Sacred Texts  Christianity  Early Church Fathers  Index  Previous  Next 

II.-Fragments Apparently of the Same Epistle of the Synod of Antioch

To Wit, of that Part of It Which It is Agreed that Eusebius Left Unnoticed.¹

------------

He says, therefore, in the commentaries (they speak of Paul), that he maintains the dignity of wisdom.

And thereafter:

If, however, he had been united² according to formation and generation, this is what befalls the man. And again: For that wisdom, as we believe, was not congenerate³ with humanity substantially, but qualitatively.⁴

And thereafter:

In what respect, moreover, does he mean to allege that the formation⁵ of Christ is different and diverse from ours, when we hold that, in this one thing of prime consequence, His constitution differs from ours, to wit, that what in us is the interior man, is in Him the Word.⁶

And thereafter:

If he means to allege that Wisdom dwells in Him as in no other, this expresses indeed the same mode of inhabitation, though it makes it excel in respect of measure and multitude; He being supposed to derive a superior knowledge from the Wisdom, say for example, twice as large as others, or any other number of times as large; or, again, it may be less than twice as large a knowledge as others have. This, however, the catholic and ecclesiastical canons disallow, and hold rather that other men indeed received of Wisdom as an inspiration from without, which, though with them, is distinct from them;⁷ but that Wisdom in verity came of itself substantially into His body by Mary.

And after other matters:

And they hold that there are not two Sons. But if Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and if Wisdom also is the Son of God; and if the Wisdom is one thing and Jesus Christ another, there are two Sons.

And thereafter:

Moreover understand (Paul would say) the union with Wisdom in a different sense, namely as being one according to instruction and participation;⁸ but not as if it were formed according to the substance in the body.

And after other matters:

Neither was the God who bore the human body and had assumed it, without knowledge⁹ of human affections¹⁰ in the first instance;¹¹ nor was the human body without knowledge, in the first instance, of divine operations in him in whom He (the God) was, and by whom He wrought these operations. He was formed, in the first instance, as man in the womb; and, in the second instance,¹² the God also was in the womb, united essentially with the human,¹³ that is to say, His substance being wedded with the man.