|
CONFESS then the same truth in respect of the actual nativity of the
Lord, as in respect of everything else. Believe that God was born when He
would, for you do not deny that He could do what He would; unless possibly
you think that that power which belonged to Him for all other things was
deficient as regards Himself, and that His Omnipotence though proceeding
from Him and penetrating all things, was insufficient to bring about His
own nativity. In the case of the Lord's nativity you bring this as an
objection against me: No one gives birth to one who is anterior in time:
and in regard of the birth which Almighty God underwent you say that the
one who is born ought to be of one substance with the one who bears; as if
you had to do with human laws as in the case of any ordinary man, to whom
you might bring the impossibility as an objection, as you include him in
the weakness of earthly things. You say that for all men there are common
conditions of birth, and but one law of generation; and that a thing could
not possibly happen to one man only out of the whole of humanity, which God
has forbidden to happen to all. You do not understand of whom you are
speaking; nor do you see of whom you are talking; for He is the Author of
all conditions, and the very Law of all natures, through whom exists
whatever man can do, and whatever man cannot do: for He certainly has laid
down the limits of both; viz., how far his powers should extend, and the
bounds beyond which his weakness should not advance. How wildly then do you
bring human impossibilities as an objection in the case of Him, who
possesses all powers and possibilities. If you estimate the Person of the
Lord by earthly weaknesses, and measure God's Omnipotence by human rules,
you will most certainly fail to find anything which seems appropriate to
God as concerns the sufferings of His Body. For if it can seem to you
unreasonable that Mary could give birth to God who was anterior to her, how
will it seem reasonable that God was crucified by men? And yet the same God
who was crucified Himself predicted: "Shall a man afflict God, for you
afflict Me?" If then we cannot think that the Lord was born of a Virgin
because He who was born was anterior to her who bore Him, how can we
believe that God had blood? And yet it was said to the Ephesian elders:
"Feed the Church of God which He has purchased with His own Blood."
Finally how can we think that the Author of life was Himself deprived of
life: And yet Peter says: "Ye have killed the Author of life." No one
who is set on earth can be in heaven: and how does the Lord Himself say:
"The Son of man who is in heaven"? If then you think that God was not
born of a Virgin because the one who is born must be of one substance with
the one who bears, how will you believe that different things can be
produced from different natures?
Thus according to you the wind did not suddenly bring the quails, nor did
the manna fall, nor was water turned into wine nor were many thousands of
men fed with a few loaves, nor did the blind man receive his sight after
the clay had been put on him. But if all these things seem incredible and
contrary to nature, unless we believe that they were wrought by God, why
should you deny in the matter of His nativity, what you admit in the matter
of His works? Or was He unable to contribute to His own nativity and advent
what He did not refuse for the succour and profit of men?
|
|