12.
For since it was impossible that perishable bodies, or the rational spirits which he had created, should approach the Supreme God, by reason of their immeasurable distance from his perfections, for he is unbegotten, above and beyond all creation, ineffable, inaccessible, unapproachable, dwelling, as his holy word assures us, 1 in the light which none can enter; but they were created from nothing, and are infinitely far removed from his unbegotten Essence; well has the all-gracious and Almighty God interposed as it were an intermediate Power 2 between himself and them, even the Divine omnipotence of his only-begotten Word. And this Power, which is in perfect nearness and intimacy of union, with the Father which abides in him, and shares his secret counsels, has yet condescended, in fullness of grace, as it were to conform itself to those who are so far removed from the supreme majesty of God. How else, consistently with his own holiness could he who is far above and beyond all things unite himself to corruptible and corporeal matter? Accordingly the Divine Word, thus connecting himself with this universe, and receiving into his hands the reins, as it were, of the world, turns and directs it as a skillful charioteer according to his own will and pleasure.
-
1 Tim. vi. 16. ↩
-
[This whole passage (which is defended by Valesius) appears, if rigidly interpreted, to lie under suspicion of a tinge of Arianism.--Bag.] It savors directly of Philo. His doctrine was of an ineffable God, above and separate from matter, and defiled by any contact with it. To bring him into connection with created things he introduced intermediate beings, or "powers," the universal power including all the rest being the Logos. Compare brief account in Zeller's Outlines of Greek Philosophy, p. 320-325; Siegfried, Philo von Alexandria (Jena, 1875), especially p. 199 sq., 219 sq., and p. 362-364, where he treats very inadequately of Eusebius' dependence on Philo; also works of Philo and Eusebius' Praep. and Demonst. Ev. There is a chance of viewing the Word thus as created, but if this is guarded against (as it is by him in the use of "begotten"), there is nothing intrinsically heterodox in making the Word the Creator of the world and only Revealer of the Father. The direct Philonian influence is seen in the phraseology of the following sentences. ↩
