|
3. But if nothing is spoken of the Father as such, except that
which is spoken of Him in relation to the Son, that is, that He is
His father, or begetter, or beginning; and if also the begetter is
by consequence a beginning to that which he begets of himself; but
whatever else is spoken of Him is so spoken as with the Son, or
rather in the Son; whether that He is great with that greatness which
He begat, or just with that justice which He begat, or good with
that goodness which He begat, or powerful with that force or power
which He begat, or wise with that wisdom which He begat: yet the
Father is not said to be greatness itself, but the begetter of
greatness; but the Son, as He is called the Son as such, is not so
called with the Father but in relation to the Father, so is not great
in and by himself, but with the Father, of whom He is the
greatness; and so also is called wise with the Father, of whom He
Himself is the wisdom; just as the Father is called wise with the
Son, because He is wise with that wisdom which He begat; therefore
the one is not called without the other, whatever they are called in
respect to themselves; that is, whatever they are called that
manifests their essential nature, both are so called together; if
these things are so, then the Father is not God without the Son,
nor the Son God without the Father, but both together are God.
And that which is said, "In the beginning was the Word," means
that the Word was in the Father, Or if "In the beginning" is
intended to mean, Before all things; then in that which follows,
"And the Word was with God," the Son alone is understood to be
the Word, not the Father and Son together, as though both were one
Word (for He is the Word in the same way as He is the Image, but
the Father and Son are not both together the Image, but the Son
alone is the Image of the Father: just as He is also the Son of the
Father, for both together are not the Son). But in that which is
added, "And the Word was with God," there is much reason to
understand thus: "The Word," which is the Son alone, "was with
God," which is not the Father alone, but God the Father and the
Son together. But what wonder is there, if this can be said in the
case of some twofold things widely different from each other? For what
are so different as soul and body? Yet we can say the soul was with a
man, that is, in a man; although the soul is not the body, and man
is both soul and body together. So that what follows in the
Scripture, "And the Word was God," may be understood thus: The
Word, which is not the Father, was God together with the Father.
Are we then to say thus, that the Father is the begetter of His own
greatness, that is, the begetter of His own power, or the begetter
of His own wisdom; and that the Son is greatness, and power, and
wisdom; but that the great, omnipotent, and wise God, is both
together? How then God of God, Light of Light? For not both
together are God of God, but only the Son is of God, that is to
say, of the Father; nor are both together Light of Light, but the
Son only is of Light, that is, of the Father. Unless, perhaps,
it was in order to intimate and inculcate briefly that the Son is
co-eternal with the Father, that it is said, God of God, and
Light of Light, or anything else of the like kind: as if to say,
This which is not the Son without the Father, of this which is not
the Father without the Son; that is, this Light which is not Light
without the Father, of that Light, viz. the Father, which is not
Light without the Son; so that, when it is said, God which is not
the Son without the Father, and of God which is not the Father
without the Son, it may be perfectly understood that the Begetter did
not precede that which He begot. And if this be so, then this alone
cannot be said of them, namely, this or that of this or that, which
they are not both together. Just as the Word cannot be said to be of
the Word, because both are not the Word together, but only the
Son; nor image of image, since they are not both together the image;
nor Son of Son, since both together are not the Son, according to
that which is said, "I and my Father are one." For "we are one"
means, what He is, that am I also; according to essence, not
according to relation.
|
|