Fragments on John 1–15

… setting him forth as maker of all things, he predicates of him the name of the Word. For since, in general, all making depends on reason (λόγος), he could not show him to be the maker of all things otherwise than thus. For our craftsmen, being men, have art (and art is a productive habit joined with true reason); but the Son of God, being no other than the craftsman of wisdom and art, is fittingly named Word. For he is not some other essence, besides the Word, that makes things through it; rather he himself is the one who makes, being God the Word. Then, since this Word, being God by essence and being this very thing, Son of God, became man for the salvation of men, the Word was named “flesh.” And since some who have fallen from the right faith think that he exists only from the time when he came forth from the Virgin, having become man, he uses words most rightly against such people: “became” of the flesh, and “was” of his divinity. It would have been more proper to say “is” of God the Word; but since he was showing the existence of the Word in distinction from the incarnation, which took place at a certain time, the evangelist used “was” instead of “is.” But we must not take the proper meanings of the verbs in the case of eternal things; … for “was” signifies the past, just as “is” shows what exists now [and “will be” what is to exist]. But since the Word of God is eternal, being God, the verbs applied to him must be taken without connoting time, since what they signify is not under time. And one can hunt out the meaning from the very words of the theologian. For at the very beginning of his composition he writes: “In the beginning was the Word.” And Moses, explaining the making of the world, said: “In the beginning God made the heaven and the earth.” But John did not say, “In the beginning the Word came to be,” or “was made,” but … For if “all things came to be through him,” and the heaven and the earth were among all things, then in their coming into being he himself was their creator. Then, since he did not say that the Word was in the beginning of something, it must be taken generally, so that the meaning is this: in the beginning of the angels and in the beginning of the archangels was the Word, and, in short, in the beginning of the visible and invisible creatures was the Word, being the beginning and maker of them all. “For in Christ all things were created, things in the heavens and things on earth, visible and invisible, whether principalities or authorities or thrones or dominions; all things were created through him and for him; and he is before all things, and all things hold together in him; he is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead.” For if all things hold together in him, and he is before them, being their beginning as the cause of their being, consequently we must say that he was in the coming into being of all things. For how should he not have been before them, and in the beginning of their existence, being their creator? Then, since he said that he was in the beginning, he had to show also how, and with whom, he was to make. Therefore he added to “In the beginning was …” … coming, when he was born of the Virgin, he had been sent by the Father … and “dwelt among us,” and had this very name, “God with us.” But when he made all things, since it was not as a man sent by the Father that he brought all things into being, (it is said that) “he was with God and was God.” And the Son of God is also called Wisdom, “created as the beginning of the ways of God,” according to the scripture of Proverbs. For the Wisdom of God, existing with him whose Wisdom she is, had no relation to anyone else; but by God's good pleasure he willed the creatures to exist. This Wisdom, then, willed to take up a creative relation to the things that were to be; and this is what is signified by her being “created as the beginning of the ways of God,” along which ways he goes, bringing into being, ordering, providing, benefiting, bestowing grace, in this Wisdom that was created. And they say that the Word is the beginning, not being other than she in essence, but in concept and relation; so that the same existence, which the scriptures now call by essence, is on the one hand made proper to God as Wisdom, and on the other inclines, so to speak, toward the things made, as the creative Word. And not here only is the Son of God called Word; one can cite texts not only from the New Testament but also from the Old: “By the word of the Lord the heavens were made firm,” and “He sent his word and healed them”; and Luke says: “Just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word handed down to us.”

“What has come into being in him,” clearly in the Word, “was life”; so that, just as God brought all things into existence, so too the things whose nature is to live might be made alive by participation in him. Therefore it is fittingly said too: “And the life was the light of men.” For we must not pay attention to those who from this phrase have thought the Word to be originate. For what has come to be … but has its being in others, as was said just now of the craftsmen among men, that their existing as men is one thing and their being craftsmen another. None of these, at any rate, do we [call reason, but] say [has reason]. But the maker of the universe is not such, being God the Word by essence … what has come to be is not itself life, which did not come upon it from outside; for in him came life. For originate beings could not have him, who is life by essence, as he is with the Father. For it is said to God: “With you is the fountain of life.” And this life is with the Father, not giving him life; for the Father does not live by participation in life, but, being living God, he begets life, as also, being wise, he begets wisdom, and being powerful, power. This life, wishing to benefit rational beings, took up a relation to them, they taking it to themselves for their living by way of participation; and this must be said not only of their common living, but also of living according to virtue, by which it comes about that one lives well. This, at any rate, is shown from the very wording; for it says: “And the life was the light of men.” And that it is so here can be confirmed from another text too. The Son and Word of God, being God the Word, is with God, as was just said, coming to be also toward men, as they are able to contain his presence. For it is said: “The word of the Lord came to Hosea,” and “The word of the Lord came to Jeremiah,” and in general: “He called them gods to whom the word of God came.” As, then, he is Word with God, but comes to be toward originate beings, so, being life, he is with the Father, giving life to those whom he visits, a life-giving relation coming to be in him, harmoniously adapted to those who are given life. But since, besides giving life, it also produces knowledge of the truth, enlightening the mind of those who receive it, it is also named the light of men. And being the light of men, clearly it enlightens also the rational beings above them. For if it is the light of the lesser rational beings, much more of those exalted above them.

… and evil subsisting. Therefore, shining in such darkness, it is not overtaken by it. For this light being the wisdom and righteousness of God, wisdom dissolves the ignorance of the mind, and righteousness directs the steps of the soul; and this is its shining in the darkness, not prevented from sending out its own rays to the man who is being enlightened. Therefore it is not overtaken by the darkness, which is dissolved and vanishes at its presence. For it is not that the darkness, subsisting and active, fails to overtake it, but that it is dissolved and no longer exists. For example, Paul, when he did not know Christ, persecuted him, driven to this by the ignorance in him, which we said is darkness; but when the light persecuted by it shone out its own rays, the darkness was dissolved, and so it could not overtake the light it was persecuting. Likewise also the robber who repented on the cross, blinded by the darkness spoken of, persecuted the light; but the darkness in the robber was dissolved, and so in turn … the truth. And when falsehood and every deceit, that is, the darkness, persecutes the light, then it is dissolved and vanishes as it comes near to what it persecutes. For when the truth appears, falsehood and deceit are dissolved. And I will say the paradox: while it is far off, the darkness persecutes the light, but when it comes near … For as far as it stands off from the truth, it rules and works in the man, so as to drive the truth from the mind; but when it draws near to the truth, it is shown not to exist at all. Hence of necessity God permitted evil to exist, though he was able to prevent it, so that the greatness of virtue might be shown.

Not so much because of the common designation of “man” as because he is by nature “after the image” and made for likeness to God. And it must be noted that “came to be” does not always signify the birth that brings into existence … “sent from God”; so that what is said is this: “He came to be sent from God for witness.” And if these things said of John are right, how much more the things written or said of the Son of God …

“That all might believe.” As far as lay in him, clearly, even if not all believed. For neither, if not all received the illumination of the sun, would one say on that account that the sun does not rise for this purpose, that all may be enlightened. For the purpose of him who sent him was that all should believe.

“He was not that light,” that is, the one spoken of by the theologian; for some had supposed, because of the advantages he had, that he was himself the Christ. For this reason he says this, so as to remove such an error by the roots. For even if John was a light, yet not that light of which the saints say to God, “In your light we shall see light”; so that even if John was a light, according to what was said to the disciples, “You are the light of the world,” yet he was not that true light. And “true light” is said not in contrast to falsehood, but in distinction from an image. For truth and the true are contrasted sometimes with falsehood and deceit, and sometimes with image and imitation. One may take as image-light the sensible light, and especially the sun, and as true light the intelligible light, or rather that which enlightens the intelligible beings, the holy powers. This, I think, is what is said by the scripture: “Every good giving and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights.” … “coming into the world.” But since “coming into the world” is said ambiguously, being able to refer sometimes to the light and sometimes to the man, it must be interpreted both ways. And first we must take it thus: the light that enlightens every man came at the time of his sojourn, the man being in the world; as it is said, the light came into the world to enlighten man. Then: the true light enlightens every man who comes into the world … the sensible; for the typical and sensible light, even if not the consequence, is yet not false. The true light, then, always benefiting every rational being, enlightens every man.

Since not all turned away from him (for many of them received him, and especially the apostles), the evangelist adds: “But as many as received him had authority to become children of God.” For those who are being introduced to the faith, and perhaps those too who have made progress, have authority to become children of God; they will become this only then (not having yet received more than the authority), when they are perfected in virtue and faith and knowledge. And what the reason is for which they had the authority, he shows by writing that it was given to those who believed in his name, the name of the light, clearly. For since believing in the name of the light is not the same as believing in the light, authority, that is, aptitude for becoming children, is given to those who believe in his name. But if by progress they pass from believing in his name to believing in him, they would no longer be children of God in potency but in act. For those who assent to the light with a simpler and not very exact understanding believe in his name; but those who have come to him with scientific demonstration and articulated understanding believe in him and call upon him. Hence Jesus, after much progress of the disciples, says: “Since you believe in God, believe also in me,” instead of “It is time for you to pass from believing in my name, so that you may believe in me and in the Father.” Indeed, after explaining to them the greatest theology, he added to one of them: “Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me?”

For those born of God were born of God by having believed that Jesus is the Christ and by doing righteousness. But they are not subject to the birth “of bloods,” that is, they do not have their origin from material things. Indeed, to Peter, who believed that Christ is the Son of the living God, it is said by the Savior … In another sense, he is a “son of bloods” who thinks himself god-fearing and a son of God through offering the sensible sacrifices according to the law. For these think to please God through slaughters and the shedding of blood. And to do this was blameless before, but for us no longer, because the blood of Jesus given for us suffices for justification. And those are subject to “the will of the flesh” and “the will of a man” who do everything so as to appear righteous to men. For these propose to please by the will of the flesh, circumcising the flesh and wishing to Judaize openly, while not caring for the heart and for being a Jew in secret. And those too have the birth from “the will of a man” who, on the pretext of human philosophy, abstain from vice and take up virtue. And above these is he who has been born of God by having believed in him after believing in his name.

The words “as of the only-begotten from the Father” lead us to understand that the Son is from the essence of the Father. For none of the creatures (has its being) from the Father, but has its being from God through the Word. For if other things too had their existence from the Father, the word “only-begotten” would be set down in vain, there being many who have their being from the Father. But this one is called only-begotten from the Father, “full of grace and truth,” … being no other than these things of which he is said to be full. For the Only-begotten himself says of himself, “I am the truth.” For what is filled by truth will be receptive of truth; but truth is not receptive of truth, being in act this very thing that it is said to be. The same might be said of grace too. And it is not strange to say such things of the Only-begotten, since such things are written of the Father too. He himself, at any rate, says of himself in the prophet: “I am full.” And it is likely that this expression was used also because of what is to be observed before the Savior's coming. The law given through Moses punished those who sinned, granting to no one the things done in transgression of it. Further, this law handed down the rites of mysteries through images and shadow-drawings, leading by the hand and preparing those led by them for the teaching of Christ; and so the law is also called a pedagogue to Christ. Since, then, the Savior came not to punish those who had sinned but to grant forgiveness of what had been so done, and to put an end to the teaching through images and to give knowledge of the truth, himself making it manifest, or rather being himself the truth, he was rightly seen full of grace and truth by those who beheld him. For if he had shown grace to some but not to others, he would not have been full of grace; just as, if he had ended one part of the shadow but not another, he would not have been full of truth. But in fact he has circumscribed every shadow and image, and grants forgiveness of all sins to those who flee to him through repentance. He is, then, full of truth and grace.

… intensified. For he who announces the great doctrines brings them forth, as he ought, loudly according to their meaning. And “first” must be understood instead of “prior.” Yet what he says is this: Jesus, being before me and prior to me, (comes) after me … And his coming after John must be understood according to the time of birth; for John was conceived six months before Jesus was conceived. In this way Jesus, coming after him, has come to be before him, being shown to be God and his maker. It might also be said thus: everyone who learns will seem to follow his teacher, and in this way is said to walk after him. Since, then, the Savior too came to John, who was baptizing, to be baptized, he is said to come after the baptizer in respect of his being baptized by John; but in respect of his having sanctified (the waters) and being borne witness to by the Father, he has come to be before the baptizer, shown to be more honorable and superior to him. And it is well said too, “has come to be before me,” since his existence is prior to his having come to be. And notice this too, with what exactness it is said: it is not written, “he who is after me,” but “he who comes”; for if he were after him, he could not be before him; but it is not impossible for one who is first to come after. It might also be said otherwise: “Because,” he says, … giving the reason why he has come to be before him, being first, he added: “Because from his fullness we have all (received)” … the pre-eminence, and the one who fills is first of those who are filled? For if he himself perfects and fills with virtue and wisdom those who come to holiness, how is he not first and pre-eminent over them? And attend to the exactness of “from his fullness we have all received.” For those who in this life partake of holiness and knowledge of the truth (have) knowing in part and prophesying in part from his fullness, but they do not have his fullness. They might have it after this temporal life, in the ages to come, according to the apostle; in agreement with this are the words in the catholic epistle of John: “And it has not yet appeared (what) we shall be, when we shall see him as he is,” that is, as it is possible for originate beings to know God; for it is not possible to take in what God himself is as he is. For we shall have something more than the present condition, if no longer in part but stripped of all ignorance we approach the purest truth, seeing him as far as is possible. Because, then, John received from the fullness of Jesus, he says of him that “he has come to be before me,” of whose fullness I have had (a share). And the fact that not one but all the saints receive from the fullness of Jesus makes manifest the pre-eminence of the one who fills and perfects. For if all the saints were filled not from the whole fullness but from some part of it, those who receive from the fullness will be seen to fall far short of the one who supplied it to them.

Of the virtues we have one part from ourselves and from our own resources, which we acquire by choice, and the other from God; having believed, at any rate, in the Savior and in his Father as far as was possible from what is in our power. It remains for us to ask for what is from God, as the disciples of Jesus too say to him: “Increase our faith.” For the word “increase” signifies that they ask for a God-given faith in addition to what they had by choice. Indeed Paul too, writing, says that the gifts of the Spirit are given “according to the proportion of faith” that is in us from what is in our power: “To another,” he says, “is given faith, by the same Spirit.” And if faith is given to someone according to the proportion of the faith he has, it is clear that the God-sent faith comes to the one achieved by what is in our power. And what has been said of faith must be said also of the other virtues. Since, then, virtue is a grace making the one who has it graced, when it has been achieved by us through choice, then what is from God comes in addition; and this is what it means to be given “grace for grace” by God.

“The law was given through Moses,” but not by him, but by God. For the law is God's, according to what is written: “The law of the Lord is blameless, converting souls.” Yet, though the law is given through Moses, “grace and truth came through Jesus Christ”: the grace, through forgiveness of sins, preventing the punishment from the law against sinners; and the truth surpassing the shadows and the types. And attend also to what will be said. Since the law and the prophets lasted until John, so that he became the end of the old scripture, after which came the Savior's coming, it is said quite fittingly: “He who comes after me has come to be before me.” For since the Savior's descent was proclaimed beforehand by the law and the prophets, when he came he is said to have come after. But even if he came after, yet, having fulfilled the law and the prophets by making manifest what was divine in them, he has come to be before, and has been shown to be the cause of all that divinely inspired scripture which lasted until John the Baptist.

Since seeing is twofold, sensible and intellectual, the one apprehends bodies and the other incorporeal things. Therefore we call the things that are subject to the mind and contemplated by it invisible, not because they are not seen, but because they are not of a nature to be seen. For none of the bodies is invisible, even if, being sometimes out of sight, it is not seen. For “invisible” does not mean “not being seen,” but “not being of a nature for this.” Therefore “not being seen” and “invisible” are not convertible. For not being seen follows upon the invisible, but the invisible does not follow upon not being seen; for many bodies, though visible, are not seen, either being covered or by not being where (the viewer) is. This distinction being right, what is said must be taken as of what is invisible. For not even the highest powers see God, not because of their weakness, but because of God's incorporeality. But … and freed from matter. For “Blessed,” he says, “are the pure in heart, for they shall see God”; and he calls the mind “heart.” Whoever has become pure in the way described, being perfected in virtue, approaches God as far as is attainable. These things being so, the mind (sees) God as … Therefore he did not say simply, “No one has seen God,” but with the addition of “ever,” which signifies something temporal, so that what is said is this: for as long a time as “ever” can be said, signifying a subject, (namely) while the mind is bound up with the material life. … from the concepts spoken of him in theology and from those we have … but by his intimacy with himself he has understanding of himself, being himself both the understanding and the thing understood. Therefore he alone knows …

Fittingly to his being only-begotten God and Son of the Father, the bosom of the Father has been named. For since all things concerning the divinity are beyond human (speech), the evangelist rightly wrote, from what we know, so as to signify his intimacy with the Father, “who is in the bosom of the Father.” For as it is written of all who are saved and receive the promises of God that they will come into the bosom of Abraham, meaning nothing else than that he is called father of the faithful, so too the Son of God is said to be in the bosom of the one who begot him. And as faithful men come into the bosom of faithful Abraham, so too the Son is in the bosom (of the Father). And the bosom of the Father must be understood as also the other things that are said of God in human fashion. And if it is said of the prophets or patriarchs or angels that they saw God, the divine scripture does not contradict itself. For no one sees God by applying his own understanding, as we are said to see visible things by the application of sight. But God is seen by those to whom he judges fit to be seen, revealing himself. For if anyone saw God, he would behold him, so to speak, such as and as great as he is. But since he does not see by himself, but God shows himself, he offers himself for contemplation as far as is possible for originate beings, as the Savior too says: “And I will manifest myself to him.” For he did not say, “He will see me,” but “I will manifest myself to him.” And this is …

The forerunner, according to the different aspects of the Savior, is: as of God, a prophet; as of the light, a lamp, giving light beforehand to those who are in the night of ignorance and accustoming the eye of the soul beforehand so as to be able to run also to the great light [as the morning star, the harbinger of the sun, signifying the arrival of the day that is to shine upon us]; as of the Word, a voice; for the voice must come before the word. … the Word, and the desert the soul that is ignorant of divine teaching. For how is it not a desert, deprived of the Word of God and of the voice that shows him? And the work of the voice is to make clear what is signified, so that they may be able to apprehend the Word that is shown without confusion. And what does the voice of one crying command the desert? “Make straight,” it says, “the way of the Lord.” And the desert signifies all who do not know him who comes after the voice. For as one who goes before a king commands those to whom the king is coming (to prepare) … to make straight the way of those who come to the teaching of the Word, [so John (goes before) the Word. For as the voice runs before the word, so John (runs before) Christ, who is the Word, as a voice].