32.
Whence it was that, when the flesh suffered, the Word was not external to it; and therefore is the passion said to be His: and when He did divinely His Father’s works, the flesh was not external to Him, but in the body itself did the Lord do them. Hence, when made man, He said 1, ‘If I do not the works of the Father, believe Me not; but if I do, though ye believe not Me, believe the works, that ye may know that the Father is in Me and I in Him.’ And thus when there was need to raise Peter’s wife’s mother, who was sick of a fever, He stretched forth His hand humanly, but He stopped the illness divinely. And in the case of the man blind from the birth, human was the spittle which He gave forth from the flesh, but divinely did He open the eyes through the clay. And in the case of Lazarus, He gave forth a human voice as man; but divinely, as God, did He raise Lazarus from the dead 2. These things were so done, were so manifested, because He had a body, not in appearance, but in truth 3; and it became the Lord, in putting on human flesh, to put it on whole with the affections proper to it; that, as we say that the body was His own, so also we may say that the affections of the body were proper to Him alone, though they did not touch Him according to His Godhead. If then the body had been another’s, to him too had been the affections attributed; but if the flesh is the Word’s (for ‘the Word became flesh’), of necessity then the affections also of the flesh are ascribed to Him, whose the flesh is. And to whom the affections are ascribed, such namely as to be condemned, to be scourged, to thirst, and the cross, and death, and the other infirmities of the body, of Him too is the triumph and the grace. For this cause then, consistently and fittingly such affections are ascribed not to another 4, but to the Lord; that the grace also may be from Him 5, and that we may become, not worshippers of any other, but truly devout towards God, because we invoke no originate thing, no ordinary 6 man, but the natural and true Son from God, who has become man, yet is not the less Lord and God and Saviour.
John x. 37, 38 . vid.Incarn.18. Cf. Leo,Serm.54, 2. ‘Suscepit nos in suam proprietatem illa natura, quæ nec nostris sua, nec suis nostra consumeret, &c.’Serm.72, p. 286, vid. alsoEp.165, 6.Serm.30, 5. CyrilCat.iv. 9. Amphiloch. ap. Theod.Eran.i. p. 66. also pp. 30, 87, 8. ed. 1614. ↩
Cf. Leo’s Tome (Ep.28.) 4. ‘When He touched the leper, it was the man that was seen; but something beyond man, when He cleansed him, &c.’ Ambros.Epist.i. 46, n. 7. Hil.Trin.x. 23 fin. vid.infr.56 note, and S. Leo’s extracts in hisEp.165. Chrysol.Serm.34 and 35. Paul.ap. Conc. Eph.(p. 1620. Labbe.) These are instances of what is theologically called the θεανδρικὴ ἐνέργεια [a condemned formula], i.e. the union of the energies of both Natures in one act. ↩
μὴ φαντασί& 139· ἀλλ᾽ ἀληθῶς . vid.Incarn.18, d.ad Epict.7, c. The passage is quoted by S. Cyril.Apol. adv. Orientp. 194. ↩
οὐκ ἄλλου, ἀλλὰ τοῦ κυρίου· and so οὐκ ἑτέρου τινός ,Incarn.18; alsoOrat.i. 45.supr.p. 244. andOrat.iv. 35. CyrilThes.p. 197. and Anathem. 11. who defends the phrase against the Orientals. ↩
Cf. Procl.ad Armen.p. 615, ed. 1630. ↩
κοινόν opposed to ἴδιον . vid.infr.§51, CyrilEpp.p. 23, e. communem, Ambros.de Fid.i. 94. ↩
