CHAPTER FOUR: Of Faith, In Which the Apostles' Creed Is Explained (part 3 of 6)
—Romans 8:9, 11
And rightly so. For Saint Peter also testifies that it was the Spirit of Christ by whom the Prophets spoke:
“The Spirit of Christ who was in them testified beforehand.” —1 Peter 1:11
Yet Scripture frequently teaches that it was the Spirit of the Father.
This distinction is so far from contradicting the unity of God that it instead proves that the Son is the same God as the Father, since they possess one and the same Spirit, and that the Spirit is not a different substance from the Father and the Son, since he is their Spirit.
For in each person the whole divine nature must be understood, together with the property belonging to that person. The Father is wholly in the Son, and the Son is wholly in the Father, as Christ himself affirms:
“I am in my Father, and my Father is in me.”
Therefore, all the teachers of the Church admit no difference of essence among the persons. In this sense we must reconcile the statements of the ancients that might otherwise appear contradictory. For at times they call the Father the beginning of the Son, while at other times they teach that the Son possesses his divinity and essence from himself.
As to the quibble of the Sabellians that God is called Father, Son, or Spirit only in the same way that he is called powerful, good, wise, and merciful, it is easily refuted. For these latter titles are epithets showing what God is toward us, whereas the former terms are names declaring what he is in himself.
Moreover, the fact that God is called Spirit must not lead us to confound the Spirit with the Father and the Son. There is no contradiction in saying that the whole essence of God is spiritual and that within this essence are comprehended the Father, the Son, and the Spirit. This is declared by Scripture. For just as we hear there that:
“God is Spirit,”
so we also hear that the Spirit is of God and proceeds from God.
Those who are not contentious can plainly see how, within one simple divine essence, the Father is comprehended together with his Word and his Spirit. Even the most rebellious cannot contradict this: the Father is God, the Son likewise is God, and the Holy Spirit is God; yet there can be only one God.
On the other hand, Scripture names three, marks out three, and distinguishes three. There are therefore three and one: one God, one essence. Who, then, are the three? Not three gods or three essences, but three properties.
To signify both the unity and the distinction, the ancients said that there is one essence and three hypostases within it. The Latins, agreeing with them in meaning, retained one of these terms but expressed the other somewhat differently. For they said that there is one essence and three persons, intending by this latter word the corresponding meaning.
The heretics bark at this terminology, while some who are not altogether wicked also murmur that these words essence and hypostasis were invented by men and are nowhere found in Scripture. But since they cannot deny that there are three within the one Godhead, what obstinacy is it to reject words that signify nothing other than what Scripture testifies?
They say it would be more expedient to confine not only our understanding but also our speech within the limits of Scripture than to publish unfamiliar words that become seeds of quarrels and dissensions. For in this way, they say, men languish in disputes over words, truth is lost in contention, and love is destroyed.
But if they call every word unfamiliar that cannot be found syllable for syllable in Scripture, they impose a severe condition upon us, for by doing so they condemn every sermon not composed word for word from Scripture.
If, however, they mean by unfamiliar words those that have been inquisitively invented and superstitiously defended, serving contention more than edification; those employed without necessity or benefit; those that stir up offense among believers; or those that might draw us away from the simplicity of Scripture, then I heartily approve their sobriety.
For I judge that we should speak of God with no less reverence than we think about his majesty, since everything we conceive concerning him from ourselves is nothing but folly, and everything we attempt to say from ourselves is inept.
Nevertheless, we must observe a proper moderation here. It is true that we must derive from Scripture the rule both of our thoughts and of our words, referring to it every conception of our minds and every expression of our mouths. But who can prevent us from explaining in clearer words those things that are obscurely set forth in Scripture, provided that what we say faithfully expresses the truth of Scripture, that it is done without excessive liberty, and that there is good reason for doing so? We have daily examples of this.
And what shall we say when it is proved that the Church was compelled to employ the words Trinity and persons? If anyone then rejects them under the pretext of their novelty, may we not judge that he cannot bear the light of truth, since the only thing he can condemn in them is a clearer explanation of what is contained in Scripture?
Such novelty of words—if it must be called novelty—is especially necessary when truth must be defended against slanderers who overturn it by evasions. We experience this more than enough today, finding great difficulty in convicting the enemies of truth because, twisting this way and that like serpents, they find some means of escape unless they are pressed closely and held, as it were, in a vise.
In this manner, the ancients, being troubled by corrupt doctrines, were compelled to explain clearly and plainly what they believed, so as to leave no refuge for the wicked, to whom every obscurity of speech would have served as a hiding place for concealing their errors.
Arius confessed that Jesus Christ was God and the Son of God because he could not resist so many testimonies of Scripture. Then, as though he had discharged his duty, he pretended to agree with the others. Yet meanwhile, he continued to say that Christ had been created and had possessed a beginning like the other creatures.
The ancient Fathers, in order to draw this malicious evasion out of the darkness, went further and declared Christ to be the eternal Son of God and of the same substance as his Father. Then the impiety of the Arians came openly to light, for they could not endure this doctrine but held it in abhorrence.
If from the beginning they had sincerely confessed Jesus Christ to be God, they would not have denied his divine essence. Who, then, will dare accuse the good Fathers of being eager for quarrels and dissensions because they became so deeply engaged in controversy over one little word, even to the disturbance of the Church’s tranquility? For that little word revealed the difference between true Christians and heretics.
Then Sabellius arose, declaring that the words Father, Son, and Holy Spirit were of no importance and possessed no proper meaning or significance beyond that belonging to the other titles of God. If anyone disputed with him, he acknowledged that the Father was God, the Son likewise, and the Holy Spirit. But afterward he found an escape, claiming that he had confessed nothing more than if he had called God good, wise, powerful, and so forth. Thus he returned to his old refrain: that the Father was the Son and the Son was the Holy Spirit, without any distinction.
Those who at that time were concerned for the honor of God opposed him in order to overthrow his wickedness, showing that three properties must be acknowledged in the one God. To arm themselves with plain and evident truth against his quibbles and crooked cunning, they affirmed that three persons subsist in the one God—or, what amounts to the same thing, that within the one divine essence there is a Trinity of persons.
If, therefore, these terms were not rashly invented, we must beware lest we ourselves be convicted of rashness if we condemn them. I would gladly have them buried, provided that this faith prevailed throughout the world: that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are one God; that the Son is nevertheless not the Father, nor the Spirit the Son; and that there is a distinction of properties.
Indeed, the word hypostasis is used by the Apostle in the same sense, as it seems to me, in which the ancients employed it, when he calls the Son:
“The express image of the hypostasis of God his Father.” —Hebrews 1:3
For I do not agree with those who in this passage understand hypostasis to mean essence, explaining it as though Christ represented the appearance of his Father within himself as wax bears the figure of a seal. Rather, I believe the Apostle’s meaning to be this: although the Father possesses his own distinct property, he has nevertheless expressed himself so vividly in his Son that his very hypostasis—that is, his person—shines forth and is manifested in him.
For it would be improper to call Christ the image of his Father’s essence, since he contains that essence wholly within himself—not in part, nor as something transferred to him, but perfectly.
For the rest, I am not so harsh and inflexible as to stir up great controversies over mere words. For I perceive that the ancient Fathers, although they endeavored to speak with great reverence in this matter, did not agree with one another in every respect, and that some of them did not always speak in the same manner.
How many expressions and forms of speech used by the Councils does Saint Hilary excuse? What boldness of expression does Saint Augustine sometimes employ? How great a difference exists between the Greeks and the Latins?
A single example will suffice to demonstrate this variety. In translating the Greek word homoousios, the Latins said that the Son was consubstantial with the Father, signifying that he was of the same substance. Thus they used substance to mean essence. Yet, on the contrary, one reads more than a hundred times in Saint Hilary that there are three substances in God.
Indeed, Saint Hilary reproaches the heretics as guilty of a great crime because, through their recklessness, he was compelled to expose to the hazards of human speech matters that ought to be kept within the heart. He does not conceal that this is to undertake things unlawful, presume upon things not granted, and express things inexpressible.
A little afterward, he excuses himself because he is compelled to introduce new terms. For after setting forth the natural names—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit—he adds that everything one might seek beyond them surpasses all eloquence, the understanding of our senses, and the conception of our minds.
In another passage, he regards the bishops of Gaul as blessed because they had neither devised nor received nor even known any confession other than that first and simplest confession delivered to all the churches since the time of the Apostles.
The modesty of this holy man ought to warn us not to condemn too readily those who are unwilling to subscribe to all our terminology. But we must teach the simple what necessity compels us to speak in this manner and gradually accustom them to our way of speaking. We must also admonish them kindly that, when it is necessary to oppose the Arians on the one side and the Sabellians on the other, they should not, by preventing the means of doing so, give occasion for suspicion that they favor their errors.
Arius does indeed say that Christ is God, but secretly he quibbles that Christ was created and had a beginning. He confesses that Christ is one with the Father, but afterward whispers into the ears of his disciples that he is united to the Father as other believers are, although by a singular privilege. If we say that Christ is of the same substance as the Father, we cut off his opportunity for malice without adding anything to Scripture.
Sabellius says that the names Father, Son, and Holy Spirit signify no distinction within God. If we say that there are three in God, he will cry out that we are attempting to make three gods. If we say that within the one divine essence there is a Trinity of persons, we simply explain what Scripture teaches and close the mouth of this heretic.
If some are held by such scrupulosity that they cannot endure these terms, nevertheless, no one can deny that when we hear Scripture declaring that there is one God, we must understand a unity of the divine essence, and that when it names three, we must acknowledge three distinct properties.
When this is confessed simply and without deceit, we need not trouble ourselves about words. Let us now proceed, therefore, to the exposition of the Creed.
THE FIRST PART
I believe in God the Father Almighty.
We must first note this manner of speaking. To believe in God means to receive and acknowledge him as our God, so that we may adhere to him and to his word. This expression is taken from the Hebrew language, which uses “believe in God” for believing God and giving credence to him, although the expression signifies something higher as well.
Here, therefore, believers profess that they receive and acknowledge God as their God, so that they may be acknowledged by him as his servants and may glory with all his people, saying:
“You are our God from the beginning; therefore, we shall not die.”
For when we possess him as our God, we possess life and salvation in him.
To confirm this confidence, the title Father is added here. For through his beloved Son, in whom his good pleasure rests, God has declared himself to be our Father:
“This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” —Matthew 3:17
Therefore, he receives us in his Son, establishing a spiritual family relationship from which, as Saint Paul says:
“Every family in heaven and on earth is named.”
As soon, therefore, as faith rises to God, it possesses him as Father, because it cannot comprehend him apart from his Son, through whom so great a blessing is communicated to us. If he is our Father, we are his children; and if we are his children, we are also his heirs.
We attribute all power to him—not the vain, dormant, and idle power imagined by the Sophists, but power full of efficacy and action. For God is called Almighty, not because he could do all things but nevertheless remains inactive, but because he holds everything in his hand, governs heaven and earth by his providence, and performs and disposes all things according to his counsel and will:
“Our God is in heaven; he does whatever pleases him.” —Psalm 115:3
For if he does whatever pleases him and nothing is hidden from his providence, it follows that everything occurs by his power and command.
We touch upon this subject only briefly for now because we defer its fuller treatment to another place. Faith arms itself with a twofold consolation from the power of God.
First, it knows that he possesses more than sufficient ability to do good, since his arm extends to rule and govern all things, heaven and earth are his possession and dominion, and every creature depends upon his pleasure in order to advance the salvation of believers.
Second, faith sees that there is complete security in his protection, since everything that could harm us is subject to his will; the devil, together with all his schemes, is restrained by his will as by a bridle; and, in short, everything that could oppose our salvation is subject to his command.
Creator of Heaven and Earth
Although the understanding of the wicked is compelled merely by beholding the world to acknowledge its Creator, faith possesses a particular manner of contemplating God as the Creator of heaven and earth. For this reason the Apostle says:
“By faith we understand that the worlds were formed by the word of God.”
Indeed, we cannot understand except by faith what it means to call God the Creator of the world, however much we may appear to comprehend it with our minds and confess it with our mouths.
After our fleshly understanding has once conceived the power of God displayed in creation, it stops there. Even when it proceeds further, it considers only the power and wisdom he employed in making such a work. It then apprehends some general activity by which he preserves and directs the things he created, attributing to this activity the movement of all creatures.
But faith rises higher. After understanding that God is the Creator of the world, it also acknowledges him as its perpetual Preserver and Governor. It does not conceive of some undefined universal movement by which he directs both the entire structure of the world and all its parts. Rather, it comprehends his particular providence, by which he sustains, preserves, and gives life to everything he has created, even the smallest birds of the air.
Although the difference may not appear great, human wisdom never rises to the contemplation pursued by David in Psalm 104, especially in its conclusion:
“All things wait upon you, Lord, and you give them food in due season. When you give it to them, they gather it; when you open your hand, they are filled with every good thing. When you hide your face from them, they are troubled; when you withdraw their breath, they perish and return to dust. When you send forth your Spirit, they are created anew, and the face of the earth is renewed.”
Similar declarations are found throughout Scripture, as when it is said:
“In God we live and move and have our being.”
That from his hand dew and rain are scattered to water the fields; that by his command heaven becomes hard as iron; that from him proceed peace and war, life and death, light and darkness, pestilence and health, abundance and famine, and all other things, according as it pleases him either to display his goodness by doing good or to declare the rigor of his judgment by severity.
From this comes a singular consolation to the believing conscience. If he feeds the young ravens that cry to him for help:
“He gives food to the beasts and to the young ravens that cry.”
much more will he give nourishment to us, who are his people and the sheep of his flock.
If a little sparrow does not fall to the ground apart from his knowledge and will:
“Not one of them shall fall to the ground without your Father.”
much more does he watch over our salvation and take care for it, since he promises to preserve us as the pupil of his eye:
“He who touches you touches the pupil of his eye.”
If man does not live by bread alone, but rather by the power of the word proceeding from the mouth of God:
“Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word proceeding from the mouth of God.”
then his promise that his help will never fail us ought to be sufficient, since that help alone is able to sustain us.
On the contrary, when the believer sees barrenness, famine, or pestilence, he will recognize the wrath of God rather than attribute such things to fortune.
Finally, understanding that God is our Creator, Guardian, and Nourisher, he will conclude that we belong to him and not to ourselves; that we must live according to his will and not our own; and that our life, together with all its actions, must be directed toward him, since it is sustained entirely by his grace.
Now, so that no one may be troubled because the glory of creating all things is here particularly assigned to the Father, as though the Son and the Holy Spirit were thereby excluded, we must note that this is to be understood according to the personal properties we have explained as existing in God.
For since the beginning of everything is attributed to the Father, we properly say that he does all things—but he does so in his wisdom and through his Spirit.
If, therefore, we wish profitably to acknowledge God as the Creator of heaven and earth and the Father Almighty, we must depend upon his providence. We must then consider in our hearts his clemency and fatherly goodness and magnify him with our mouths. We must honor, fear, and love so good a Father; devote ourselves wholly to his service; and receive everything willingly from his hand, even those things that appear most contrary to our welfare.
When we suffer adversities and afflictions, we must judge that his providence orders them for our salvation. Therefore, whatever may happen, we must never doubt that he is gracious toward us and loves us, having the advancement of our salvation in view. For the first part of the Creed was given to instruct us in such confidence.
THE SECOND PART
And in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord.
What we have said—that Jesus Christ is the proper goal and object of our faith—is readily apparent from the fact that all the parts of our salvation are here enumerated and comprehended in him. For, as the Prophet says:
“The Lord went forth to save his people, to save them with his Christ.”
For through Christ’s hand he accomplished the work of his mercy—that is, the redemption of his people.
First, our Redeemer is called Jesus. This title was given to him by the mouth of the Father because he was sent to save his people and deliver them from sin:
“You shall call his name Jesus, for he shall save his people from their sins.”
In him, therefore, and nowhere else, we shall find salvation. For this name was not imposed upon him by chance or human presumption. Nor was it without cause that the angel, by God’s ordinance, called him by this name. It was done so that, being drawn away from every fantasy of seeking salvation elsewhere, we might hold him alone as our Savior.
For this reason Scripture declares:
“There is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”
This name therefore signifies to all believers that they must seek salvation in him alone and assures them that they will find it there.
The title Christ, meaning Anointed, is added. Although this title may with some reason be attributed to others, it belongs to him by a singular privilege. For the Lord anoints all those upon whom he pours out the graces of his Spirit.
It is certain that no believer has ever been without this spiritual anointing. It follows, therefore, that all believers are anointed by God. The Prophets also possessed their anointing, as did the kings and priests—not merely the outward and ceremonial anointing mentioned in the Old Testament, but a spiritual anointing.
For a Prophet, who must serve as God’s messenger among men, must be endowed with singular graces of the Holy Spirit. The same is true of a priest, who is called the messenger of the living God, and finally of kings, who bear the image of God upon earth.
Therefore, the material oil with which Prophets, priests, and kings were anointed and consecrated to their offices was not a vain and meaningless sign, but a sacrament of the true spiritual anointing.
Nevertheless, all such anointings are nothing in comparison with that of our Savior. For all other men have received different portions of grace according to the measure God was pleased to distribute to them. No one except Christ alone possessed them all together in their fullness.
Saint John, explaining more openly what had been foretold concerning him:
“God has anointed you with the oil of gladness above your companions,”
says:
“God does not give him the Spirit by measure.”
He also adds the reason:
“From his fullness we have all received, and grace for grace.”
For this reason another Prophet had foretold that the Spirit of the Lord would rest upon him—not to confer upon him only one grace, but to equip him with wisdom, understanding, power, counsel, knowledge, and godliness:
“The Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him: the Spirit of wisdom and understanding, the Spirit of counsel and power, the Spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the Lord.” —Isaiah 11:2
This prophecy was visibly confirmed when the Spirit appeared at his baptism, descending upon him and resting in him:
“He saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and coming to rest upon him.”
It is therefore with good reason that the title Christ is attributed preeminently to our Savior.
There is also good reason why the Spirit of God is called an anointing and his graces are called oil. Unless we are saturated by him, we wither, for in ourselves we possess nothing but barrenness and dryness and are devoid of all the vigor of life.
The Spirit of God, therefore, having been poured out in complete abundance upon Jesus, chose his soul as his proper dwelling place, so that from it he might flow down upon us as from the one fountain.
Thus, all believers are anointed with the oil of the Holy Spirit solely through participation in Jesus Christ, and each one receives it in proportion as he has communion with him.
We have in few words the difference between our Savior’s anointing and ours. Our Lord bestowed upon him fully and without measure all the treasures of his spiritual riches, from which Christ distributes some portion to each of us. Moreover, God caused his whole Spirit to rest upon him so that he might be for us the fountain from which the Spirit afterward proceeds to be distributed to us, so that we may all draw from his abundance and, having fellowship with him, partake of the graces of the Holy Spirit through that communion.
Moreover, through this anointing Jesus Christ was appointed King by his Father, so that all power in heaven and on earth might be subjected to him, as the Psalmist teaches. Likewise, he was consecrated Priest to perform the office of Intercessor before his Father.
These things are of great importance for strengthening and supporting our faith. As to his kingdom, it is not fleshly or earthly and therefore subject to corruption, but spiritual, belonging chiefly to the life to come and the heavenly kingdom.
Moreover, his manner of reigning is not so much for his own benefit as for ours. For he arms and strengthens us with his power, adorns us with his magnificence, enriches us with his blessings, and, in short, raises and exalts us through the majesty of his kingdom.
By means of the communion through which he has united himself to us, he makes us kings, arming us with his power to battle against the devil, sin, and death; clothing and adorning us with the garments of his righteousness in the hope of immortality; and filling us with the riches of his holiness so that we may bear fruit to God in good works.
We receive no less benefit from his priestly office. Through his intercession, he makes the Father gracious toward us by virtue of the eternal reconciliation he accomplished through his death. Moreover, he receives us into fellowship and participation in that priesthood, so that, possessing him as our Intercessor and Mediator, we may offer to the heavenly Father our prayers, thanksgivings, ourselves, and everything proceeding from us.
Thus, what our Lord anciently promised to his people:
“You shall be to me a kingdom of priests,”
is fulfilled for us today in our Savior, who alone grants us entrance into the kingdom of righteousness and the holy tabernacle of God.
In short, by the name Jesus, our confidence in redemption and salvation is confirmed. By the title Christ, we are invited to receive the fellowship of the Holy Spirit and the fruit of sanctification proceeding from him, since Christ sanctified himself for us, as he declares with his own mouth:
“For their sakes I sanctify myself.”
He is afterward called the Son of God—not as other believers are, by adoption and grace, but as the true and natural Son, and for this reason the only Son, so that he may be distinguished from all others.
For in Scripture God grants to all of us who are regenerated unto new life the honor of being called his children. Nevertheless, he attributes particularly to Jesus Christ alone the titles of true and only Son. How could he be the true and only Son among so great a multitude of brothers unless he possessed by nature what the others possess by gift?
We must beware of agreeing with those who confess Jesus Christ to be the only Son of God in such a way that, if they are pressed closely, it becomes apparent that they confess this only because he was conceived by the Holy Spirit in the womb of the Virgin. The Manichaeans likewise once imagined man to be of the substance of God because one reads that God breathed into Adam the breath of life.
On the contrary, Scripture shows us that the Son of God is his Word, begotten of him before all ages.
It is true that such people cite the following testimony in defense of their error:
“God did not spare his own Son.”
They also cite the angel’s declaration:
“The holy one who shall be born of you shall be called the Son of God.”
But so that they may not boast too greatly in such objections, let them consider with me what these words mean.
If it is a sound argument that Jesus Christ began to be the Son of God when he was conceived in the Virgin’s womb because, when conceived in her, he was called the Son of God, it will likewise follow that he began to be the Word of life only when he was manifested in the flesh. For Saint John says that he proclaims the Word of life whom human hands touched and human eyes beheld:
“That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, and which our hands have touched concerning the Word of life.”
Likewise, if they wish to follow this manner of reasoning, how will they explain what is said by the Prophet?
“You, Bethlehem, land of Judah, are little among the thousands of Judah; nevertheless, from you I will cause a Ruler to arise who shall govern my people Israel, whose goings forth have been from the beginning, from the days of eternity.”
But a single passage from Saint Paul will resolve all such quibbles:
“He was set apart for the Gospel of God, which God had promised beforehand through his Prophets, concerning his Son, who was made of the seed of David according to the flesh and declared to be the Son of God with power.” —Romans 1:1–4
Why would he particularly call him the Son of David according to the flesh and, on the other hand, say that he was declared the Son of God, unless he intended to indicate that this declaration was made apart from consideration of the flesh?
Certainly, this statement is so clear that to reply against it would not be ignorance but obstinacy. Nevertheless, we must not deny that he is the Son of God in the flesh he assumed. Rather, if we wish to speak in a manner that edifies our faith, when we call him the Son of God, we must understand not only the Word of God, eternal in himself, but the Word together with the humanity in which he was clothed, as will shortly be explained more fully.
Finally, the title Lord is given to Jesus Christ because he was appointed by the Father to be our Lord, King, and Lawgiver. Likewise, when the Father manifested his Son in the flesh, he declared that this was the one through whom he willed to reign and govern.
Therefore, the Apostle says:
“For us there is one God, from whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and we through him.”
By this is signified not only that he is our Protector and Master, whose doctrine we must hear and follow, but also that he is our Head and Prince, to whose power we must submit, whose pleasure we must obey, and according to whose will we must direct all our works.
For the Father has given him the right of the firstborn within his household, so that he may rule over his brothers with authority and distribute the blessings of his inheritance according to his will.
Who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary.
Because the mystery of the incarnation, just as it dazzles the understanding of the simple by its great brightness, also troubles and perplexes them if it is not rightly understood, we must explain it somewhat before proceeding further.
First, it was necessary that the one who was to be our Mediator should be true God and true man. For since our iniquities had placed an obstacle between God and us, alienated us from the kingdom of heaven, and turned God away from us, no one could serve as the means of reconciling us unless he could reach God himself.
But what creature could have reached him? Could it have been one of Adam’s children? All of them, together with their first father, recoiled in horror from appearing before his face. Could it have been one of the angels? They also needed a head through whom they might be perfectly united to their God.
What then? The matter was altogether hopeless unless the majesty of God descended to us, since it was not within our power to ascend to him.
For this reason, the Son of God had to become Immanuel—that is, God with us—and in such a manner that, as he joined his divinity to us, he also joined our humanity to his divinity. Otherwise, there would have been no union near enough or firm enough to give us hope that God dwelt among us and assisted us, so great was the distance between our lowliness and the greatness of the divine majesty.
Therefore, when Saint Paul presents him to us as Mediator, he expressly calls him a man:
“There is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the man Jesus Christ.”
He could just as readily have called him God, or at least omitted the word man, just as he omits the name of God in this passage. But he knew our weakness. Therefore, so that no one should torment himself by wondering where this Mediator must be sought or by what path one must approach him, Paul immediately adds that he is a man, as though saying that he is our near neighbor, joined to us because he is our flesh.
By this he intended to signify what is declared more fully elsewhere:
“We do not have a High Priest who cannot have compassion upon our infirmities, but one who was tempted in every respect as we are, yet without sin.”
What we have said will become more evident if we consider how extraordinary the office of Mediator was: to restore us so completely to God’s grace that we, who were children of men, should become his children; and that we, who were heirs of hell, should become heirs of the heavenly kingdom.
Who could have accomplished this unless the Son of God had become the Son of Man and so assumed our condition that he transferred his own to us, making ours by grace what belonged to him by nature?
We therefore possess confidence that we are the children of God, having this pledge: that the natural Son of God took a body from our body, flesh from our flesh, and bone from our bones, in order to be united with us. He received into his person what belonged to us so that what properly belonged to him might become ours, and thus he might be, together with us, both Son of God and Son of Man.
For this reason, we hope that the heavenly inheritance is ours, because the Son of God, to whom it belonged entirely, has adopted us as his brothers. And if we are his brothers, we are also his fellow heirs.
There is another reason why the one who was to be our Redeemer had to be true God and true man. It was his task to swallow up death. Who could do this except life? It was his task to conquer sin. Who could do this except righteousness? It was his office to subdue the powers of the air—that is, the devils. Who could do this except a power superior to the air and the world?
And in whom do life, righteousness, and the power of heaven reside except in God alone? Therefore, the Lord in his great clemency made himself our Redeemer when he willed to redeem us.
The other part of our redemption was that man, who had lost and ruined himself through disobedience, should efface his disgrace through obedience, satisfy the judgment of God, and suffer the penalty due to his sin:
“As by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.” —Romans 5:19
The Lord Jesus therefore came forward, assumed the role of Adam, and took his name, so that he might render himself obedient to the Father in Adam’s place, present our humanity in satisfaction before the judgment of God, and bear the penalty of sin in the same flesh in which it had been committed.
Finally, since God alone could not experience death and man alone could not overcome it, he joined divinity with humanity so that he might subject the weakness of the one to endure the penalty of death, and by the power of the other fight against death until he obtained the victory.
Those, therefore, who strip Christ either of his divinity or of his humanity not only blaspheme his greatness or obscure his goodness, but also do grave injury to men by overthrowing their faith, which cannot stand firmly unless supported by this foundation.
I consider it unnecessary to spend further time proving his divinity. The truth of his human nature was assailed by both the Manichaeans and the Marcionites, who attempted to overthrow it. The former imagined that he had brought a spiritual body from heaven. The latter held that he possessed no true body, but only a phantom and the appearance of a body.
Yet Scripture supplies many testimonies by which both errors may be firmly resisted. For the blessing was not anciently promised in a heavenly seed or in the disguise of a man, but in the seed of Abraham and Jacob:
“In your seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed.” —Genesis 22:18
Nor was the eternal throne promised to a man fashioned in the air, but to the Son of David and the fruit of his body:
“Of the fruit of your body I will set one upon your throne.” —Psalm 132:11
For this reason, when manifested in the flesh, he is called the Son of Abraham and of David:
“The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the Son of David, the Son of Abraham.”
This is not merely because he was born of the Virgin, as though he had first been fashioned in the air, but because, according to the flesh, he was formed from the seed of David, as Saint Paul explains:
“His Son, who was made of the seed of David according to the flesh.”
The same Apostle elsewhere testifies that he descended from the Jews:
“From them, according to the flesh, came Christ.”
Therefore, Christ himself, not content merely to call himself a man, calls himself the Son of Man, intending to signify that he is a man begotten from human seed.
Since the Holy Spirit had so often, through various mouths, expressed this truth so carefully and plainly—a truth not in itself particularly difficult—who would have expected men to be so shameless as to resort to evasions here? Nevertheless, we possess still other testimonies by which such slanders may be refuted.
Saint Paul says:
“God sent forth his Son, made of a woman.”
There are also countless passages showing that he was subject to cold, heat, hunger, and the other infirmities of our nature. But we should select those that can build up our hearts in true confidence.
For example, it is said that he did not confer upon the angels the honor of assuming their nature, but assumed ours, so that in our flesh and blood he might destroy through death the one who possessed the dominion of death:
“Since the children partake of flesh and blood, he himself likewise partook of the same, so that through death he might destroy the one who had the power of death.”
Again, through this fellowship he regards us as his brothers:
“He is not ashamed to call them brothers.”
Again, he had to be made like his brothers so that he might become a faithful and merciful Intercessor:
“He had to be made like his brothers in all things, so that he might be a merciful and faithful High Priest.”
Again:
“We do not have a High Priest who cannot have compassion upon our infirmities, but one who was tempted in every respect as we are, yet without sin.”
And there are other similar passages.
The heretics draw the passages they use to confirm their errors most ineptly toward their own fantasies. Marcion and his followers said that Christ had assumed a phantom instead of a body because it is said:
“He was made in the likeness of men and was found in appearance as a man.”
But he erred because he failed to consider what Saint Paul means there. For Paul does not intend to explain what kind of body Jesus Christ assumed. He merely shows that although Jesus Christ might have claimed the glory of divine majesty, he conducted himself as a man, humbling himself in his outward appearance.
The Manichaeans fashioned for him a body in the air because he is called the second Adam, heavenly and coming from heaven:
“The first man is of the earth, earthly; the second man is the Lord from heaven.”
But in this passage the Apostle does not speak of a heavenly essence, but of the spiritual power given to Christ to make us alive.
On the contrary, the doctrine believers hold concerning the true human nature of Jesus Christ is very well confirmed by this passage. For if he did not possess the same nature as we do, the argument Saint Paul presses so forcefully would be frivolous: that since Jesus Christ has risen, we shall also rise; and that if we do not rise, it would follow that Christ has not risen:
“If there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ has not risen.”
When it is said that the Word was made flesh:
“The Word was made flesh and dwelt among us,”
we must not understand this as though the Word had been transformed into flesh or confusedly mingled with it. Rather, he took a human body from the Virgin’s womb as a temple in which he might dwell.
The one who was the Son of God became the Son of Man, not by a confusion of substances but by unity of person. That is, he so joined and united his divinity with the humanity he assumed that each of the two natures retained its proper character, while Jesus Christ possessed not two distinct persons but one person alone.
If anything comparable to this mystery can be found, the likeness of man appears suitable. For we see that man is composed of two natures, yet neither is so mingled with the other that it fails to retain its proper character. The soul is not the body, and the body is not the soul.
Therefore, something may be said particularly of the soul that cannot belong to the body, and likewise something may be said of the body that cannot belong to the soul. Something may also be said of the man that cannot belong to either the soul or the body considered separately.
Finally, the things belonging particularly to the soul are transferred to the body, and those belonging to the body are mutually transferred to the soul. Meanwhile, the person composed of these two substances is one man, not several.
This manner of speaking signifies that there is one nature in man composed of two united parts, while a distinction nevertheless remains between them. Scripture speaks in this manner concerning Jesus Christ. For sometimes it attributes to him what can refer only to his humanity; sometimes what belongs particularly to his divinity; and sometimes what belongs to both natures united and not to either one alone.
Indeed, Scripture expresses so carefully the union of the two natures in Jesus Christ that it communicates to one what belongs to the other. This manner of speaking was called by the ancient teachers the communication of properties.
When I have proved all these things by sound testimonies of Scripture, it will be evident that I am saying nothing of my own.
When Jesus Christ said concerning himself:
“Before Abraham was, I am,”
this could not be understood of his humanity, for he did not become man until many centuries after Abraham’s death.
Likewise, what is said of him:
“He is the firstborn of every creature,” and, “He is before all things, and by him all things consist,”
—Colossians 1:15, 17
cannot belong to man. Such praises, therefore, belong properly to his divinity.
But the following things belong to his humanity: that he is called the servant of the Father; that he grew in age and wisdom before God and men:
“Jesus increased in wisdom and stature and in favor with God and men”;
that he confesses himself to be less than the Father:
“My Father is greater than I”;
that he does not seek his own glory; that he does not know when the last day will come:
“Of that day and hour no one knows, neither the angels of heaven nor the Son, but the Father alone”;
that he does not speak from himself; that he does not seek his own will; and that he can be seen and touched.
For insofar as he is God, he is equal to the Father; he cannot increase in anything; he does all things for his own sake; nothing is hidden from him; he does everything according to his pleasure; and he is invisible and cannot be touched.
There is a communication of properties when Saint Paul says:
“God purchased his Church with his own blood,”
and:
“The Lord of glory was crucified.”
Certainly, God has no blood and cannot suffer. But because Christ, who was true God and true man, was crucified and shed his blood for us, what was done in his humanity is transferred by an improper yet reasonable manner of speaking to his divine nature.
The same example appears when Saint John says that God laid down his life for us:
“By this we know the love of God: that he laid down his life for us.”
For there he attributes to the divinity what belongs particularly to the humanity.
On the other hand, when Christ said:
“No one has ascended into heaven except the Son of Man who is in heaven,”
he was not then in heaven according to his body. But because he was God and man, by reason of the union of his two natures he attributed to the one what belonged to the other.
Yet we cannot better understand the true substance of Christ than through the passages that comprehend both natures together, of which there are many in the Gospel of Saint John. For the things stated there belong neither to his humanity nor to his divinity considered separately, but to his person insofar as he is God and man.
Thus, authority was given to him by the Father to forgive sins, raise whomever he wills, and bestow righteousness, holiness, and salvation. He was appointed Judge over the living and the dead so that he might be honored as the Father. He is the Light of the world, the Good Shepherd, the only Door, and the Vine.
For he received these privileges when he was manifested in the flesh, although he possessed them in himself before the creation of the world. It is certain that they cannot belong to a man possessing nothing but humanity.
We must understand in this same sense what Saint Paul says:
“Then he shall deliver the kingdom to God his Father,” —1 Corinthians 15:24
after he has executed judgment. Certainly, the kingdom of the Son of God, which had no beginning, can have no end.
But just as his kingdom was in some measure hidden beneath the humility of the flesh, and he emptied himself, taking the form of a servant and outwardly laying aside his majesty to render himself obedient to the Father; and just as, after this submission, he was crowned with glory and honor and, being exalted, received a name above every name, before which every knee must bow:
“He humbled himself and became obedient unto death. Therefore God also highly exalted him and gave him a name above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,”
so likewise he will then submit to his Father both this crown of glory and everything he received from him in the flesh:
“Then the Son himself shall be subject to him who subjected all things to him, so that God may be all in all.”
This observation will be greatly useful in freeing us from many perplexities. It is remarkable how some simple people torment themselves when such expressions are presented to them, in which things are attributed to Christ that belong properly neither to his humanity nor to his divinity considered separately. They fail to consider that these things belong to his person, in which he was manifested as God and man.
Indeed, one may see how all the things stated above agree perfectly together, provided that we are willing to consider so great a mystery with the reverence due to its greatness.
But there is nothing that furious and deranged minds will not disturb. They seize upon what belongs properly to the humanity of Jesus Christ in order to destroy his divinity; upon what belongs to his divinity in order to destroy his humanity; and upon what is said of both natures together in order to overthrow them both.
But what is this except to argue that Christ is not man because he is God, that he is not God because he is man, and that he is neither God nor man because he contains both natures within himself?
We therefore conclude that Christ, insofar as he is God and man, composed of two natures united but not confused, is our Lord and the true Son of God, even according to his humanity, although not simply by reason of his humanity.
For we must abhor the heresy of Nestorius, who, dividing rather than distinguishing the natures of Jesus Christ, thereby imagined a double Christ. On the contrary, we see how Scripture proclaims loudly and clearly that the one born of the Virgin Mary shall be called the Son of God:
“The holy one who shall be born of you shall be called the Son of God.”
It also declares that this Virgin is the mother of our Lord:
“Why is this granted to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?”
We therefore confess that he was born of the Virgin Mary so that he might be acknowledged as the true Son of Abraham and David who had been promised through the Law and the Prophets. From this faith receives a twofold benefit.
First, it sees that the Son of God, by assuming our flesh, was prepared to accomplish the salvation of men, since by this means he called us into fellowship and communion with himself and all his blessings. Desiring to overcome the devil and death, he assumed our condition, in which he willed to conquer and triumph, so that the victory and triumph might be ours.
The second benefit is that, by tracing the lineage of Jesus Christ back to David and Abraham, we possess greater certainty that our Redeemer is the one whom God had foretold so long before.
It is then said that he was conceived by the Holy Spirit because it was not fitting that the one sent to purify others should himself possess an impure and contaminated origin. Nor was it fitting that the human body taken by the divine essence as its dwelling place should be polluted by the universal corruption of mankind.
The Holy Spirit therefore worked here and, by his marvelous and incomprehensible power, overcame the ordinary law of nature. He caused Jesus Christ to be stained by no spot or fleshly pollution, but to be born in perfect holiness and purity.
Faith is therefore taught to seek all holiness confidently in Jesus Christ and in him alone, because he alone was exempted in his conception from human corruption.
It follows afterward how he accomplished our redemption, for which purpose he had become mortal man. For because God had been provoked to wrath by man’s disobedience, Christ made satisfaction through his obedience, subjecting himself to the Father even unto death.
Therefore, in the restoration of our salvation, his obedience must be held in the highest esteem, as Saint Paul says:
“Just as by the transgression of one all were constituted sinners, so by the obedience of one many are accounted righteous.”