Chapter Two

About Christ

First of all, we need to know that in Christ, the nature of His Godhead is a different matter, because He is the only-begotten Son of God; and another thing is human nature, which He has recently assumed according to the economy. In view of this, we must first consider what the only-begotten Son of God is. It is known that He is called by many and different names, depending on the circumstances and the concepts of those who name Him. Thus He is called Wisdom, as we find it in the words of Solomon: "The Lord had me as the beginning of His way before His creatures, from time immemorial; From eternity I was anointed, from the beginning, before the existence of the earth. I was born before the depths existed, when there were no springs abounding in water, I was born before the mountains were raised, before the hills" (Proverbs 8:22-24). He is also called the firstborn, as the Apostle says: "He who was born before all creation" (Col. 1:15). And yet the firstborn is not different in nature from Wisdom, but one and the same (with Her). Finally, the Apostle Paul says: "Christ is the power of God and the wisdom of God" (1 Cor. 1:24).

But let no one think that when we call the Son the Wisdom of God, we recognize Him as something not substantial, as if we do not regard Him as any rational living being, but as some thing which can make (men) wise, and communicate to the minds of those who are made receptive to the properties and to the understanding of them. If, therefore, it is once properly accepted that the only-begotten Son of God is His Wisdom, existing substantially, then, in my opinion, our reason should no longer wander in conjectures, such as whether the very substance of the Son, has not something corporeal; for everything corporeal has either a form, or a color, or a size, but what sensible person would seek color or size in Wisdom as wisdom? God the Father could never, not for a single moment, of course, exist without giving birth to this Wisdom: this is what everyone who only knows how to piously think and think about God must think and believe. In fact, if God begat Wisdom that did not exist before, then He either could not give birth to Her before He gave birth to Her before He gave birth to Him, or He could, but did not want to give birth. But this cannot be said of God: it is clear to all that both suppositions are both absurd and impious, and in both cases it is found that God either rose from a state of incapacity to a state of ability, or, supposing His ability, He delayed and postponed the birth of Wisdom. That is why we always acknowledge God as the Father of His only-begotten Son, begotten of Him and receiving existence from Him, but without any beginning, not only such as can be divided into any temporal extensions, but also such as is usually contemplated by the mind alone in itself, and which is seen, so to speak, by pure thought and spirit. Thus, it must be believed that Wisdom is born outside of any beginning, of which it is possible to speak or think. In this very hypostasis of Wisdom was all the power and destiny of the future creation, both that which exists from the beginning of the world and that which happens afterwards; all this was predestined and arranged in Wisdom by the power of foresight. In view of these creatures, which were, as it were, predestined and predestined in Wisdom Itself, Wisdom says through Solomon about Itself, that it was created by the beginning of the ways of God, or that it also contains in Itself the principles, or forms, or forms or forms of all creation.

Thus, when it is said that Wisdom is the beginning of God's ways and that it was created, this, in our understanding, means that Wisdom predestines and contains in Itself the beginnings of all creation. In the same way, the name of Wisdom as the Word of God must be understood, namely, in the sense that Wisdom reveals to all other (beings), that is, to all creation, the knowledge of the mysteries and of all the hidden things contained within the Wisdom of God: She is called the Word because it serves as an interpreter of the mysteries of the spirit. Therefore, the saying written in the Acts of Paul seems to me to be correct: "This is the Word, a living being." As for John, he speaks even more sublimely and beautifully, when at the beginning of his Gospel he gives his own definition that the Word is God. He says: "And the Word was God, and the Word was with God" (John 1:1). But whoever ascribes the beginning to the Word of God, or the Wisdom of God, evidently extends his impiety even to the unbegotten Father Himself, for then he will deny the truth that He has always been the Father, and begat the Son, and had Wisdom in all previous times or ages, in a word, in all that may be, however it may be signified in human language.

This Son is the Truth and the Life of all that exists, and in justice. Indeed, how could all created beings live if not by virtue of Life alone? Or how they would stand in the truth if. did not come from the Truth? Or how could they be rational beings if the Word or Reason did not exist before them? Or how would they philosophize if there were no Wisdom? But since some creatures were destined to fall away from life and cause their own death, precisely by falling away from life (for death is nothing but falling away from life), and since at the same time it would certainly be inconsistent if that which God had once created for life were utterly lost, therefore such a power must have existed before death, which could destroy this future death and be a resurrection. This resurrection was realized in our Lord and Saviour – precisely the resurrection that dwelt in the Very Wisdom of God, and in the Word, and in the Life. Since, furthermore, some created beings, who did not wish to remain forever unyielding, unchangeable, and remaining with the same calm equilibrium in the same goods, were afterwards destined to be corrupted, to change, and to fall from their state, in consequence of the fact that the good is inherent in them not by nature, that is, not substantially, but as an accidental property, it is for this reason that the Word and Wisdom of God became the way. Wisdom is called the way because it leads to the Father those who come through it. Thus, what we have said about the Wisdom of God – all this can be fully applied to the designation of the Son of God as Life, Word, Truth, Resurrection, because all these names are taken from His works and powers, and in none of these names can even the most superficial thought understand anything corporeal that has size, or form, or color. The sons of men that we see, or the children of other animals, correspond to the seed of their fathers or mothers, in whose womb they are formed and nourished; from them they have everything that they bring with them when they come into this world. But to compare God the Father in the birth of His only-begotten Son and in the bestowal of His existence with any parent from among men or other creatures is both impious and unlawful. The birth of a son is something exceptional and worthy of God; for him no comparison can be found, not only in things, but also in thought and in mind, so that human thought cannot understand how the unborn God becomes the Father of the only-begotten Son. For this birth is eternal and uninterrupted, just as radiance is born of light. For the Son is not the Son by adoption from without through the Holy Spirit, but the Son by nature.

However, we must see how what has been said is confirmed by the authority of the divine Scriptures. Thus, the Apostle Paul says that the only-begotten Son is the image of the invisible God and that He is the firstborn before all creation (Col. 1:15), and in the Epistle to the Hebrews he writes that He "is the radiance of glory and the image of His hypostasis" (Heb. 1:3). Also in the Wisdom called Solomon's Wisdom we find the following image of the Wisdom of God. It "is the pair of the power of God, and the pure outpouring of the Almighty of glory; For this reason nothing is defiled and attacks Ia. For the radiance is the everlasting light, and the mirror of God's unblemished action, and the image of His goodness" (Wis. 7:25-26). Wisdom, we repeat, has its existence only in Him Who is the beginning of all things. From Him was born all wisdom, because He is the only Son by nature, and therefore is called the only-begotten.

Let us also see how we should understand that the Son is called the image of the Invisible One – this is, of course, in order to find out in what sense God is justly called the Father of His Son. And first of all, let us consider what people usually call images. Sometimes an image is called that which is usually depicted or carved on some material, i.e. on wood or stone. Sometimes the begotten is called an image in relation to the begotten, precisely when the traits of the begat are exactly similar to those of the begotten. In the first sense, in my opinion, an image can be called a person created in the image and likeness of God. This is what we will consider more thoroughly when, with God's help, we explain the passage from the Book of Genesis related to this. The second meaning of the image is applicable to the Son of God, of whom we are now speaking, in view of the fact that He is the invisible image of the invisible God, just as Seth, according to the historical narrative, is the image of Adam. In fact, it is written thus: "And Adam begat Seth, in his own image and after his likeness" (Gen. 5:3). This image contains (an indication of) the unity of the nature and essence of the Father and the Son. For if all that the Father does is done in the same way by the Son, then the image of the Father in the Son is imprinted precisely in the fact that the Son does everything in the same way as the Father from Whom He is born, as if it were a certain will of Him, proceeding from thought. And I think that the will of the Father is sufficient for the realization of that which the Father wills, for in His desire He uses, of course, not any other means, but that which is indicated by the counsel of His will. And so the hypostasis of the Son is born from him. This, of course, must be agreed first of all by those who admit that there is nothing that has not happened, that is, that is not begotten, except God the Father alone. However, we must beware lest we fall into the absurd fables of those who invent for themselves some kind of outflow, and at the same time divide the divine nature into parts and divide God the Father in Himself, whereas even to think slightly about this about an incorporeal being is not only extremely impious, but also to the last degree foolish, in any case, completely contrary to reason, to think the division of the incorporeal nature in essence. On the contrary, just as the will proceeds from the intellect, and yet does not separate any part from it, nor is it itself separated from it, so it must be thought that the Father begat the Son, this image of Himself; therefore, just as He Himself is invisible by nature, so He gave birth to an invisible image. In fact, the Son is the Word, and therefore nothing sensual should be thought of in Him. The Son is Wisdom, and in Wisdom nothing corporeal can be conceived. He is the true light, enlightening every man who comes into the world (John 1:9), but He has nothing in common with the light of this sun. Thus, our Saviour is the image of the invisible God the Father; in relation to the Father Himself, He is the truth; in relation to us, by whom He reveals the Father, He is the image through which we know the Father, Whom no one else knows but the Son, and he to whom the Son wants to reveal Him knows. He reveals the Father when He Himself is the object of knowledge, because whoever knows Him also knows the Father, as He Himself says: "He who has seen Me has seen the Father" (John 14:9).

(From Jerome's letter to Avitus: "The Son, who is the image of the invisible Father, is not truth in comparison with the Father; but to us, who cannot perceive the truth of the almighty God, He seems to be the image of the truth; for the height and majesty of the Most High is known in the Son in a certain way limited").

But since we have quoted Paul's saying that the Son is the radiance of the glory of God and the image of His hypostasis, let us see what idea should follow from this saying. "God," according to John, "is light" (John 1:5). Thus the only-begotten Son is the radiance of this light, which illuminates all creation and proceeds from Him, inseparable, just as radiance proceeds from light. The work of light must be understood in accordance with the above considerations about the sense in which the Son is the path leading to the Father, in what sense He is the Word who explains and offers to the rational creature the mysteries of wisdom and knowledge, in what sense He is the Truth, and the Life, and the Resurrection. Thus, through radiance it is known and felt what light itself is. This radiance, which for the weak and fragile eyes of mortals (men) seems comparatively acceptable and soft, and little by little as it were teaches and prepares them to perceive the brilliance of the light itself, removing from them everything that hinders their sight, according to the word of the Lord: "First take the beam out of thy eye" (Luke 6:42), makes them capable of perceiving the glory of light, and thus becomes. as if it were a kind of intermediary between people and the Light.

(From Jerome's letter to Avitus: "God the Father is an incomprehensible light. Christ in comparison with the Father is a faint radiance, which seems great to us, because of our weakness").

But, according to the words of the Apostle, He is not only the radiance of Glory, but also the imprinted image of His essence and even His hypostasis. Therefore, it seems to me that it is not superfluous to pay attention to the sense in which any other essence and hypostasis, besides the very essence of God, can be called His image. The Son of God, Who is called the Word of God and His Wisdom, alone knows the Father and reveals Him to those whom He wills, that is, to those who can be made capable of receiving the Word and Wisdom itself. And so, see if He can not be called an imprinted image of His essence and even hypostasis, because He makes it possible through Himself to comprehend and know God? In other words, can He not be called the imprinted image of the essence of God, that, being Wisdom, He first of all reflects in Himself all that He wishes to reveal to others, and on the basis of which these latter know and comprehend God? And in order to make it even clearer in what sense the Saviour is the image of the essence and hypostasis of God, we will use an example, which, it is true, does not fully and not in the proper sense designate the object in question, but it seems that we will apply it in clarifying, at least, the proposition that the Son of God, being the image of God, humbled Himself and through His very humiliation tries to show us the fullness of the Godhead. Suppose, for example, that a statue has been made, which, in its size, occupies the whole circle of the earth, and in its immensity is inaccessible to no one's observation; Let us suppose that there is another statue, in the arrangement of the limbs and the features of the face, similar in appearance and material in all respects to the first, but not of such enormous size. Then people who cannot see and contemplate the first, huge statue, when they see the second, smaller one, can admit that they have seen that statue, because the smaller statue does not differ from the large one at all in the outlines of the limbs and face, in appearance and material.

(From Jerome's letter to Avitus: "He gives the example of two statues, a larger one and a smaller one; the first fills the world and, due to its size, seems to be invisible, while the other is accessible to the eye; with the first statue he compares the Father, with the second the Son").