Oration II Against the Arians 61–71

Since, then, there is such a difference between “he created” and “he begets me,” and between “beginning of ways” and “before all,” God, being the creator of human beings, thus, as has been said, becomes afterwards their Father too, because of his Word dwelling in them. But with the Word it is the reverse: God, being his Father by nature, afterwards becomes also his creator and maker, when the Word puts on the flesh that was created and made, and becomes man. For just as human beings, receiving “the Spirit of the Son,” become children through him, so the Word of God, when he himself put on human flesh, is then said to be created and made. If, then, we are sons by nature, clearly he too is by nature a creature and a work; but if we become sons by adoption and by grace, clearly the Word too, having become man because of the grace toward us, said, “The Lord created me.” Then, since, having put on what is created, he became like us in body, he was fittingly called our “brother” and “firstborn.” For even though he became man after us and for our sake, and our brother by the likeness of the body, yet in this too he is called and is our “firstborn,” because, when all human beings were perishing through the transgression of Adam, his flesh was saved and set free before all others, having become the body of the Word himself; and thereafter we, being “of the same body,” are saved according to it. For in it the Lord becomes our guide into the kingdom of heaven and to his own Father, saying, “I am the way” and “the door,” and “through me all must enter.” Hence he is also called “firstborn from the dead,” not because he died before us—for we had died before him—but because, having undergone death for us and “destroyed” it, he rose first, as man, raising his own body for our sake. For since he has risen, we too thereafter in turn are raised from the dead, from him and because of him.

And if he is also called “firstborn of creation,” he is not called firstborn as being put on a level with the creatures and first of them in time (for how could that be, when he is “only-begotten”?), but because of the Word's condescension to the creatures, by which he has also become “brother” of “many.” For the only-begotten is only-begotten because there are no other brothers; but the firstborn is called firstborn because of the other brothers. That is why nowhere in the Scriptures is it said, “the firstborn of God,” nor “the creature of God”; but “only-begotten,” and “Son,” and “Word,” and “Wisdom” have their reference to the Father and express what is proper to him: “For we beheld his glory, glory as of the only-begotten from the Father,” and “God sent his only-begotten Son,” and “For ever, O Lord, your Word abides,” and “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God,” and “Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God,” and “This is my beloved Son,” and “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” But “firstborn” refers to his condescension to creation; for it is of creation that he was called “firstborn.” And “he created” refers to his grace toward the works; for it is for them that he is created. If, then, he is only-begotten, as indeed he is, let “firstborn” be interpreted; but if he is firstborn, then let him not be only-begotten. For the same one cannot be both only-begotten and firstborn, except in different respects: only-begotten because of his generation from the Father, as has been said, and firstborn because of his condescension to creation and his making many into brothers. Indeed, since these two sayings stand over against each other, one would rightly say that the property of being only-begotten prevails in the case of the Word, because there is no other Word nor other Wisdom, but he alone is the Father's true Son. And indeed, as was said before, “the only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father,” is said of him not with any reason attached but without qualification; but “firstborn” again has the reason attached, namely creation, which Paul added, saying, “for in him all things were created.” And if all creatures were created in him, he is other than the creatures, and is not a creature but the creator of creatures.

So he was called “firstborn” not because he is from the Father, but because creation came to be in him. And just as the Son himself, through whom creation came to be, was before creation, so too, before he was called “firstborn of all creation,” he was none the less himself “the Word with God, and the Word was God.” But the impious, not understanding this either, go around saying, “If he is firstborn of all creation, clearly he too is one of the creation.” Fools! If he is firstborn of all creation at all, then he is other than all creation. For it did not say, “He is firstborn of the other creatures,” lest he be thought to be one of the creatures; but it is written “of all creation,” so that he might be shown to be other than creation. Reuben, at any rate, is not called firstborn of all the children of Jacob, but of Jacob himself and of his brothers, lest he be thought other than Jacob's children. And of the Lord himself the apostle did not say, “that he might become firstborn of all,” lest he be thought to bear a body other than ours, but “among many brothers,” because of the likeness of the flesh. If, then, the Word too were one of the creatures, Scripture would have said of him too that “he is firstborn of the other creatures”; but as it is, since the saints say that “he is firstborn of all creation,” the Son of God is shown outright to be other than all creation, and not a creature. For if he is a creature, he will be firstborn of himself. How then, Arians, can he be both first and second to himself? Then, if he is a creature, and all creation came to be through him and holds together in him, how can he both create creation and be one of the things that hold together in him? Since such a notion of theirs appears absurd, they are refuted by the truth: he was called “firstborn among many brothers” because of kinship of the flesh; “firstborn from the dead” because the resurrection of the dead is from him and after him; and “firstborn of all creation” because of the Father's love for humankind, because of which not only do all things hold together in his Word, but creation itself too, of which the apostle said that it “awaits the revelation of the sons of God,” will one day “be set free from the bondage of corruption into the freedom of the glory of the children of God.” And when it is thus set free, the Lord will be firstborn of it too and of all who have been made children, so that, by his being called “first,” the things after him may abide, joined to the Word as to a beginning.

I think that even the impious themselves will be put to shame by such an understanding. For if it is not as we have said, but they will have him be “firstborn of all creation” as a creature in substance among creatures, let them consider that they will be supposing him to be brother and like even to irrational and lifeless things. For these too are parts of all creation; and the firstborn must be first only in time, but the same in kind and likeness with all. How then, in saying this too, do they not exceed all impiety? Or who will bear them saying such things? Or who would not hate them for merely thinking such things? For it is clear to all that he was called its “firstborn” neither for his own sake, as being a creature, nor because he has some kinship in substance with all creation; but because, when at the beginning the Word was crafting the creatures, he condescended to originated things, so that they might be able to come into being. For they could not have borne his nature, which is untempered and the Father's own splendor, had he not condescended with the Father's love for humankind and taken hold of them, and, holding them fast, brought them into being. And secondly, because when the Word condescended, creation itself too is made a son through him, so that he might become its “firstborn” in every respect, as has been said, both in creating it and in being brought into the world itself for the sake of all. For so it is written: “And when he brings the firstborn into the world, he says, And let all the angels of God worship him.” Let the Christ-fighters hear and tear themselves, that his coming into the world made him also be called “firstborn” of all; so that the Son is only-begotten of the Father, because he alone is from him, but “firstborn” of creation because all are made sons. And as he is firstborn among brothers and rose from the dead as “the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep,” so, since it was fitting that “he should be preeminent in all things,” therefore he is also “created a beginning of ways,” so that, walking on this way and entering through him who says, “I am the way and the door,” and sharing in the knowledge of the Father, we too may hear, “Blessed are the blameless in the way,” and “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.”

Since the truth has shown that the Word is not a creature by nature, it follows now to say how he is also called “beginning of the ways.” For since the first way, the one through Adam, was lost, and instead of paradise we turned aside into death, and heard, “You are earth, and to earth you shall return,” therefore the Word of God, who loves humankind, by the will of the Father puts on the created flesh, so that the flesh which the first man had made dead through the transgression he himself might make alive in the blood of his own body, and might open “for us a new and living way,” as the apostle said, “through the veil, that is, through his flesh.” Indicating this elsewhere too, he says, “So if anyone is in Christ, there is a new creation; the old things have passed away; see, all things have become new.” And if a new creation has come about, there had to be someone first of this creation; but a mere man, only “earthy,” such as we have become through the transgression, could not be this. For in the first creation too human beings proved unfaithful, and through them the first creation was lost; and there was need of another, who would renew the first and preserve the new one that had come to be. So in his love for humankind no one else but the Lord is created as beginning of the new creation, as the way, and fittingly he says, “The Lord created me a beginning of his ways for his works,” so that man might no longer live according to that first creation, but, since there is a beginning of a new creation, and we have Christ as the “beginning of the ways” of it, we may henceforth follow him who says, “I am the way.” For the blessed apostle too, teaching this in the letter to the Colossians, said, “He is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things he might be preeminent.”

For if, as has been said, he is called “beginning” because of the resurrection from the dead, and the resurrection happened when, bearing our flesh, he gave himself up to death for us, it would be evident that what he says, “He created me a beginning of ways,” signifies not his substance but his presence in the body. For death was proper to the body; and as death is proper to the body, so what is said, “The Lord created me a beginning of his ways,” would be proper to the bodily presence. For since the Saviour was thus created according to the flesh and became the beginning of those being re-created, having as our firstfruits the human flesh which he took, the people to come is consequently also created after him, as David says, “Let this be written for another generation, and a people that is being created will praise the Lord,” and again in the twenty-first psalm, “The generation to come will be told of the Lord, and they will proclaim his righteousness to a people that shall be born, which the Lord has made.” For we shall no longer hear, “In the day you eat of it, you shall surely die,” but “Where I am, you too shall be”; so that we may say, “For we are his workmanship, created for good works.” And again, since God's “work,” that is, man, though created perfect, became deficient through the transgression and became dead by sin, and it was unfitting that the work of God should remain incomplete (which is why all the saints prayed about this, saying in the hundred and thirty-seventh psalm, “Lord, you will repay on my behalf; Lord, do not overlook the works of your hands”), therefore the perfect Word of God puts on the incomplete body and is said to be “created for the works,” so that, paying the debt in our place, he might through himself complete what was lacking to man. And what man lacked was immortality and the way to paradise. And this is what the Saviour says: “I glorified you on the earth; I completed the work which you gave me to do”; and again, “The works which the Father has given me to complete, these very works which I do bear witness about me.” And the works which he here says the Father gave him to complete are those for which he is created, as he says in the Proverbs, “The Lord created me a beginning of his ways for his works”; for it is the same to say, “The Father gave me the works,” and “The Lord created me for works.”

When, then, did he receive the works to complete them, you fighters against God? For from this “he created” too will be understood. If you say, “At the beginning, when he made them out of what was not into being,” it is false; for they had not yet come into being, whereas he evidently speaks as one receiving things that already existed. Nor is it reverent to name the time before the Word became flesh, lest his coming should then appear superfluous; for it was for the sake of these works that the coming took place. So it remains to say that when he became man, then he received the works; for then he also completed them, healing our wounds and granting us the resurrection from the dead. And if the works were given to him when the Word became flesh, it is clear that when he became man, then too he is “created for the works.” So “he created” signifies not his substance, as has often been said, but his bodily origin. For then, because the works had become incomplete and lame through the transgression, he is said in a bodily sense to be “created,” so that, having completed them and made them whole, he might present the church to the Father, as the apostle said, “not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing, but that it might be holy and blameless.” So the human race has been perfected in him and restored, as it was when made at the beginning, and indeed with greater “grace”; for having risen from the dead we no longer fear death, but in Christ we shall reign for ever in the heavens. And this has happened because the Word of God himself, who is proper to the Father and from him, put on the flesh and became man. For if he had become man while being a creature, man would have remained none the less as he was, not joined to God. For how, being a work, could he join a work to the creator? Or what help could come from like to like, when they themselves need the same help? And how, if the Word were a creature, could he have undone God's sentence and forgiven sin, when it is written in the prophets that this belongs to God? “For who is a God like you, taking away sins and passing over iniquities?” For God said, “You are earth, and to earth you shall return”; and human beings became mortal. How then could sin be undone by originated beings? But the Lord himself undid it, as he himself said, “If the Son sets you free”; and the Son who set them free truly showed that he is not a creature, nor one of the originated beings, but the proper Word and image of the Father's substance, of him who at the beginning pronounced the sentence and who “alone forgives sins.” For since it was said in the Word, “You are earth, and to earth you shall return,” it followed that through the Word himself and in him the freedom and the undoing of the condemnation came about.

“But,” they say, “even if the Saviour were a creature, God could simply have spoken and undone the curse.” They might hear the same thing from someone else who says, “Even if he had not come at all, God could simply have spoken and undone the curse.” But one must consider what is profitable to human beings, and not reckon in every case what is possible to God. For he could have destroyed the transgressors of that time even before Noah's ark, but he did it after the ark. He could have brought the people out of Egypt without Moses, simply by speaking, but it was expedient to do it through Moses. God could have saved the people without the judges, but it was expedient for the peoples that a judge be raised up for them from time to time. The Saviour could have come at the beginning, or, having come, not have been handed over to Pilate; but he came “at the consummation of the ages,” and when he was sought he said, “I am he.” For what he does is what is expedient for human beings, and it was not fitting that it should happen otherwise; and for what is expedient and fitting he makes provision. He came, at any rate, “not to be served but to serve,” and to work our salvation. Certainly, though he could have spoken the law from heaven, he saw that it was profitable to human beings to speak it from Sinai; and he did so, so that Moses might be able to go up, and they, hearing the word from close by, might be better able to believe. Besides, one can see the reasonableness of what happened from this: if he had spoken because he had the power, and the curse had been undone, the power of him who commanded would have been displayed, but man would have become such as Adam was before the transgression, having received grace from outside and not having it fitted to the body; for that is how he was when he was placed in paradise; and perhaps he would even have become worse, because he had learned to transgress. Being such, then, if he had again been led astray by the serpent, there would again have been need “for God to command and undo the curse”; and so the need would have gone on without end, and human beings would none the less have remained liable, serving sin; always sinning, they would always have needed someone to pardon them, and would never have been set free, being flesh in themselves and always worsted by the law because of the weakness of the flesh.

Again, if the Son were a creature, man would have remained none the less mortal, not being joined to God; for a creature would not join creatures to God, since it too seeks one to join it; nor could a part of creation be the salvation of creation, since it too needs salvation. So that this too should not happen, he sends his own Son, and he becomes son of man, taking the created flesh; so that, since all are liable to death, he, being other than all, might himself offer his own body to death for all; and thereafter, as though all had died through him, the word of the sentence might be fulfilled (“for all died in Christ”), and all through him might thereafter become free from sin and from the curse that came through it, and might truly abide for ever, risen from the dead and clothed with immortality and incorruption. For when the Word put on the flesh, as has often been shown, every bite of the serpent was entirely quenched in it; whatever evil sprang up from the impulses of the flesh was cut off, and together with these the death that follows sin was destroyed, as the Lord himself says, “The ruler of this world is coming, and finds nothing in me,” and “For this he was manifested,” as John wrote, “to destroy the works of the devil.” And these having been destroyed from the flesh, we were all thus set free by kinship of the flesh, and thereafter we too were joined to the Word. And being joined to God, we no longer remain on earth, but, as he himself said, “Where he is, we too shall be”; and thereafter we shall no longer fear the serpent; for he was brought to nothing, driven out in the flesh by the Saviour and hearing, “Get behind me, Satan”; and so he is cast out of paradise into the eternal fire. Nor shall we have to guard against a woman who leads astray; for “in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are as angels”; and in Christ Jesus there will be “a new creation,” and “neither male nor female,” but Christ will be “all and in all.” And where Christ is, what fear or what danger will there be any longer?

But this would not have happened if the Word were a creature. For the devil, being himself a creature, would always have kept up the fight with a creature; and man, being in the middle, would always have been exposed to death, not having one in whom and through whom he might be joined to God and become free of all fear. Hence the truth shows that the Word is not among originated things, but rather their creator; for this is how he also took the originated, human body, so that, having renewed it as creator, he might deify it in himself, and so bring us all into the kingdom of heaven after its likeness. But man would not have been deified by being joined to a creature, had the Son not been true God; nor would man have been brought into the Father's presence, had the one who put on the body not been his natural and true Word. And just as we would not have been set free from sin and the curse had the flesh which the Word put on not been human by nature (for we would have had nothing in common with what was foreign to us), so man would not have been deified had the Word who became flesh not been by nature from the Father, true, and proper to him. For this is why such a union took place: that he might join what is by nature man to what is by nature Godhead, and that man's salvation and deification might be secure. So let those who deny that the Son is by nature from the Father and proper to his substance deny also that he took true human flesh from Mary ever-virgin. For there would have been no further gain for us human beings if either the Word were not true and natural Son of God, or the flesh which he assumed were not true. But he did take true flesh, even if Valentinus rages; for the Word was by nature and truly God, even if the Ariomaniacs rage; and in that flesh the beginning of our new creation came about, he having been created man for us and having opened for us that way, as has been said.

So the Word is neither a creature nor a work; for creature, thing made, and work are the same; and if he were a creature and a thing made, he would also be a work. That is why he did not say, “He created me a work,” nor “He made me with the works,” lest he seem to be a creature in nature and substance; nor “He created me so that I might make works,” lest again, according to the ill will of the impious, he be thought to have come into being for our sake as an instrument; nor did he announce, “He created me before the works,” lest, as he is offspring before all, so, being also created before the works, he should cause “offspring” and “he created” to be thought the same. But with precise care he said, “for works,” which is equal to saying, “The Father made me into flesh, to become man”; so that from this too it is again shown that he is not a work but offspring. For as one who enters a house is not part of the house but other than the house, so one who is created for the works would be other in nature than the works. For if, as you say, Arians, the Word of God is a work, by what hand and in what wisdom did he himself come into being? For all things that came into being came into being by the hand and in the wisdom of God, as God himself says, “My hand made all these things,” and David sings, “And you, Lord, in the beginning founded the earth, and the heavens are the works of your hands,” and again in the hundred and forty-second psalm, “I remembered the days of old, and I meditated on all your works; I meditated on the works of your hands.” If, then, the things made were wrought by the hand of God, and it is written that “all things came into being through the Word, and without him not one thing came into being,” and again, “one Lord Jesus, through whom are all things,” and that “in him all things hold together,” it is very clear that the Son would not be a work, but that he himself is the hand of God and his wisdom. Knowing this, the martyrs in Babylon, Ananias, Azarias, and Misael, refute the Arian impiety. For saying, “Bless the Lord, all you works of the Lord,” they listed the things in heaven and on earth and all creation as works; but they did not name the Son; for they did not say, “Bless, O Word, and praise, O Wisdom,” so as to show that all the others are praising and are works, while the Word is not a work nor one of those who praise, but is praised together with the Father, and worshipped, and confessed as God, being his Word and Wisdom and the creator of the works. The Spirit too said this in the Psalms with a most beautiful distinction: “The Word of the Lord is upright, and all his works are in faithfulness”; as it says in another place too, “How great are your works, O Lord! In wisdom you have made them all.”