11.
This their notion then being evidently unseemly and irrational as well as the rest, the likeness and the oneness must be referred to the very Essence of the Son; for unless it be so taken, He will not be shown to have anything beyond things originate, as has been said, nor will He be like the Father, but He will be like the Father’s doctrines; and He differs from the Father, in that the Father is Father 1, but the P. 400 doctrines and teaching are the Father’s. If then in respect to the doctrines and the teaching the Son is like the Father, then the Father according to them will be Father in name only, and the Son will not be an exact Image, or rather will be seen to have no propriety at all or likeness of the Father; for what likeness or propriety has he who is so utterly different from the Father? for Paul taught like the Saviour, yet was not like ‘Him in essence 2.’ Having then such notions, they speak falsely; whereas the Son and the Father are one in such wise as has been said, and in such wise is the Son like the Father Himself and from Him, as we may see and understand son to be towards father, and as we may see the radiance towards the sun. Such then being the Son, therefore when the Son works, the Father is the Worker 3, and the Son coming to the Saints, the Father is He who cometh in the Son 4, as He promised when He said, ‘I and My Father will come, and will make Our abode with him 5;’ for in the Image is contemplated the Father, and in the Radiance is the Light. Therefore also, as we said just now, when the Father gives grace and peace, the Son also gives it, as Paul signifies in every Epistle, writing, ‘Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.’ For one and the same grace is from the Father in the Son, as the light of the sun and of the radiance is one, and as the sun’s illumination is effected through the radiance; and so too when he prays for the Thessalonians, in saying, ‘Now God Himself even our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ, may He direct our way unto you 6,’ he has guarded the unity of the Father and of the Son. For he has not said, ‘May they direct,’ as if a double grace were given from two Sources, This and That, but ‘May He direct,’ to shew that the Father gives it through the Son;—at which these irreligious ones will not blush, though they well might.
Cf.Serap.i. 16.de Syn.51. andinfr.§19, note. And so S. Cyril, cf.Or.i. 21–24,de Decr.11, n. 6,Thesaur.p. 133, Naz.Orat.29, 5. vid. also 23, 6 fin. 25, 16. vid. also the whole of Basil,adv. Eun.ii. 23. ‘One must not say,’ he observes, ‘that these names properly and primarily, κυρίως καὶ πρώτως belong to men, and are given by us but by a figure καταχρηστικῶς (ii. 39, n. 7) to God. For our Lord Jesus Christ, referring us back to the Origin of all and True Cause of beings says, “Call no one your father upon earth, for One is your Father, which is in heaven.”’ He adds, that if He is properly and not metaphorically even our Father (de Decr.31, n. 5), much more is He the πατὴρ τοῦ κατὰ φύσιν υἱοῦ . Vid. also Euseb.contr. Marc.p. 22, c.Eccl. Theol.i. 12. fin. ii. 6. Marcellus, on the other hand, said that our Lord was κυρίως λόγος , not κυρίως υἱ& 231·ς . ibid. ii. 10 fin. vid.supr.ii. 19, note 3. ↩
κατ᾽ οὐσίαν ὅμοιος ,Or.i. 21, n. 8. ↩
Supr.§6. ↩
And so ἐργαζομένου τοῦ πατρὸς, ἐργάζεσθαι καὶ τὸν υἱ& 231·ν .In illud Omn.1, d. Cum luce nobis prodeat, In Patre totus Filius, et totus in Verbo Pater.Hymn. Brev. in fer.2. Ath. argues from this oneness of operation the oneness of substance. And thus S. Chrysostom on the text under review argues that if the Father and Son are one κατὰ τὴν δύναμιν , they are one also in οὐσία .in Joan. Hom.61, 2, d. Tertullianin Prax.22. and S. Epiphanius,Hær. 57. p. 488. seem to say the same on the same text. vid. Lampein loc.And so S. Athan. τριὰς ἀδιαίρετος τῇ φύσει, καὶ μία ταύτης ἡ ἐνέργεια .Serap.i. 28, f. ἓν θέλημα πατρὸς καὶ υἱοῦ καὶ βούλημα, ἐπεὶ καὶ ἡ φύσις μία .In illud Omn.5. Various passages of the Fathers to the same effect (e.g. of S. Ambrose, si unius voluntatis et operationis, unius est essentiæ,de Sp.ii. 12. fin. and of S. Basil, ὦν μία ἐνέργεια, τούτων καὶ οὐσία μία , of Greg. Nyss. and Cyril. Alex.) are brought together in the Lateran Council. Concil.Hard.t. 3, p. 859, &c. The subject is treated at length by PetaviusTrin.iv. 15. ↩
John xiv. 23 . ↩
1 Thess. iii. 11 . ↩
