Oration III Against the Arians 29–40

This, then, is the scope and character of the holy Scripture, as we have often said: that there is a twofold account of the Saviour in it: that he was always God and is Son, being the Word and radiance and wisdom of the Father; and that afterwards, for our sake, taking flesh from the Virgin Mary, the God-bearer, he became man. And this can be found signified throughout the whole inspired Scripture, as the Lord himself said, “Search the Scriptures, for it is they that bear witness about me.” But so that I may not become long-winded by collecting all the sayings, let us be content to mention, as representing all, John, who says, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God; he was in the beginning with God; all things came into being through him, and without him not one thing came into being”; then, “And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld his glory, glory as of the only-begotten from the Father”; and Paul, who writes, “who, being in the form of God, did not count it robbery to be equal to God, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men; and being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, becoming obedient to death, even death on a cross.” For going through the whole Scripture with this understanding, one will see how in the beginning the Father said to him, “Let there be light,” and “Let there be a firmament,” and “Let us make man”; but at the consummation of the ages he sent him into the world, “not to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through him”; and it is written, “Behold, the virgin shall conceive in the womb and bear a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.”

Let whoever reads the divine Scripture, then, learn the sayings from the old books, and from the Gospels behold the Lord become man; for “the Word,” it says, “became flesh and dwelt among us.” And he became man; he did not come into a man. This must be known, lest the impious, falling into this error too, should deceive some, and they should think that, as in former times the word “came” to each of the saints, so now too the Word came to dwell in a man, sanctifying him too and being manifested as in the others. For if it were so, and he had only appeared in a man, there would have been nothing strange, nor would those who saw him have been startled, saying, “What sort of man is this?” and “Why do you, being a man, make yourself God?” For they were accustomed to hearing, “And the word of the Lord came to” each of the prophets. But as it is, since the Word of God, through whom all things came into being, submitted to become also Son of man, and “humbled himself, taking the form of a servant,” therefore the cross of Christ is “to the Jews a scandal, but to us Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.” For “the Word,” as John said, “became flesh,” Scripture being accustomed to call man “flesh,” as it says through Joel the prophet, “I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh,” and as Daniel said to Astyages, “I do not worship idols made with hands, but the living God, who created the heaven and the earth and has lordship over all flesh”; for both he and Joel call the human race “flesh.”

In former times, then, the Word came to each of the saints and sanctified those who genuinely received him; but it was not said, when they were born, that “he himself has become man,” nor, when they suffered, that “he himself has suffered.” But when he came from Mary to dwell among us “once, at the consummation of the ages, for the putting away of sin” (for so the Father, well pleased, “sent his own Son, born of a woman, born under the law”), then it is said that, taking flesh, he became man and suffered in it for us, as Peter said, “Since, then, Christ suffered for us in the flesh”; so that it might be shown, and we all might believe, that, being always God, and sanctifying those to whom he came, and ordering all things according to the will of the Father, he afterwards also became man for our sake, and “bodily,” as the apostle says, “the Godhead dwelt” in the flesh; which is equal to saying, “Being God, he had his own body, and using it as an instrument he became man for our sake.” And for this reason the things proper to the flesh are said to be “his,” since he was in it—such as hungering, thirsting, suffering, growing weary, and the like, of which the flesh is capable; while the works proper to the Word himself, such as raising the dead, making the blind see again, and healing the woman with the flow of blood, he himself did through his own body. The Word bore the weaknesses of the flesh as his own, for the flesh was his; and the flesh served the works of the Godhead, because the Godhead was in it, for the body was God's. And the prophet spoke well in saying “he bore,” and not “he himself healed our weaknesses,” lest, as though he were outside the body and only healed it, as he had always done, he should leave human beings still subject to death. But he bears our weaknesses, and “he himself carries our sins,” so that it might be shown both that he has become man for our sake and that the body which bears them in him is his own; and he himself was not harmed, “carrying up our sins in his body onto the tree,” as Peter said, while we human beings were redeemed from our own passions and filled with the righteousness of the Word.

Hence, when the flesh suffered, the Word was not outside it; that is why the passion too is called “his.” And when he did the Father's works divinely, the flesh was not outside him, but the Lord did these things in the body itself. That is why, having become man, he said, “If I do not do the works of my Father, do not believe me; but if I do, even if you do not believe me, believe the works, so that you may know that the Father is in me and I in him.” Indeed, when there was need to raise Peter's mother-in-law, who had a fever, he stretched out his hand humanly, but it was divinely that he stopped the illness. And in the case of the man “blind from birth,” he spat from the flesh a human “spittle,” but divinely opened the eyes by means of the clay; and in the case of Lazarus he uttered a human voice, as man, but divinely, as God, raised Lazarus from the dead. These things were done in this way, and it was shown that he had a body not in appearance but truly. And it was fitting that the Lord, putting on human flesh, should put it on whole, with its own passions, so that, as we say that the body is his own, so the passions of the body too may be said to be his alone, even though they did not touch him in his Godhead. If, then, the body were another's, the passions too would be said to be that other's; but if the flesh is the Word's (“for the Word became flesh”), the passions of the flesh must also be said to be his, whose the flesh is. And he to whom the passions are ascribed—above all being condemned, being scourged, thirsting, the cross, death, and the other weaknesses of the body—his too is the triumph and the grace. For this reason, then, consistently and fittingly, such passions are said to be not another's but the Lord's, so that the grace too may be from him, and we may not become worshippers of another, but truly God-fearing, because it is not any originated being, nor some ordinary man, but the natural and true Son from God, the same one who has become man, whom we none the less call upon as Lord and God and Saviour.

Who would not marvel at this? Or who would not agree that the thing is truly divine? For if the works of the Word's Godhead had not come about through the body, man would not have been deified; and again, if the things proper to the flesh had not been said to be the Word's, man would not have been completely freed from them. Even if he had found rest for a little while, as I said before, sin and corruption would have remained in him again, as happened with the men of earlier times; and this is shown. Many, at any rate, have become holy and pure of all sin; Jeremiah was even sanctified from the womb; and John, while still carried in the womb, “leaped for joy” at the voice of Mary the God-bearer; and yet “death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of Adam's transgression”; and so human beings remained none the less mortal and corruptible, subject to the passions proper to their nature. But now, since the Word has become man and made his own the things of the flesh, these no longer touch the body, because of the Word who has come to be in it; they have been destroyed by him, and henceforth human beings no longer remain sinners and dead according to their own passions, but, rising by the power of the Word, remain immortal and incorruptible for ever. Hence, when the flesh was born from Mary the God-bearer, he himself is said to have been born, he who gives others their coming into being; so that he might transfer our birth to himself, and we might no longer return to earth as being earth only, but, joined to the Word from heaven, be brought up by him into the heavens. So in the same way he fittingly transferred to himself the other passions of the body too, so that we might partake of eternal life no longer as mere human beings, but as belonging to the Word. For we no longer die “in Adam” according to our former birth; but henceforth, since our birth and all fleshly weakness have been transferred to the Word, we are raised from the earth, the curse due to sin having been undone because of him who is in us and “became a curse for us”; and fittingly so. For as, being all from earth, we die in Adam, so, “being born again from above of water and Spirit, we are all made alive in Christ,” the flesh being no longer earthly but henceforth made Word-like because of God's Word, who for our sake “became flesh.”

So that one may know more precisely both the impassibility of the Word's nature and the weaknesses said to be “his” because of the flesh, it is well to hear the blessed Peter; for he would be a trustworthy witness about the Saviour. He writes in his letter, then, saying, “Since, then, Christ suffered for us in the flesh.” So also, when he is said to hunger, and thirst, and toil, and not know, and sleep, and weep, and ask, and flee, and be born, and ask to be spared the cup, and in short all the things of the flesh, it might consistently be said in each case: “Since, then, Christ hungered and thirsted for us in the flesh”; and said he did not know, and was struck, and toiled “for us in the flesh”; and was lifted up, and born, and grew “in the flesh”; and feared, and hid himself “in the flesh”; and said, “If it is possible, let this cup pass from me,” and was beaten, and received “for us in the flesh”; and in short all such things “for us in the flesh.” For this is why the apostle himself said, “Since, then, Christ suffered”—not in the Godhead, but “for us in the flesh”—so that the passions might be recognized as proper by nature not to the Word himself but to the flesh itself. So let no one be scandalized at the human things, but rather know that the Word himself is impassible in nature, and yet these things are said of him because of the flesh he put on, since these things are proper to the flesh, and the body itself is proper to the Saviour. He himself remains, as he is, impassible in nature, not harmed by these things, but rather abolishing and destroying them; while human beings, since the passions have passed over to the impassible one and been wiped out, henceforth themselves also become impassible and free from them for ever, as John taught, saying, “And you know that he was manifested to take away our sins, and in him there is no sin.” This being so, no heretic will complain, “Why does the flesh rise, being by nature mortal? And if it does rise, why does it not hunger and thirst again, and suffer, and remain mortal? For it came from the earth, and how could what is natural to it cease?” For the flesh can then answer so contentious a heretic: “I am by nature mortal, from the earth; but afterwards I became the flesh of the Word, and he bore my passions, though he is impassible; and I have become free of them, no longer left to serve them, because of the Lord who freed me from them. If you complain that I have been released from natural corruption, see that you do not complain that the Word of God took my servile form. For as the Lord, putting on the body, became man, so we human beings are deified by the Word, being taken up through his flesh, and henceforth we inherit eternal life.”

We have examined these things beforehand of necessity, so that, if we see him doing or saying something divinely through the instrument of his own body, we may know that he works these things as God; and again, if we see him speaking or suffering humanly, we may not be unaware that, bearing flesh, he became man, and so does and says these things. For knowing what is proper to each, and seeing and understanding that both are done by one, we believe rightly and shall never go astray. But if anyone, seeing what is done divinely by the Word, denies the body, or, seeing what is proper to the body, denies the Word's presence in the flesh, or from the human things thinks lowly of the Word, such a person, like a Jewish tavern-keeper mixing his wine with water, will consider the cross a “scandal,” or like a Greek will count the preaching “folly”—which is just what has happened to the God-fighting Arians. For seeing the human things of the Saviour, they thought him a creature. Then, seeing the divine works of the Word, they ought also to have denied the birth of his body, and thereafter to count themselves among the Manichees. But let them learn, even at this late hour, that “the Word became flesh”; and let us, holding the scope of the faith, recognize that what these men understand wrongly has a correct sense. For “The Father loves the Son and has given all things into his hand,” and “All things have been handed over to me by my Father,” and “I can do nothing of myself; but as I hear, I judge,” and similar sayings, do not show that the Son once did not have these things. (For how could the only Word and Wisdom of the Father by substance not have eternally what the Father has, he who also says, “All that the Father has is mine,” and “Mine are the Father's”? For if the things of the Father are the Son's, and the Father always has them, it is clear that what the Son has, being the Father's, is always in him.) So he did not say these things because he once did not have them, but because the Son, eternally having what he has, has it from the Father.

For lest anyone, seeing the Son having all that the Father has, should, because of the exact likeness and identity of what he has, go astray like Sabellius and fall into impiety, thinking him to be the Father, he said “was given to me,” and “I received,” and “was handed over to me,” only to show that he is not himself the Father, but the Father's Word and the eternal Son, who, because of his likeness to the Father, has eternally what he has from him, and because he is Son, has from the Father what he has eternally. For that “was given” and “was handed over” and the like do not lessen the Son's Godhead, but rather show him to be truly Son, can be learned from the sayings themselves. For if “all things” were handed over to him, first, he is other than all the things he received; then, being “heir of all things,” he alone is Son and proper to the Father by substance. For if he were one of all things, he would not be heir of all things; each would receive as the Father willed and gave. But as it is, receiving all things himself, he is other than all things and alone proper to the Father. And again, that “was given” and “was handed over” do not show that he once did not have them, one can see from a similar saying about all these things. For the Saviour himself says, “As the Father has life in himself, so he has given to the Son also to have life in himself.” By saying “he has given” he signifies that he himself is not the Father; but by saying “so” he shows the Son's natural likeness and propriety toward the Father. If, then, there was once a time when the Father did not have life, clearly the Son too once did not have it; for as the Father has, so the Son has too. But if it is impious to say this, and rather pious to say that the Father always has it, how is it not absurd, when the Son says that as the Father has, so the Son also has, for these men to say that he does not have it so, but otherwise? Rather, then, the Word is to be believed, and all things which he says he has received, always having them, he has from the Father; the Father has them from no one, but the Son from the Father. For as with the radiance: if the radiance itself were to say, “The light has given me to illuminate every place; and I do not illuminate of myself, but as the light wills,” in saying this it does not show that it once did not have this, but means, “I am proper to the light, and all that is its is mine.” So too, and much more, one can understand of the Son. For the Father, having given all things to the Son, again has all things in the Son; and when the Son has them, the Father again has them. For the Godhead of the Son is the Godhead of the Father; and so the Father exercises providence over all things in the Son.

Such, then, is the sense of such sayings; and as for what is said of the Saviour in human terms, these things too have a pious meaning. For this is why we examined such matters beforehand: so that, if we hear him asking where Lazarus lies, and, when he comes into the region of Caesarea, inquiring, “Who do men say that I am?” and “How many loaves do you have?” and “What do you want me to do for you?”, we may know the right sense of these sayings from what has been said, and not be scandalized like the Christ-fighting Arians. First, then, this must be said to the impious: from where do they get the idea that he was ignorant? For one who asks does not necessarily ask because he is ignorant; one who knows may also ask about what he knows. Indeed, John knows that Christ, when he asked, “How many loaves do you have?”, was not ignorant but knew; for he says, “He said this to test Philip; for he himself knew what he was going to do.” And if he knew what he was doing, then he asked not in ignorance but knowing. From this one can understand the similar cases too: that when the Lord asks, he asks not because he is ignorant where Lazarus lies or who men say he is, but knowing what he himself was asking, and knowing what he was about to do; and so their cleverness is quickly thrown out. But if they still contend because of his asking, let them hear that in the Godhead there is no ignorance, but that ignorance is proper to the flesh, as has been said. And that this is true, see how the Lord who inquired where Lazarus lay himself said, when he was not present but far away, “Lazarus has died,” and where he had died. And he who according to them is supposed to be ignorant is the very one who foreknows the reasonings of the disciples, and knows what is in each one's heart, and “what is in man”; and, what is greater, he alone knows the Father, and says, “I am in the Father and the Father in me.”

So it is clear to all that ignorance belongs to the flesh, while the Word himself, as Word, knows all things even before they come to be. For he did not cease to be God because he became man; nor, because he is God, does he shun what is human—God forbid!—but rather, being God, he took the flesh to himself, and being in the flesh he deified the flesh. For as he inquired in it, so too in it he raised the dead man; and he showed all that he who gives life to the dead and calls back the soul knows much more the hidden things of all; and he knew where Lazarus lay, yet he inquired. For the all-holy Word of God, who endured all things for our sake, did this too, so that, bearing our ignorance in this way as well, he might grant us to know his own only true Father, and himself, sent for our sake for the salvation of all—a grace than which none greater could be. When, then, concerning the sayings they allege as pretexts, the Saviour says, “Authority has been given to me,” and “Glorify your Son,” and Peter says, “Authority was given to him,” we understand all these in the same sense: that he says all these things humanly because of the body. For though he had no need, nevertheless he himself is said to have received what he received in human fashion, so that again, since it was the Lord who received and the gift rests in him, the grace might remain secure. For a mere man who receives is liable also to have it taken away; and this was shown in Adam, for having received he lost. But so that the grace might become irremovable and be kept secure for human beings, he makes the gift his own, and says that as man he has received authority which as God he always has; and he who glorifies others says, “Glorify me,” to show that he has flesh which needs these things. So, when the flesh received, since that which received is in him, and by taking it he became man, he himself is said to have received.

If, then, as has often been said, the Word did not become man, let receiving, needing glory, and being ignorant belong, on your view, to the Word; but if he became man (and he did), and it belongs to man to receive, to need, and to be ignorant, why do we think of the giver as receiving, and suspect that he who supplies others has need, and divide the Word from the Father as imperfect and in need, and strip humanity of grace? For if the Word himself, as Word, received and was glorified for his own sake, and if it is he in his Godhead who was sanctified and rose, what hope is there for human beings? For they remain as they were, naked and wretched and dead, having nothing in common with what was given to the Son. And why did the Word come among us and become flesh? If it was to receive these things which he says he has received, he was empty of them before; and of necessity he would rather owe thanks to the body, because when he came into it he then received from the Father these things which he did not have before his descent into the flesh. For then he would appear rather to have been improved because of the body than the body improved because of him. But this is a Jewish way of thinking. But if the Word came to redeem the human race, and the Word became flesh to sanctify and deify them (for this is why he came), to whom is it not evident that the things he says he received when he became flesh he says not for his own sake but for the flesh's? For the gifts given through him from the Father belonged to the flesh in which he was speaking. Let us see what it was that he asked, and what in general he said he had received, so that even so they may be able to perceive it. He asked for glory, then, and said, “All things have been handed over to me”; and after the resurrection he says he has received “all authority.” But even before he said, “All things have been handed over to me,” he was Lord of all things, for “all things came into being through him,” and he was “one Lord, through whom are all things”; and when he asked for glory, he was and is “the Lord of glory,” as Paul says, “For if they had known, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.” For he had the glory he asked for, saying, “with the glory which I had with you before the world was.”

And the authority which he said he received after the resurrection he had also before receiving it, and before the resurrection. For he himself rebuked Satan in his own person, saying, “Get behind me, Satan”; and he “gave” the disciples “authority” against him, when, as they returned, he said, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven.” And again, what he said he had received he is shown to have had before receiving it; for he drove out demons, and what “Satan had bound” he loosed, as he did for “the daughter of Abraham”; and he forgave sins, saying to the paralytic and to the woman who anointed his feet, “Your sins are forgiven.” He raised the dead, and restored the blind man's birth, granting him sight. And he did these things not waiting until he received, but being “one with authority.” So from these things it is clear that what he had as Word, this, having become man and after the resurrection, he says in human fashion that he received, so that through him human beings, on earth, as “partakers of the divine nature,” might henceforth have authority against demons, and in the heavens, as “set free from corruption,” might reign eternally. For in general one must know this: that nothing of what he says he received did he receive as not having it; for the Word, being God, always had these things. But it is now said in human fashion that he received, so that, since the flesh in him receives, it might henceforth pass securely from it to us as well. For what Peter says too, “having received from God honor and glory, angels being subjected to him,” has such a sense. As he inquired humanly but raised Lazarus divinely, so “he received” is said humanly, while the subjection of the angels shows the Godhead of the Word.