|
But perhaps you will
say: If I admit that the same Person was in the end of time born of a
Virgin, who was begotten before all things of God the Father, I shall imply
that before the beginning of the world God was in the flesh, as I say that
He was afterwards man, who was always God: and so I shall say that that man
who was afterwards born, had always existed. I do not want you to be
confused by this blind ignorance, and these obscure misconceptions, so as
to fancy that I am maintaining that the manhood which was born of Mary
had existed before the beginning of things, or asserting that God was
always m a bodily form before the commencement of the world. I do not say,
I repeat it, I do not say that the manhood was in God before it was born:
but that God was afterwards born in the manhood. For that flesh which was
born of the flesh of the Virgin had not always existed: but God who always
was, came in the flesh of man of the flesh of the Virgin. For "the Word was
made flesh," and did not manifest flesh together with Himself: but in the
glory of Divinity joined Himself to human flesh. For tell me when or where
the Word was made flesh, or where He emptied Himself by taking the form of
a servant: or where He became poor, though He was rich? Where but in the
holy womb of the Virgin, where at His Incarnation, the Word of God is said
to have been made flesh, at His birth He truly took the form of a servant;
and when He is in human nature nailed to the Cross, He became poor, and was
made poor in His sufferings in the flesh, though He was rich in His Divine
glory? Otherwise if, as you say, at some later period the Deity entered
into Him as into one of the Prophets and saints, then "the Word was made
flesh" in those men also in whom He vouch-soled to dwell: then in each one
of them He emptied Himself and took upon Him the form of a servant. And
thus there is nothing new or unique in Christ. Neither His conception, nor
His birth nor His death had anything special or miraculous about it.
|
|