look for, and ask of Him all the light of faith, and all the know- ledge of salvation. Observe that in Greek the article is prefixed to tight, as it were that light meaning the spiritual and Divine light, that which shineth of itself, and is essentially light, and the source of all enlightenment, which is as it were a Divine Sun, in respect of which John the Baptist was but as the moon, or the day-star. For as the morning star goes before the sun, so did John precede Christ the Sun of righteousness. The meaning is as follows — Inasmuch as the light of the Godhead was hidden in the humanity of Christ, as in a lan- tern dark and shaded, so that men discerned it not, therefore did God send John, that he might uncover and make this light manifest, and testify that Jesus was the very Son of God, the Teacher and Redeemer of the world. For, as Paul saith (1 Tim. vi. 16), God “inhabiteth the unapproachable light, whom no man hath seen, nor can see.” And again, the Son “ is the splendour of His glory, 32 S. JOHN, C. I. and the form of the substance” of God the Father (Heb. L 3, Vulg.) And again, the same is “ the brightness of eternal light, and the spotless mirror of the majesty of God, and the image of His good- ness ” (Wisd. vji. 26). That all men through him might believe: that is, believe in the Light, and so be justified and saved. Through him, namely, John, who as it were with his finger pointed out Christ, saying : “ Behold the Lamb of God, that taketh away the sins of the world.” He was not that Lights &c The Jews and the Scribes thought, because of the preaching and heavenly life of John in the wilderness, that he was himself the Light, ue., Christ John the Evangelist by these words destroys such an idea. He was not that Light. That is, he was not the Saviour of the world, but only His witness, who received all his own light of knowledge and prophecy and grace from Christ Wherefore in v. 35, he is called “ a burning and a shining lamp.” u But,” says Origen. “he did not bum by his own fire, nor shine by his own light.” That was the true Light, &c Not John, but Christ Himself. You will ask, Why is Christ called the true Light f or, as the Greek forcibly expresses it, rb <f>us rb the Light the truet I answer, first, because the Word is the original, uncreated, and essential Light : but John the Baptist and the rest of the saints are light only by participation and communication from the Word. Wherefore, in comparison with Christ they do not deserve the name of light, for- asmuch as they are infinitely surpassed by His brightness. Christ therefore alone is Light, and alone deserves the name of light. In the same way the name of God is Jehovah, or He who is, because He is the true, essential, eternal, and infinite Being, but all other things derive from Him a spark of being. Wherefore, in comparison with God they have but an imperfect and mutilated existence, so as rather to seem to exist, than actually to be. For they are as it were the shadow of that infinite Being, which fills immensity, that is, God, who truly is the only Being, or He who is. 2. Christ is the true Light of the world, because His faith and THE TRUE LIGHT. 33 doctrine are opposed to the errors and false doctrines of Gentile philosophers, heretics, and atheists. For the true Light is that which is pure, sincere, genuine, which has nothing feigned, nor obscure, nor imperfect 3. Because Christ illuminates us far more truly, and perfectly than any corporeal light does, therefore spiritual light alone deserves the name of light, and corporeal light is only, as it were, a shadow of it In a similar way, and with a like meaning, Christ says (xv. 1), I am the true Vine : and in vi. 55, He calls Himself the true Bread. In like manner that which is perfect, and of surpassing excellency, is often called true. 4. Christ is the true Light because He most fully and most widely diffuses His light in every directioa Therefore everywhere is He the true Light For, as S. John adds by way of explana- tion, He lighteneth every man that cometh into this world.” For all the saints and the faithful, how great soever, and how many soever they are, which have been, and are, and shall be, from the beginning of the world, have derived all their light of faith and grace from Christ. But John the Baptist was a light only to Judea, a little corner of the world, and that only in the days of Herod. In like manner it has been with the rest of the saints. Lastly, John and the rest were only able to teach their hearers exteriorly, and with the outward voice, but they could not directly, nor of themselves, illuminate the soul. But Christ does both. The voice only strikes upon the outward ears, but Christ, by His grace, both strikes upon, and illuminates the souL This is why Christ is continually called by John, the Truth . And Christ says in the 14th chapter : “ / am the Way , the Truth , and the Life.” For in Christ there is all truth, and that fourfold : there is the truth of being, or existence, the truth of the soul, the truth of word, and the truth of deed. Truth lies hid, as the true Deity lay hid, in the humanity of Christ Yet cannot it lie hid for ever. As Cicero says {pro Calio ), “O mighty power of truth, which by itself easily defends itself against the wit of men, against craft and cunning, and against VOL. iv. c 34 S. JOHN, c. I. every ensnaring device.” Wherefore, the truth may be oppressed, but can never be extinguished, just as the sun may be obscured by the clouds, but by-and-by it disperses the clouds by the force of its rays, and shines out brightly. Such is truth, and such too is Christ Lighteneth every man : that is, as far as Christ is concerned. Wherefore, let those who are not enlightened, ascribe the fault to themselves, because they will not receive the light of faith and grace which Christ offers them. Thus does the sun give light so far as he is concerned to all that are in the house. But if any one shut the window, and prevent the sun from shining through it, this will be his own fault, not the fault of the sun. S. John here alludes to the sun, which gives light to the whole world. So S. Chrysostom, Cyril, Euthymius. This may be gathered from what preceded, the light shineth in darkness , &c This is said of the supernatural light of grace, though S. Cyril explains it of the natural light of reason. For God has given to every man the light of reason, that by it he may know what is good, what is evil, what to embrace, and what to shun. That cometh into this world, i.e., bom in this world. This is a Hebraism. The Greek iffifiptm, coming, may be taken to be in grammatical agreement with light , so that the meaning would be, the light coming into this world, that is, Christ bom in this world, enlightens, so far as He is concerned, every man. So S. Augustine (lib. i. de pec. mer. c. 25). So Christ says (xii. 46), I am come a Light into the world. But almost all the Greek and Latin inter- preters take coming to be in the accusative, as agreeing with man.

He was in the world, &c. The Word, or Son of God, was in the world. For He as God was in the world by His essence and presence, and power, from the beginning, preserving and governing it by His providence. So S. Paul says (Acts xviL 27). So SS. Chrysostom, Austin, and all the other Greek and Latin Fathers. Otherwise Maldonatus, who refers the passage to the Incarnation. But the Evangelist is about to treat of the Incarnation in the verses following. THE WORLD KNEW NOT THE WORD . 35 And the world was made by Him. And is here put for assuredly , or, more emphatically, for because. The meaning is — Therefore was the Word in the world, because the world was created, and is still preserved, and exists by Him. For the Word is the foundation, yea, as it were, the very soul of the world, even as Plato, though a heathen, thought Wisely Philo saith, “ It is the property of the Creator to bless, of the creature to give thanks.” And the world knew Him not. John marks the ingratitude of the world, because it knew not its Maker, whom it always had present, even the Word, or Son of God. Moreover, there is a play upon the word world. For (i.) by world is properly understood the universe, and ail the things that are therein, all which were made by the Word. But when it is added, and the world kneiv Him not ', by the world is understood inhabitants of the world , that is to say, men given up to the world, who knew not the Author of the world. So SS. Augustine and Chrysostom. Observe here, that by the works of Nature, it may be naturally known that God is One in Essence, but not Three in Person, and consequently the Word cannot in this way be known as the Word. John therefore here blames worldly men, not because they did not recognise the Word qua Word, but because they did not recognise Him as God, the Creator of the world, by means of His workmanship. And this affords a reply to Maldonatus, who argues that John is speaking in these words of the Incarnation of the Word. But we answer, that they did not know the Word as the Word, or the Person of the Son. Indeed, many have not from the works of God in the world even recognised God as its Creator. I allow that some men, both patriarchs and prophets, knew the Word, or Son of God, and prophesied concerning Him. But they knew this by a special revelation of God, not by His works in the world. John therefore is here deploring the blindness and ignorance of human infirmity, since the Fall, because with faith it lost the knowledge of its Creator and Saviour, that is, the Word. He came unto His own , &c. By His own Augustine, Cyril, Chry- sostom, &c, understand the Jews, for they were the peculiar people 36 S. JOHN, C. I. of God. But by His <nvn you may better understand the world, and all the inhabiters thereof. For S. John says the same thing, and after his manner repeats and enforces it, as I have already said : thus, “ He was in the worlds and the world 7vas made by Him , and the world knew Him not. 1 * Hear S. Cyril at the Council of Ephesus, “ The Only Begotten came unto His own, especially the Israelites, when He became man incarnate.” And His own — not all. but many, for some did receive Jesus as the Christ, such as the twelve apostles, and the seventy-two dis- ciples. But these were few compared with the rest of the Jews who did not receive Him.

But as many as received Him , to them gave He power to become the sons of God \ even to those who believe in His name: i.e., on Himself, for the name signifies the Person of Christ. The pronoun who must be referred, not to sons of God, but to as many . This is plain from the Greek ©7, which is masculine, and must refer to ©*•#, as many , or whosoever , not to rtxta ( children , , or sons), which is neuter. The meaning is, “to as many as have received Christ, that is, to all who believe in His name, He has given power to become sons of God. 11 And so S. John explains himself (i Ep. v. i), “ Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ, is bom of God.” Power, Greek, i goutf/cu, i.e., dignity, authority, right, that indeed by this very thing, that they receive Christ by faith and by the sac- rament of faith, i.e., baptism, or certainly by faith formed by love, which includes the wish for, or desire of baptism, they become at the same time justified, and they are made and are (for the Greek ytridat means both), the adopted sons of God by participation and grace, even as Christ is the natural Son of God by His own Divine Hypostasis. Wherefore Clement of Alexandria (Adhort. ad Gent.) says, that Christ by His Incarnation changed earth into heaven, and of men made angels, yea gods, and therefore that He is the beautiful charioteer who drives to heaven, to a blessed immortality, the chariot, whose two horses are the Jews and the Gentiles. Therefore the word t%ouoia, power } signifies both the dignity of the CO-OPERATION OF MAN S WILL. 3 7 Divine adoption, and the liberty of our will freely to embrace it For He does not say, He made them to be sons of God \ but He gave them power, le. 9 free will to become sons of God, if, that is, they will freely to believe in, and obey Him. Calvin and Beza deny this, but Augustine asserts it (de Spirit et Lit c. 31). “For,” he says, “we call this power, where the faculty of performing is added to the will Wherefore every one is said to have in his power that which if he wills to do, he does, which if he wills not to do, he does not” S. Chrysostom, Theophylact, Euthymius, Bede, and others, assert the same thing continually. Hear S. Chrysostom, “ Like as if fire shall touch metalliferous earth, it immediately turns it into gold, so much more does baptism make those whom it washes to be gold instead of clay. For the Holy Ghost, as it were fire, in that same hour that He enters our hearts, takes away our likeness to earth, and makes us to have a heavenly likeness new and bright, and shining as in a furnace. And why did He not say, He made us to become the sons of God l It was that he might show that we have need of great diligence, that we may keep pure and un defiled the mark of adoption stamped upon us by baptism. Moreover because no one is able to take away this power from us unless we shall first take it away from ourselves.” You will say, faith equally with adoption is the gift of God, there- fore it cannot be at the disposal of man’s wilL I reply by denying the inference. For God does not bestow faith, hope, and charity and other virtues and gifts of His upon men against their will, or as unreasoning beings, but as reasonable creatures, co-operating freely with Him. For this is what S. John here says, God has given power to become sons of God to those who freely receive Christ by faith and obedience, excluding those who are unwilling to receive Him. “Power is given that they who believe in Him may become sons of God, since this very thing is given that they may believe in Him,” says S. Augustine (lib. 1. contr. 2. epist Pelag. c. 3). And this is given by God, when He so by His grace illuminates and influences the soul of man as freely herself to consent and believe. To become the sons of God \ How this is wrought, and how great is the dignity of this adoption, I have shown on Hosea L 10, upon 38 S. JOHN, c. I. the words, “ It shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God.” Wherefore Cyril saith, ‘‘Let us rise to our supernatural dignity through Christ, — not indeed that we should be sons of God by nature as He is, but that, through likeness to Him, we may be sons of God by grace.”

Which were barn , not of bloods (Greek) nor of the will (Arabic, appetite) of the flesh , &c. S. John here gives an antithesis between human generation and Divine, and demonstrates the supe- riority of the latter. For (1.) he says that the former is of bloods , which is a Hebraism for bloody meaning the blood of man, produced by food. 2. He asserts that it is of the will \ i.e. f the concupiscence of the flesh . This is what is elsewhere called flesh and bloody in which the will, or concupiscence of man, consists. He explains the will of the flesh to be the will of man. That is, the will, or appetite, or concupiscence of the flesh is the will, or concupiscence, for the generative act, which the carnal appetite desires. On the other hand, the Divine generation of the sons of God is not of blood, nor of the will and concupiscence of the flesh, but is of Gody that is, of the will, predestination, and love of God. Again, of God means of the Spirit and grace of God, by which the mind of man, beforetime carnal, is regenerated and justified, and so a man becomes spiritual, just, and holy, a friend, yea, a son of God. 3. Of Gody because in this regeneration of man, God not only gives him His grace and love and all other virtues, but also Him- selfj that a man may be truly justified, and may have the Spirit really dwelling in his soul, yea, may have the whole Trinity, and so may become Divine, a son and heir of God, and a joint-heir with Christ

And the Word was made fleshy &c. Thus it is literally translated in the Syriac, Persian, Egyptian, and Ethiopic versions. But the Arabic has, The Word was made a body \ For flesh here means the human body , and so man. From this the heresiarch Apol- linaris denied that the Word assumed a human soul and mind. He asserted that in their place were the mind and Divinity of the Divine Word. So says S. Augustine (Hares. 55). For the faith teaches UNION OF THE TWO NATURES. 39 that the Word assumed as well true human flesh as a true reasonable soul, and therefore had two perfect and uncommingled natures, the Divine and the human, and consequently possessed two wills, and a twofold mind, the Divine and the human. So that these two natures with their attributes subsist in the one only Person of the Word, in which Person } but not in His nature, this union has taken place, as the Council of Ephesus defines against Nestorius, and the Council of Chalcedon against the Eutychians. From this unity of Person there follows, as theologians teach, a participation of the attributes (communieatio idtomatum) of both natures, so that in Christ whatsoever is an attribute of man as man, the same may be predicated of His Divinity, and conversely. For example, we truly say, this Man, namely, Jesus, is God, is Almighty, is the Creator, is from eternity. And conversely we say that God, or the Son of God, truly suffered, was crucified, and died. For indeed there is one and the same Divine Person in Christ, God and man, who underwent all these things, although in accordance with two different natures. For actions and passions inhere in concrete individuals, or persons, in whatsoever nature they subsist Hear S. Austin (in Dial. 65. quast. ad Oros. qu. 4). “ The Word was made flesh, not being changed by the flesh ; so that He did not cease to be what He was, but began to be what He had not been. For He assumed flesh, He did not convert Himself into flesh. By that flesh , as a part for the whole, we understand the whole man, that is, flesh and reasonable soul And as the first man had died both in the flesh and in the soul, so also it behoved that he should be quickened both in flesh and in soul, through the Mediator between God and man, the Man Christ Jesus.” It follows (2.) that the Word was made flesh , not in the way in which water became wine when it was changed into wine, nor as food becomes our flesh, when it is changed into it, nor yet again as gold becomes a statue, by the addition to the material of gold of the accidental form of a statue, but after a similar manner to that in which soul and flesh being united become one man. So S. Athanasius in the Creed : “ One, not by confusion of substance, but 40 S. JOHN, C. I. by unity of Person. For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man, so God and man is one Christ” But man is one esseniialiter ; Christ is one personaliter . Or again, it is after the manner in which a man is clothed by the putting on of a garment. So a new substance was added to the Word, as it were a garment, but substantially, not accidentally : for the Son of God clothed Himself with the substance of flesh, and of our nature, and joined, and most closely united it to Himself substantially in the same Hypostasis of the Word. Flesh here, as often in Scripture, signifies by synecdoche the whole man. The Word was made flesh , i.e., the Son of God became man. In a similar manner, S. John might have said, The Word of God became a soul. But he preferred to say flesh rather than soul, that he might show how great was the kindness of God, that for love of us He emptied Himself. For God was made flesh , that we instead of flesh that was most corrupt through concupiscence and sin might become as it were Divine, and sons of God, and akin to God Him- self “The Word,” says S. Cyril (epist. 8. ad Nestor.), “uniting to Himself, according to His substance, flesh animated by a reasonable soul, was ineffably made man.” We will now comment upon each word of this passage singly. And: this word conjoins the sentence with those preceding it. It has partly an historical, partly a causative force. Historically — that Eternal Word, whose generation I have declared, and of whom I have said, that He was with God, and was God, was in the time divinely appointed made flesh t for He assumed our flesh of the Blessed Virgin, and when He was born of her was called Jesus. So that and in this place may stand for therefore. As thus, 1'herefore was the Word made flesh, that He might make us to be the sons of God. Therefore S. Augustine says, “Let us not be amazed, or astounded at such grace, and let it not seem a thing incredible to us, that men should be born of God, when He asks you to consider that God was bom of men.” The Word : the Greek has the article, and is emphatic — that Divine and Eternal Word, of whom we have been thus far speak- * AGAINST THE EUTYCHIANS. 41 ing. Wherefore S. Athanasius ( Epist . ad Epictetum) cites Gal. iiL as a parallel passage, and says, “ For as Christ is called a curse, not because He Himself was made a curse, but because for us He bore the curse, so is He said to be made flesh, not because He Himself was changed into flesh, but because He assumed flesh for us.” The Word was made flesh is explained by the same parallel of a curse by S. Gregory Nazianzen (Epist ad Cledon .), S. Flavian, Patriarch of Antioch, S. Ignatius, S. Irenaeus, S. Hippolytus, S. Basil, S. Chrysostom, S. Gregory Nyssen, Amphilochius, and others, who are cited by Theodoret in a Dialogue entitled Immuta- bilis . In this he confutes those Eutychians who said that the Word was changed by His Incarnation, and transformed into flesh. He confutes others who said that flesh was changed into the Word, and that the Word absorbed the flesh in the same way that the sea swallows up a stream which flows into it. These he confutes in his Dialogue Inconfusus. He confutes a third section of the Eutychians, who said that the Godhead in Christ suffered and was crucified, in a third Dialogue called Impassibilis. Lastly, listen to S. Cyril in the Council of Ephesus, “By the Word flesh the whole man must be understood, as in the place where it is said, 4 All flesh shall see the salvation of God,’ and * I com- muned not with flesh and blood’ (Gal. L) Soul is understood in similar way, as 4 Seventy-five souls of our fathers went down into Egypt ’ (Acts vil) As often therefore a3 we hear that the Word was made fleshy we understand that He became a man of flesh and blood.” S. Cyril elsewhere repeats this, and adds, “ Not according to trans- ference, or conversion, or commutation, as though there were a transformation into the nature of flesh, nor as having commingling, nor consubstantiation, &c.” Fleshy i.e., man. To the Word he opposes fleshy as it were the lowest to the highest, what is wretched to what is blessed, what is most vile, weak, and impure, to what is most glorious. For what is more vile, weak, and filthy than human flesh ? And yet the Word of God deigned to stoop to such flesh as this, from love of us. This 42 S. JOHN, C. I. is that p/Xa^wT/a and ecstasy of love which the Apostle celebrates (Titus iii. 4). Hear S. Bernard (Serrn. 3. de Naiiv.) : “ Forasmuch as He was in the beginning with God, He dwelt in the unapproach- able light, and none could comprehend Him. For ‘ who hath found out the mind of the Lord, or who hath been His counsellor ?* ‘The carnal mind perceiveth not the things of the Spirit of God,’ but now even the carnal man may receive them, because the Word has been made flesh . O man who art in the flesh, to thee is manifested that wisdom which afore was hid. Behold, now is it drawn forth from its hiding-place, and introduces itself into the very senses of thy flesh. After a fleshly manner, that I may so say, is it preached unto thee. Flee from voluptuousness, for death has been placed beside the gate of pleasure.” The Word then was made fleshy i.e., man, as subsisting (existentem), not as a person ( subsistentem ). For He assumed the very nature of man, but not the person of a man. Nor indeed was the Person of the Word made the person of a man, for this were impossible. The Word assumed the essence and substance of man, not human per- sonality. A human nature was assumed by Him in that very moment of time in which it was formed by the Holy Ghost, who came first that it, namely, the humanity, should not subsist as a person ; and He conjoined the same human nature to Himself in the unity of His Divine Person, and made it to subsist in the same. Wherefore the Humanity of Christ subsists not in itself, but in the Person of the Word. Was made: not that the Word was changed into flesh, or flesh into the Word, for, as S. Chrysostom says, “ far from that immortal nature is transmutation.” For how could flesh become God, that is, how could the creature become the Creator? Neither does it mean that the Word was made fleshy that is, became a man, in such a sense that He assumed not only human nature, but a human person, as Nestorius thought. “It is not as if,” says Theophylact, “ the Word had found a man endued with virtues, and united him to Him- self,” as the Holy Ghost united Himself to the prophets, the angel Raphael to Tobias. But it is that He united the nature of man to THE INCARNATION. 43 His own Hypostasis, and caused that the man Jesus should subsist in the same Hypostasis as God the Word, God the Son. Moreover, the Word was made flesh, not in imagination, nor appearance, nor fancy, as the Manichseans maintained, but in the very truth and reality of actual fact The Word was made man, I say, not by Him- self alone, but by the whole Trinity. For all the Holy Trinity was the efficient cause of the Incarnation of the Word, but still in such a manner that the Hypostatic Union was with the sole Person of the Word, not with that of the Father, or the Holy Ghost : and the Son alone became man. “ For the Trinity itself made the Word only to be flesh,” says S. Fulgentius (lib. de fide ad Petr.) The Word therefore clothed with flesh was as the sun vested with a cloud, or as fire burning iron, or as a burning coal, as S. Cyril says. Wherefore its type and symbol is a carbuncle, as I have said on Apoc. xxi. 29. Again, it was like unto a pearl in a shell, or as lightning in a cloud, or as gold in a furnace, or an angel in a body. Moreover S. Augustine says (lib. 15. de Trin . c. 11), “As our speech becomes a voice, and yet is not changed into a voice, so the Word of God being made flesh was not changed into flesh.” I have said more on the subject of the Incarnation in the first