We must refer the fact that Christ is said to speak nothing of Himself, to His human nature. After explaining how it is right to say that He hears and sees the Father as being God, He shows conclusively, by a large number of proofs, that the Son of God is not a creature.
132. Are we indeed to bring the Son of God to such a low estate that He may not know how to act or speak, except as He hears, and are we to suppose that a fixed measure of action or of speech is assigned to Him, because it is written: “I speak not of Myself,” and, further on: “As the Father hath said unto Me, even so I speak”?1036 S. John xii. 50. But those words have reference to the obedience of the flesh, or else to the faith in the Unity. For many learned men allow that the Son hears, and that the Father speaks to the Son through the unity of their Nature; for that which the Son, through the unity of their will, knows that the Father wills, He seems to have heard.
133. Whereby is meant no personal duty, but an indivisible sentence of co-operation. For this does not signify any actual hearing of words, but the unity of will and of power, which exists both in the Father and in the Son. He has stated that this exists also in the Holy Spirit, in another place, saying, “For He shall not speak of Himself, but whatsoever He shall hear, that shall He speak,”1037 S. John xvi. 13. so that we may learn that whatsoever the Spirit says, the Son also says; and whatsoever the Son says, the Father says also; for there is one mind and one mode of working in the Trinity. For, as the Father is seen in the Son, not indeed in bodily appearance, but in the unity of the Godhead, so also the Father speaks in the Son, not with a voice of earth, not with a human sound, but in the unity of Their work. So when He had said: “The Father that dwelleth in Me, He speaketh; and the works that I do, He doeth;”1038 S. John xiv. 10. He added: “Believe Me, that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me; or else believe Me for the very work’s sake.”1039 S. John xiv. 17.
134. This is what we understand according to the whole course of the holy Scriptures; but the Arians, who will not think of God the things that be right, may be put to silence by an example just suited to their deserts; that they may not believe everything in carnal fashion, since they themselves do not see the works of their father the devil with bodily eyes. So the Lord has declared of their fellows the Jews, saying: “Ye do what ye have seen your father doing;”1040 S. John viii. 38. though they are reproved not because they saw the work of the devil, but because they did his will, since the devil unseen works out sin in them in accordance with their own wickedness. We have written this, as the Apostle did, because of the folly of these traitors.1041 2 Tim. iii. 9.
135. But we have sufficiently proved by examples from Scripture that it is a property of the unity of the divine majesty that the Father should abide in the Son, and that the Son should seem to have heard from the Father those things which He speaks. How else can we understand the unity of majesty than by the knowledge that the same deference is paid to the Father and the Son? For what can be better put than the Apostle’s saying that the Lord of glory was crucified?1042 1 Cor. ii. 8.
136. The Son then is the God of glory and the Lord of glory, but glory is not subject to creatures; the Son therefore is not a creature.
137. The Son is the Image of the Father’s Substance;1043 Heb. i. 3. but every creature is unlike that divine Substance, but the Son of the Father is not unlike God; therefore the Son is not a creature.
138. The Son thought it not robbery to be equal with God;1044 Phil. ii. 6. but no creature is equal with God, the Son, however, is equal; therefore the Son is not a creature.
139. Every creature is changeable; but the Son of God is not changeable; therefore the Son of God is not a creature.
140. Every creature meets with chance occurrences of good and evil after the powers of its nature, and also feels their passing away; but nothing can pass away from or bring addition to the Son of God in His Godhead; therefore the Son of God is not a creature.
141. Every work of His God will bring into judgment;1045 Eccles. xii. 14. but the Son of God is not brought into judgment; for He Himself judges; therefore the Son of God is not a creature.
142. Lastly, that thou mayest understand the unity, the Saviour in speaking of His sheep says: “No man is able to pluck them out of My hand. My Father Which gave them to Me is greater than all, and no man is able to pluck them out of My Father’s hand. I and My Father are one.”1046 S. John x. 28–30.
143. So the Son gives life as does the Father. “For as the Father raiseth up the dead and quickeneth them, even so the Son quickeneth whom He will.”1047 S. John v. 21. So the Son raises up as does the Father: so too the Son preserves as does the Father. He Who is not unequal in grace, how is He unequal in power? So also the Son does not destroy, as neither does the Father. Therefore lest any one should believe there were two Gods, or should imagine a diversity of power, He said that He was one with His Father. How can a creature say that? Therefore the Son of God is not a creature.
144. It is not the same thing to rule as to serve; but Christ is both a King and the Son of a King. The Son of God therefore is not a servant. Every creature, however, gives service. But the Son of God, Who makes servants become the sons of God, does not give service. Therefore the Son of God is not a servant.
CAPUT XI.
Quod Christus legatur nihil a se loqui, hoc referendum ad ipsius humanitatem. Quomodo etiam secundum divinitatem audire ac videre Patrem recte dicatur, exposito, Dei Filium creaturam non esse multis coacervatis argumentis evincit.
0675C
133. [Alias Cap. V.] An vero in hanc humilitatem Dei Filium deducemus, ut nisi quae audierit, facere aut loqui nesciat: et praescriptam agendi loquendique ei putemus esse mensuram; quia scriptum est: Ex me ipso non sum locutus (Joan. XII, 49); et infra: Sicut dixit mihi Pater, ita loquor (Ibid. 50)? Sed ad obedientiam carnis, aut ad fidem unitatis ista referantur. Plerique enim doctiores et audire Filium, et dicere aliquid Filio Patrem accipiunt per 575 unitatem naturae, quod enim per unitatem voluntatis 0675D novit Filius Patrem velle, videtur audisse.
134. Unde non officium corporale, sed arbitrium indissociabile cooperationis declaratur; neque enim verborum hic aliquem significat auditum, sed unitatem voluntatis atque virtutis, quae et in Patre est et in Filio. Quam etiam in Spiritu sancto esse memoravit 0676A alio loco, dicens: Non enim loquetur a se, sed quaecumque audit, loquetur (Joan. XVI, 13); ut adverteremus quia quidquid Spiritus loquitur, loquitur et Filius: et quidquid loquitur Filius, loquitur et Pater; quia una sententia et operatio Trinitatis est. Sicut enim Pater videtur in Filio, non utique specie corporali, sed unitate divinitatis; ita etiam Pater loquitur in Filio, non temporali voce, nec corporali sono, sed operis unitate. Denique cum dixisset: Pater qui in me manet, ipse loquitur: et opera quae ego facio, ipse facit; addidit: Credite mihi, quia ego in Patre, et Pater in me est. Alioquin propter opera ipsa credite (Joan. XII, 60; XIV, 50).
135. Hic intellectus est noster secundum divinarum seriem Scripturarum: Ariani autem qui nolunt de Deo aestimare quae digna sunt, vel apto suis meritis 0676B confutentur exemplo, ne totum carnaliter credant; cum ipsi patris sui diaboli opera incorporaliter videant. Sicut de eorum consortibus Judaeis Dominus declaravit dicens: Vos quod vidistis patrem vestrum facientem, facitis (Joan. VIII, 38); cum utique non quia diabolum operantem viderint, sed quia arbitria ejus fecerint, arguantur, invisibiliter in his secundum iniquitatem suam diabolo operante peccatum. Hoc secundum Apostolum (II Tim. III, 9) propter insipientiam posuimus perfidorum.
136. Caeterum satis probatum est Scripturarum exemplis ad unitatem majestatis pertinere divinae, quod et Pater maneat in Filio; et ea quae loquitur Filius, a Patre videatur audisse. Unitatem autem majestatis 0676C quibus aliis possumus intelligere, quam quod eadem Patri et Filio deferuntur? Nam quid praecellentius potest dici, quam quod Apostolus (I Cor. II, 8) dixit Dominum majestatis crucifixum?
137. Filius ergo est et Deus majestatis, et Dominus majestatis; sed non creaturis subjecta majestas: non ergo creatura Filius.
138. Filius paternae est imago substantiae (Hebr. I, 3): omnis autem creatura dissimilis supernae substantiae, sed non dissimilis Dei Patris Filius: non ergo creatura Filius.
139. Filius non rapinam arbitratus est esse se aequalem Deo (Phil. II, 6): sed nulla creatura aequalis Deo, aequalis autem Filius: non ergo creatura Filius.
0676D 140. Omnis creatura mutabilis: sed non mutabilis Dei Filius: non ergo creatura Dei Filius.
141. Omnis creatura accidentia et boni et mali recipit suae capacitate naturae, eademque decessionem sentit: Dei autem Filio nihil 576 potest ex ejus divinitate vel decedere vel accedere: non ergo creatura Dei Filius.
0677A 142. Omne opus suum adducet Deus in judicium (Eccl. XII, 14), sed Dei Filius non adducitur in judicium; quia ipse judicat: non ergo creatura Dei Filius.
143. Postremo ut unitatem intelligas, de ovibus dicens Salvator: Nullus, inquit, rapit eas de manu mea. Pater quod dedit mihi, majus omnibus est, et nemo potest rapere de manu Patris mei. Ego et Pater unum sumus (Joan. X, 29, 30).
144. Sic vivificat Filius, ut Pater: Sicut enim Pater suscitat mortuos et vivificat; sic et Filius quos vult, vivificat (Joan. V, 21). Sic suscitat Filius, ut Pater: sic conservat Filius, ut Pater. Qui non impar est gratia, quomodo impar est potestate? Sic etiam non perdit Filius, ut Pater. Et ideo ne quis vel duos deos crederet, vel discretionem potestatis induceret, unum 0677B se esse cum Patre dixit. Id quemadmodum potest dicere creatura? Non ergo creatura Dei Filius est.
145. Non idem est regnare et servire: Christus autem et rex est et filius regis: non ergo servus est Dei Filius. Omnis autem creatura servit; sed non servit Dei Filius, qui ex servis filios Dei facit: non ergo creatura Dei Filius.