Scripture Passages

 1. GEN. i. 26. "Let us make man," etc.

 The Catholic Fathers, as is well known, interpret such texts as this in the general sense which we find taken above (vol. i. de Syn. § 27, p. 112) by the first Sirmian Council convened against Photinus, Marcellus, etc. It is scarcely necessary to refer to instances; Petavius, however, cites the following: First, those in which the Eternal Father is considered in Gen. i. 26 to speak to the Son. Theophilus, ad Autol. ii. 18. Novatian, de Trin. 26. Tertullian, Prax. 12. Synod. Antioch. contr. Paul. Samos. ap. Routh, Reliqu. t. 2, p. 468. Basil. Hexaem. fin. Cyr. Hieros. Cat. x. 6. Cyril. Alex. Dial. iv. p. 516. Athan. contr. Gentes, 46. Orat. iii. § 29 fin. Chrysost. in Genes. Hom. viii. 3. Hilar. Trin. iv. 17, v. 8. Ambros. Hexaëm. vi. 7. Augustin. c. Maxim. ii. 26, n. 2. Next those in which Son and Spirit are considered as addressed. Theoph. ad Autol. ii. 18. Basil. contr. Eunom. v. 4, p. 315. Pseudo-Chrysost. de Trin. t. i. p. 832. Cyril. Thesaur. p. 12. Theodor. in Genes. 19. Hær. v. 3, and 9. But even here, where the Arians agree with Catholics, they differ in this remarkable respect, that in the Canons they pass in their Councils, they place certain interpretations of Scripture under the sanction of an anathema, showing how far less free the system of heretics is than that of the Church.

 2. Gen. xviii. 1. "The Lord appeared to Abraham," etc.

 The same Sirmian Council anathematises those who say that Abraham saw "not the Son, but the Ingenerate God."

 This again, in spite of the wording, which is directed against the Catholic doctrine, and is of an heretical implication, is a Catholic interpretation. vid. (besides Philo de Somniis, i. 12, p. 1139,) Justin. Tryph. 56, and 126. Iren. Hær. iv. 10, n. 1. Tertull. de Carn. Christ. 6. adv. Marc. iii. 9. adv. Prax. 16. Novat. de Trin. 18. Origen. in Gen. Hom. iv. 5. Cyprian. adv. Jud. ii. 5. Antioch. Syn. contr. Paul. apud Routh, Rell. t. 2, p. 469. Athan. Orat. ii. 13. Epiph. Ancor. 29 and 39. Hær. 71, 5. Chrysost. in Gen. Hom. 41, 6 and 7. These references are principally from Petavius; also from Dorscheus, who has written an elaborate commentary on this Council. The implication alluded to above is, that the Son is of a visible substance, and thus is naturally the manifestation of the Invisible God. Bull (Def. F. N. iv. 3) denies what Petavius maintains, that this doctrine is found in Justin, Origen, etc. The Catholic doctrine is that the Son manifests Himself (and thereby His Father) by means of material representations. Augustine seems to have been the first who changed the mode of viewing the texts in question, and considered the divine appearance, not God the Son, but a created Angel. vid. de Trin. ii. passim. Jansenius considers that he did so from a suggestion of S. Ambrose, that the hitherto received view had been the "origo hæresis Arianæ," vid. his Augustinus, lib. proSm. c. 12, t. 2, p. 12.

 3. Exodus xxxiii. 23. "Thou shalt see My back, but My face," etc [ ta opiso mou ] and not [ to prosopon ]. Gregory Naz. interprets [ to opiso ([ opisthia ])] to mean God's works in contrast with His [ eidos ].

 4. Deut. xxviii. 66. "Why Life shall be hanging before thee."

 Athanasius says, "His crucifixion is denoted by 'Ye shall see your Life hanging.'" Orat. ii. 16, supr. vol. i. p. 270.

 Vid. Iren. Hær. iv. 10, 2. Tertull. in Jud. 11. Cyprian. Testim. ii. 20. Lactant. Instit. iv. 18. Cyril. Catech. xiii. 19. August. contr. Faust. xvi. 22, which are referred to in loc. Cypr. (Oxf. Tr.) To which add Leon. Serm. 59, 6. Isidor. Hisp. contr. Jud. i. 35, ii. 6. Origen. in Cels. ii. 75. Epiph. Hær. 24, p. 75. Damasc. F. O. iv. 11. fin. This interpretation I am told by a great authority is recommended even by the letter, which has [Hebrew-1], [ apenanti ton ophthalmon sou ], in Sept. "Pendebit tibi a regione," vid. Gesenius, who also says, "Since things which are à regione of a place, are necessarily a little removed from it, it follows that [Hebrew-2] signifies at the same time to be at a small distance," referring to the case of Hagar, who was but a bow-shot from her child. Also, though the word here is [Hebrew-3], yet [Hebrew-4] which is the same root, is used for hanging on a stake, or crucifixion, e.g. Gen. xl. 19. Deut. xxi. 22. Esth. v. 14; vii. 10.

 5. Psalm xliv. 9. "Therefore God, Thy God, hath anointed Thee," etc.

 " Wherefore," says Athan. "does not imply reward of virtue or conduct in the Word, but the reason why He came down to us, and of the Spirit's anointing which took place in Him for our sakes. For he says not, 'Wherefore He anointed Thee in order to Thy being God or King or Son or Word;' for so He was before and is for ever, as has been shown; but rather, 'Since Thou art God and King, therefore Thou wast anointed, since none but Thou couldest unite man to the Holy Ghost, Thou the Image of the Father, in which we were made in the beginning; for Thine also is the Spirit.' ... That as through Him we have come to be, so also in Him all men might be redeemed from their sins, and by Him all things might be ruled." Orat. i. § 49, supr. vol. i. p. 230.

 The word "wherefore" denotes the fitness why the Son of God should become the Son of man. His Throne, as God, is for ever; He has loved righteousness; therefore He is equal to the anointing of the Spirit, as man. And so S. Cyril in Joan. lib. v. 2. "In this ineffable unity," says St. Leo, "of the Trinity, whose words and judgments are common in all, the Person of the Son has fitly undertaken to repair the race of man, that since He it is by whom all things were made, and without whom nothing is made, and who breathed the truth of rational life into men fashioned of the dust of the earth, so He too should restore to its lost dignity our nature thus fallen from the citadel of eternity, and should be the reformer of that of which He had been the maker." Leon. Serm. 64, 2. vid. Athan. de Incarn. 7 fin. 10. In illud Omn. 2. Cyril. in Gen. i. p. 13.

 6. Prov. viii. 22. "The Lord created Me in the beginning of His ways, for His works."

 The long and beautiful discourse left us by Athanasius on the First-born and His condescension, may be said to have grown out of what must be considered a wrong reading of this verse, created for possessed, [ ektise ] for [ ektesato ] being the Septuagint translation of the Hebrew [Hebrew], as also in Gen. xiv. 19, 22. Such too is the sense of the word given in the Chaldee, Syriac, and Arabic versions, and the greater number of primitive writers. In consequence we find that it was one of the passages relied upon by the forerunners of the Arians in the 3rd century, vid. supr. vol. i. pp. 45-47. On the rise of Arianism, Eusebius of Nicomedia appealed to it against Alexander; also the other Eusebius in Demonstr. Evan v. p. 212, etc. It was still insisted on in A.D. 350.

 On the other hand, Aquila translates [ ektesato ], and so read Basil c. Eunom. ii. 20, Nyssen c. Eunom i. p. 34, Jerome in Is. xxvi. 13; and the Vulgate translates possedit, vid. also Gen. iv. 1, and Deut. xxxii. 8. The Hebrew sense is also recognised by Eusebius, Eccl. Theol. iii. 2, p. 153, and Epiph. Hær. 69, 24.

 Athanasius, assuming the word created to be correct, interprets it of our Lord's human nature, as do Epiph. Hær. 69, 20-25. Basil. Ep. viii. 8. Naz. Orat. 30. 2. Nyss. contr. Eunom. ut. supr. et al. Cyril. Thesaur. p. 155. Hilar. de Trin. xii. 36-49. Ambros. de Fid. i. 15. August. de Fid. et Symb. 6.

 Our Lord is [ arche hodon ], says Athan. Orat. ii. 47, fin. in contrast with His proper Sonship; and so Justin understands the phrase, according to the Benedictine Ed. vid. supr. art. Indwelling .

 7. Isa. liii. 7. "He shall be led as a sheep to the slaughter."

 Athan. says, Orat. i. § 54, supr. vol. i. p. 234, as elsewhere, that the error of heretics in their interpretation of Scripture arises from their missing the person, time, circumstances, etc., which Scripture has in view, and which (as I understand him to imply) Tradition (that is, the continuous teaching of the Church,) supplies; just as the Jews, as regards Isa. liii. instead of learning from Philip, as he says, the meaning of the chapter, conjecture its words to be spoken of Jeremias or some other of the Prophets.

 The more common evasion on the part of the Jews was to interpret the prophecy of their own sufferings in captivity. It was an idea of Grotius that the prophecy received a first fulfilment in Jeremiah. vid. Justin. Tryph. 72 et al. Iren. Hær. iv. 33. Tertull. in Jud. 9. Cyprian Testim. in Jud. ii. 13. Euseb. Dem. iii. 2, etc.

 8. Jerem. xxxi. 22. "The Lord hath created a new salvation," etc.

 This is the Septuagint version, as Athan. notices Expos. F. § 3, Aquila's being "The Lord hath created a new thing in the woman." The Vulgate ("a new thing upon the earth, a woman shall compass a man,") is with the Hebrew. Athan. has preserved Aquila's version in three other places, Ps. xxx. 12, lix. 5, and lxv. 18.

 9. Matt. i. 25. "And he knew her not, until," etc., that is, until then when it became impossible, and need not be denied.

 Supposing it was said, "He knew her not till her death," would not that mean, "He never knew her"? and in like manner, if she was "the Mother of God," it was an impossible idea, and the Evangelist would feel it to be so. They only can entertain the idea who in truth do not believe our Lord's divinity, who do not believe literally that the Son of Mary is God. Vid. art. Mary .

 10. Matt. iii. 17. "This is My well-beloved Son," [ agapetos ], etc. "Only-begotten and Well-beloved are the same," says Athan. ... "hence the Word, with a view of conveying to Abraham the idea 'Only begotten,' says, 'Offer thy Son, thy Well-beloved.'" Orat. iv. § 24. He adds, ibid. iv. § 29, "The word 'Well-beloved' even the Greeks, who are skilful in grammar, know to be equivalent with 'Only-begotten.' For Homer speaks thus of Telemachus, who was the only-begotten of Ulysses, in the second book of the Odyssey:

 O'er the wide earth, dear youth, why seek to run,  An only child, a well-beloved son? ([ mounos eon agapetos ].)  He whom you mourn, divine Ulysses, fell,  Far from his country, where the strangers dwell.

 Therefore he who is the only son of his father is called well-beloved."

 [ Agapetos ] is explained by [ monogenes ] by Hesychius, Suidas, and Pollux; it is the version in the Sept. equally with [ monogenes ] of the Hebrew [Hebrew]. Homer calls Astyanax [ Hektoriden agapeton ]; Plutarch notices the instance of Telemachus, [ Homeros agapeton onomazei mounon telugeton, toutesti me echousi heteron goneusi mete hexousi gegennemenon ], as quoted by Wetstein in Matt. iii. 17. Vid. also Suicer in voc.

 11. Matt. xii. 32. "Whosoever shall speak a word," etc.

 This passage, which is commented on at Orat. i. § 50, Athan. explains at some length in Serap. iv. 8, etc., supr. vol. i. p. 231. Origen, he says, and Theognostus understand the sin against the Holy Ghost to be apostasy from the grace of Baptism, referring to Heb. vi. 4. So far the two agree; but Origen went on to say, that the proper power or virtue of the Son extends over rational natures alone, e.g. heathens, but that of the Spirit only over Christians; those then who sin against the Son or their reason, have a remedy in Christianity and its baptism, but nothing remains for those who sin against the Spirit. But Theognostus, referring to the text, "I have many things to say, but ye cannot bear them now; howbeit, when He, the Spirit of Truth," etc., argued that to sin against the Son was to sin against inferior light, but against the Spirit was to reject the full truth of the Gospel.

 12. Matt. xiii. 25. "His enemy came and over-sowed cockle," etc. [ epispeiras ], Decr. § 2. Orat. i. § 1, etc., etc. supr. vol. i. pp. 14, 155.

 An allusion to this parable is very frequent in Athan., chiefly with a reference to Arianism. He draws it out at length, Orat. ii. § 34. "What is sown in every soul from the beginning is that God has a Son, the Word, the Wisdom, the Power, that is, His Image and Radiance; from which it at once follows that He is always; that He is from the Father; that He is like; that he is the eternal offspring of His substance; and there is no idea involved in these of creature or work. But when the man who is an enemy, while men slept, made a second sowing, of 'He is a creature,' and 'There was once when He was not,' and 'How can it be?' thenceforth the wicked heresy of Christ's enemies rose." Elsewhere, he uses the parable for the evil influences introduced into the soul upon Adam's fall, contr. Apoll. i. § 15, as does S. Irenæus Hær. iv. 40, n. 3, using it of such as lead to backsliding in Christians, ibid. v. 10, n. 1. Gregory Nyssen, of the natural passions and of false reason misleading them, de An. et Resurr. t. ii. p. 640. vid. also Leon. Ep. 156, c. 2.

 Tertullian uses the image in a similar but higher sense, when he applies it to Eve's temptation, and goes on to contrast it with Christ's birth from a Virgin: "In virginem adhuc Evam irrepserat verbum ædificatorium mortis; in Virginem æque introducendum erat Dei Verbum exstructorium vitæ ... Ut in doloribus pareret, verbum diaboli semen illi fuit; contra Maria," etc. de Carn. Christ. 17. S. Leo, as Athan., makes "seed" in the parable apply peculiarly to faith in contrast with obedience, Serm. 69, 5, init.

 13. John i. 1. "In the beginning," etc. vid. Orat. i. § 11, supr. vol. i. p. 167.

 If "beginning" in this verse be taken, not to imply time, but origination, then the first verse of St. John's Gospel may be interpreted "In the Beginning," or Origin, i.e. in the Father, "was the Word." Thus Athan. himself understands the text. Orat. ii. 57. Orat. iv. § 1. vid. also Orat. iii. § 9. Origen. in Joan. tom. 1, 17. Method. ap. Phot. cod. 235, p. 940. Nyssen. contr. Eunom. iii. p. 106. Cyril. Thesaur. 32, p. 312. Euseb. Eccl. Theol. ii. 11 and 14, pp. 118, 123, and Jerome in Calmet on Ps. 109.

 14. John i. 3. "Without Him was nothing made that was made." Vid. Orat. i. § 19. supr. p. 179.

 The words "that was made" which end this verse were omitted by the ancient citers of it, as Irenæus, Clement, Origen, Eusebius, Tertullian, nay, Augustine; but because it was abused by the Eunomians, Macedonians, etc., as if derogatory to the divinity of the Holy Spirit, it was quoted in full, as by Epiphanius, Ancor. 75, who goes so far as to speak severely of the ancient mode of citation. vid. Fabric. and Routh, ad Hippol. contr. Noet. 12.

 Also vid. Simon. Hist. Crit. Comment. pp. 7, 32, 52. Lampe in loc. Joann. Fabric. in Apocryph. N. T. t. 1, p. 384. Petav. de Trin. ii. 6, § 6. Ed. Ben. in Ambros. de Fid. iii. 6. Wetstein in loc. Wolf. Cur. Phil. in loc. The verse was not ended as we at present read it, especially in the East, till the time of S. Chrysostom, according to Simon, (vid. Ben. Præf. in Joann. § iv.) though, as has been said above, S. Epiphanius had spoken strongly against the ancient reading. S. Ambrose loc. cit. refers it to the Arians, Lampe refers it to the Valentinians on the strength of Iren. Hær. i. 8, n. 5. Theophilus in loc. (if the Commentary on the Gospels is his) understands by [ ouden ] "an idol," referring to 1 Cor. viii. 4. Augustine, even at so late a date, adopts the old reading, vid. de Gen. ad lit. v. 29-31. It was the reading of the Vulgate, even at the time it was ruled by the Council of Trent to be authentic, and of the Roman Missal. The verse is made to end after "in Him," (thus, [ oud' hen ho gegonen en autoi ]) by Epiph. Ancor. 75. Hil. in Psalm. 148, 4. Ambros. de Fid. iii. 6. Nyssen in Eunom. i. p. 84, app., which favours the Arians. The counterpart of the ancient reading, which is very awkward, ("What was made in Him was life,") is found in August. loc. cit. and Ambrose in Psalm xxxvi. 35, but he also notices "What was made, was in Him," de Fid. loc. cit. It is remarkable that St. Ambrose attributes the present punctuation to the Alexandrians (in loc. Psalm.) in spite of Athan.'s and Alexander's (Theod. Hist. i. 3, p. 733), nay, Cyril's (in loc. Joann.) adoption of the ancient.

 15. John ii. 4. "Woman," etc. "He chid His Mother," says Athan.

 [ Epeplette ]; and so [ epetimese ], Chrysost. in loc. Joann. Hom. 21, 3, and Theophyl. [ hos despotes epitimai ], Theodor. Eran. ii. p. 106. [ entrepei ], Anon. ap. Corder. Cat. in loc. [ memphetai ], Alter Anon. ibid. [ epitima ouk atimazon alla diorthoumenos ], Euthym. in loc. [ ouk epeplexen ], Pseudo-Justin. Quæst. ad Orthod. 136. It is remarkable that Athan. dwells on these words as implying our Lord's humanity, (i.e. because Christ appeared to decline a miracle,) when one reason assigned for them by the Fathers is that He wished, in the words [ ti moi kai soi ], to remind our Lady that He was the Son of God and must be "in His Father's house." "Repellens ejus intempestivam festinationem," Iren. Hær. iii. 16, n. 7, who thinks she desired to drink of His cup; others that their entertainer was poor, and that she wished to befriend him. Nothing can be argued from S. Athan.'s particular word here commented on, how he would have taken the passage. That the tone of our Lord's words is indeed (judging humanly and speaking humanly) cold and distant, is a simple fact, but it may be explained variously. It is observable that [ epiplettei ] and [ epitimai ] are the words used by Theophylact (in Joan. xi. 34, vid. infra, art. Specialties,) for our Lord's treatment of His own sacred body. But they are very vague words, and have a strong meaning or not, as the case may be.

 16. John x. 30. "I and My Father are one."

 "They contend," says Athan., Orat. iii. § 10, supr. vol. i. p. 369, "that the Son and the Father are not in such wise one as the Church preaches ... but that, since what the Father wills, the Son wills also, and ... is in all respects concordant ([ symphonos ]) with Him ... therefore it is that He and the Father are one. And some of them have dared to write as well as to say this," viz. Asterius; vid. Orat. iii. § 2, supr. vol. i. p. 360.

 We find the same doctrine in the Creed ascribed to Lucian, as translated above, Syn. § 23, supr. vol. i. p. 97, where vid. note 2; vid. also infra. art. [ homoion ]. Besides Origen, Novatian, the Creed of Lucian, and (if so) Hilary, (as mentioned in the note at vol. i. p. 97,) "one" is explained as oneness of will by S. Hippolytus, contr. Noet. 7, where he explains John x. 30, by xvii. 22, like the Arians; and, as might be expected, by Eusebius, Eccl. Theol. iii. 19, p. 193, and by Asterius ap. Euseb. contr. Marc. pp. 28, 37. The passages of the Fathers in which this text is adduced are collected by Maldonat. in loc.

 17. John x. 30, 38. xiv. 9. "I and the Father are One." "The Father is in Me, and," etc. "He that seeth Me," etc.

 These three texts are found together frequently in Athan., particularly in Orat. iii., where he considers the doctrines of the "Image" and the [ perichoresis ]; vid, de Decr. § 21, § 31. de Syn. § 45. Orat. iii. 3, 5, 6, 10, 16 fin. 17. Ep. Æg. 13. Sent D. 26. ad Afr. 7, 8, 9. vid. also Epiph. Hær. 64, 9. Basil. Hexaem. ix. fin. Cyr. Thes. xii. p. 111. Potam. Ep. ap. Dacher. t. 3, p. 299. Hil. Trin. vii. 41. Vid. also Animadv. in Eustath. Ep. ad Apoll. Rom. 1796, p. 58.

 In Orat. iii. § 5, these three texts, which so often occur together, are recognised as "three;" so are they by Eusebius, Eccl. Theol. iii. 19, and he says that Marcellus and "those who Sabellianise with him," among whom he included Catholics, were in the practice of adducing them, [ thrullountes ]; which bears incidental testimony to the fact that the doctrine of the [ perichoresis ] was the great criterion between orthodox and Arian. To the many instances of the joint use of the three which are given supr. may be added Orat. ii. 54 init. 67 fin. iv. 17, Serap. ii. 9, Serm. Maj. de fid. 29. Cyril. de Trin. p. 554, in Joann. p. 168. Origen, Periarch. p. 56. Hil. Trin. ix. 1. Ambros. Hexaem. vi. 7. August. de Cons. Ev. i. 7.

 18. John xiv. 28. "The Father is greater than I."

 Athan. explains these words by comparing them with " Made so much better than the Angels," Hebr. i. 1. "He says not ' the Father is better than I,' lest we should conceive Him to be foreign to His Nature," as Angels are foreign in nature to the Son; "but greater, not indeed in greatness nor in time, but because of His generation from the Father Himself," Orat. i. § 58, that is, on account of the principatus of the Father, as the and [ arche ] and [ pege theotetos ], and of His own filietas .

 19. Acts x. 36. "God sent the word to the children of Israel ... You know the word," etc.

 So the Vulgate, but the received Greek runs with Athan. Orat. iv. § 30. [ ton logon, hon apesteile ... houtos esti ... humeis oidate to genomenon rhema ]. The followers of Paul of Samosata, with a view to their heresy, interpreted these words, as Hippolytus before them, as if [ ton logon ] were either governed by [ kata ] or attracted by [ hon,houtos ] agreeing with [ ho logos ] understood. Dr. Routh in loc. Hipp. (vid. Noët 13) who at one time so construed it, refers to 1 Pet. ii. 7, John iii. 34, as parallel, also Matt. xxi. 42. And so 'Urbem quam statuo,' etc. vid. Raphel. in Luc. xxi. 6. vid. also [ ten archen hoti kai lalo humin ], John viii. 25, with J. C. Wolf's remarks, who would understand by [ archen ] omnino, which Lennep however in Phalar. Ep. says it can only mean with a negative. The Vulgate is harsh in understanding [ logos ] and [ rhema ] as synonymous, and the latter as used merely to connect the clauses. Moreover, if [ logos ] be taken for [ rhema, ton logon apesteile ] is a harsh phrase; however, it occurs Acts xiii. 26. If [ lolos ] on the other hand has a theological sense, a primâ facie countenance is given to the distinction between "the Word" and "Jesus Christ," which the Samosatenes wished to deduce from the passage.

 20. Rom. i. 20. "His Eternal Power and Divinity."

 Athanasius understands this of our Lord. Orat. i. § 11. Syn. § 49. vid. Justinian's Comment. in Paul. Epp. for its various interpretations. It was either a received interpretation, or had been adduced at Nicæa, for Asterius had some years before these Discourses replied to it, vid. Syn. § 18, supr. vol. i. p. 88, and Orat. ii. § 37, p. 297.