Sermo major

Creator, creator; bringing to himself for the sake of great honor; he is deemed worthy; he overturns; or neither; into the whole of other things; he held together having dwelt in a body once upon it; through the inside outside. Of the same author concerning the birth of Christ in the flesh. From the apology of Dionysius, Archbishop of Alexandria. For when he received what he had to offer on our behalf, and this was the body from Mary the virgin, then both the being created and the being born and the being made are written about him; for such words are fitting for humans. Of the whole world; they were created; by from; because of which standing of power a clear proof of these things of the god-killer. It signifies; beginning coming 1, beginning 2. Beginning coming. Of the same author concerning the baptism of the Lord Christ. From the discourse against the Arians. And let no one think that he received the Spirit because he did not have it. For he himself sent it from above as God and he himself received it below as man. From him to him it descended from his divinity to his humanity. Of the same author concerning the struggles of the Lord Christ against the devil. From the discourse on the division of the garments. Thus also the Lord, having summoned the devil by human weakness, having conquered by his own power, strengthened man against the enemy. His co-workers working with him; themselves flesh savior. Of the same author from the discourse against the Arians. And when Peter says:

Let every house of Israel know for certain that God made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ." He does not speak concerning his divinity, that "God made him Lord and Christ," but concerning his humanity. And a little later. For the Word, the Son of God, was always Lord and God, and was not made Lord and God after the crucifixion, but, as I said before, his divinity made his humanity Lord and Christ. Son Jesus. From the same holy Athanasius, from the letter to Maximus the philosopher. For the things that Christ endured through the body, these he magnified as God; and he hungered in the flesh, but divinely he fed the hungry. And if anyone is scandalized by the bodily things, let him believe in the things he does as God. For he asks humanly where Lazarus lies, but raises him divinely. Therefore let no one laugh, speaking of a child and naming age and growth and eating and drinking and suffering, lest by denying the properties of the body he completely deny his sojourn among us. For just as he did not become a man by a natural succession, so it was fitting that when he took on a body he should show its properties, so that the fantasy of the godless Manichaean might not prevail. And again it was fitting that when he came in a body he should not hide the things of divinity, so that the Samosatene might not find a pretext. From the same, from the apology on behalf of Dionysius. The things said concerning the divinity of Christ and his humanity have their own and appropriate interpretation for each of the things said.

And the one who writes about his human aspects also knows about his divinity, and the one who expounds on his divinity is not ignorant of the peculiarities of the flesh, but each, like a skilled and reputable money-changer, discerning rightly, will walk according to piety. For when he says that he weeps, he knows that the Lord is man; he shows that weeping belongs to man, but he raises Lazarus as God. And he knows that he hungers and thirsts in a bodily way, but divinely satisfies five thousand from five loaves; and he knows that the body lying in the tomb is a human body, but that it is raised as the body of God by the Word himself. From the same letter. The Savior said: "I am the vine, you are the branches, the father is the farmer." For we are akin to the Lord according to the body, and for this reason he said: "I will announce your name to my brothers." And just as the branches are consubstantial with the vine and from it, so we, having bodies of the same kind as the Lord's body, receive from his fullness, and have that as a root for resurrection and for salvation. And the father is called the farmer; for he worked the vine through the Word, which is the Lord's body. From the same defense. For if the Lord is called a vine, there must also be a farmer; and if he prays, there must be one who hears; and if he asks, there must be one who gives. Such things rather easily show the madness of the Sabellians, that the one who prays is different, the one who hears is different, and the vine is one and the farmer another.

For all the sayings that are spoken as if alienating the Son from the Father are said about him because of the flesh which he wore for our sake. For things that are created are by nature foreign to God. He refused, he desired, the word, the high priest, the glory, Solomon. Of the same holy Athanasius, from the homily on Golgotha, whose beginning: the passage read is from the Gospel. The apostolic word proclaims: for this reason he is also crucified, so that he might redeem the curse and we might inherit the blessing. While suffering, he himself was not harmed at all, but rather bestowed grace, and while dying, he did not remain dead, but rather brought even the dead to life. And while being sacrificed, he was not destroyed, but by the blood of the sacrifice he ransomed everyone without exception and himself remained impassible. But if someone should ask how this happened, let him hear. A union of two things took place at the same time. I speak of things not equal, but having no comparison in every respect. For a mortal was intertwined with an immortal, and a perishable body had come together with an imperishable word. And the mortal did not harm the immortal; for it was impassible, but rather it itself remained impassible in the dominion of death. For what rules is always master of what is ruled. Therefore, because of the immortal word that was present with it, death was paradoxically obliterated in him as straw is obliterated by fire. And the word, being imperishable, rather benefits the perishable that is present with it. For darkness is illuminated by light, and the lesser is blessed by the greater. From the discourse on faith, whose beginning: having sufficiently taken up a few from many in the preceding.

And just as when a great king enters a great city and takes up residence in one of its houses, that city is deemed worthy of great honor, and no enemy or robber who attacks it can destroy it, but rather it is deemed worthy of every care because the king dwells in one of its houses, so also it happened with the savior of all. For when he came to our region and dwelt in one of the bodies like ours, thereafter every plot against men ceased and the corruption of death which formerly prevailed against them vanished. From the same holy Athanasius, from the same discourse. For the Word of God was not shut up in the body, nor was he in the body but not elsewhere, nor did he move that body while the whole of his activity and providence was empty of him; but, most paradoxically, being Word, he was not contained by anything, but rather he himself contained everything. And just as he is in all creation, yet is outside the whole in essence, and is in all things by his own powers, ordering everything, and extending his providence over all things in all, and giving life to each and all alike, encompassing the whole and not being encompassed, but being wholly in his own Father in every respect, so also, being in the human body and giving life to it, he fittingly gave life to the whole and was in all things and was outside the whole. And being known from the body through his works, he was not invisible. From the same discourse.

When, therefore, the theologians speak of him as eating and drinking and being born, know that the body, as a body, was born and was nourished with the usual foods, but the divine Word himself, who was united with the body, ordering all things and through the works he performed in the body, made himself known not as a man but as the divine Word. From the same discourse. For this reason, after the demonstrations of his divinity from his works, he then offered the sacrifice on behalf of all, surrendering his own temple to death in place of all, so that he might render all free and unaccountable for the ancient transgression, and show himself superior to death, displaying his own body as the firstfruits of the resurrection of all, incorruptible. For the body, as having a common substance—for it was a human body, even if it was constituted by a newer miracle from a virgin alone—was nevertheless mortal in accordance with our nature and died. But by the descent of the Word into it, it was no longer subject to corruption according to its own nature, but because of the indwelling of the Word of God, it became free from corruption. And both things happened together in it paradoxically: that the death of all was fulfilled in the Lord’s man, and that death and corruption were abolished through the Word who was present. For death was necessary, and death had to occur on behalf of all, so that what was owed by all might be paid. Hence, as I said before, since it was not possible for the Word himself to die—for he was immortal—he took for himself a body capable of dying, so that he might offer it as his own on behalf of all. 86: See: “You will not let your holy one see corruption”?

As I said, as I said before, from the same discourse. For he could have roused it immediately from death and shown it alive again. But the savior, having foreseen this well, did not do so. For someone might have said that it had not died at all, or that death had not fully touched it, if he had displayed the resurrection immediately. And perhaps, if the interval between death and resurrection were equal, the glory concerning incorruption would have been unclear. Therefore, in order that the body be shown dead, and the Word endured a single intermediate day, he displayed it incorrupt to all on the third day. So for the sake of demonstrating death in the body, he raised it on the third day. But so that it might not remain long and, having become completely corrupted, be disbelieved when later raised, as if he were bringing not the same body but another. For someone might, because of the time, disbelieve what appeared and forget what had happened. For this reason he did not allow more than three days, nor did he long delay those who had heard him concerning the resurrection. But while their ears still held his word freshly, and their eyes were still expectant, and their attention was still fixed, and they were still living on earth and were at the place where those who put to death and witnesses of the death of the Lord's body were, the Son of God himself, within a three-day interval, showed the body that had become dead to be deathless and incorrupt. And it was demonstrated to all that the body had not died from weakness of the nature of the indwelling Word, but in order that death might be obliterated in it by the power of the savior. From the same discourse.

He who disbelieves concerning the resurrection of the Lord's body seems to be ignorant of the power of the Word of God and of wisdom. For if he altogether took a body to himself and made it his own according to the reasonable sequence, as the argument has shown, what was the Lord to do concerning this, or what end was the body to have, once the Word had entered into it? It could not but die, since it was mortal, and was offered up to death on behalf of all, for which reason also the Savior fashioned it as a temple for himself. But it was not possible for it to remain dead, because it had become a temple of life. Hence it died as mortal, but it came to life again through the life in it, and the works are the sign of the resurrection. From the same discourse. For this reason the Savior fittingly put on a body, so that, the body having been intertwined with life, it might no longer remain in death as mortal, but, having put on immortality, having risen, it might thereafter remain immortal. For once it had put on corruption, it would not have risen, unless it had put on life. And again, death would not have appeared by itself, unless it were in the body. For this reason he put on a body, so that, finding death in the body, he might blot it out. For how could the Lord have been shown to be life at all, if he had not given life to the mortal? From the same discourse. And when did the so-called gods and heroes of the poets, who were mortal men, begin to be condemned, if not from the time when the Word of God accomplished the trophy against death and preserved the body he assumed incorrupt, having raised it from the dead? Of the same holy Athanasius, from the letter to Germanus, whose beginning is: "Having read what has now been written.

He inquires in a human manner, "Where does Lazarus lie?"—for he was a man—but he raises him in a divine manner—for he was also God. Therefore, let no one laugh, speaking of a child and naming age and growth and eating and drinking and suffering, lest by denying the proper attributes of the body, he completely deny also his economy on our behalf. For just as he was not born a man by the sequence of nature, so it was fitting that, having taken up a body, he should display the proper attributes of the body, so that the fantasy of the godless Manichaean might not prevail. From the homily of Saint Athanasius on the seed, whose beginning is: "On the Sabbath day we assembled, not suffering from Judaism." They reproached the Savior, saying, "See what your disciples do, which is not permitted to do on the Sabbath." But the Savior said to them, "Have you not read this either, though you profess to study? You have no knowledge, nor have you read this, which David did." He who is from David remembers David; he who is from David according to flesh, but before David according to spirit; he who is according to flesh the son of David, but according to spirit the master of David. He who sprouted from the root of Jesse, the marvelous rod, which crushes the race of the Jews and gathers the race of the nations as a flock, signifies.

Of the same holy Athanasius, from the interpretation of the passage, "Every lawlessness and impiety shall be forgiven to men," the beginning of which: concerning which, writing, you made known an evangelical saying. Be indulgent, beloved, having a good conscience. For again, for the sake of security, one must not shrink from saying this. Thirsting, toiling, sleeping, being struck, eating—these are proper to man; but the works which the Lord performed were no longer those of a man, but of God, to do them. From the same discourse: "If, then, you see," he says, "the Son of Man ascending to where he was before? It is the spirit that gives life; the flesh avails nothing. The words which I have spoken to you are spirit and life." For here also he has said both things concerning himself, flesh and spirit. And he distinguished the spirit from that which is according to the flesh, so that, believing not only in what is visible but also in what is invisible of him, they might learn that what he says is not fleshly but also spiritual. For to how many would the body suffice for food, that it might become nourishment for the whole world? But for this reason he made mention of the ascension of the Son of Man into the heavens, in order to draw them away from the corporeal notion and that they might learn that the flesh spoken of is a heavenly and spiritual food given by him from above. "For what I have spoken," he says, "to you is spirit and life." This is equivalent to saying: The thing shown and given for the salvation of the world is the flesh which I bear, but this flesh and its blood will be given to you by me as spiritual food, so that this may be spiritually distributed in each one to all as a safeguard for the resurrection of eternal life.

Of the same holy Athanasius, from the third discourse against the Arians, the beginning of which: I for my part thought the hypocrites of the Arian madness. For Moses, being by nature a man, became faithful by believing in God who spoke to him through the Word. But the Word was not like one of the generated things, nor in a body as a creature in a creature, but God in flesh and creator and maker in that which was made by him. From the same discourse: "Wisdom built herself a house;" and it is clear that the house of wisdom is our body, which the Lord assumed. From the same discourse: For since the first path through Adam was lost and instead of paradise we turned aside to death and heard: "You are earth and to earth you shall return," for this reason the philanthropic Word of God, by the will of the Father, puts on the created flesh, so that the flesh which the first man killed through transgression, he himself might make alive in the blood of his own body and "renew for us a fresh and living path," as the apostle said, "through the veil, that is, through his flesh." 99 Of the same, from the fourth discourse against the Arians, the beginning of which: The Ariomaniacs, as it seems, having judged. Bodily, as the apostle says, the divinity dwelt in the flesh; equivalent to saying "being God, he had his own body and, using this as an instrument, became man," and for this reason the things proper to this flesh are said "of him," since he is in it, such as hunger, thirst, suffering, toil, and the like, of which the flesh is receptive.

The proper works of the Word himself, such as raising the dead, making the blind see, and healing the woman with the hemorrhage, he performed through his own body. And the Word bore the weaknesses of the flesh as his own, for the flesh was his, and the flesh served the works of the divinity, because they occurred in it, for it was the body of God. From the same discourse. And in order that one might more precisely know both the impassibility of the Word's nature and the weaknesses spoken of on account of the flesh, it is good to hear the blessed Peter, for he would be a trustworthy witness concerning the Savior. He writes, then, in his epistle, saying: "Christ therefore having suffered for us in the flesh." Therefore, also when it is said that he hungers and thirsts and wearies and does not know and sleeps and weeps and asks and flees and is born and declines the cup, and simply all things of the flesh, it would be said accordingly in each case: "Christ therefore hungering and thirsting for us in the flesh," and not knowing and being struck and wearying "for us in the flesh," and again being lifted up and being born and growing and fearing and hiding "in the flesh," and saying: "If possible, let the cup pass from me," and being beaten and receiving "for us in the flesh." "And altogether all such things 'for us in the flesh.'" For the apostle himself said this: "Christ therefore having suffered" not in divinity but "for us in the flesh," so that these are not proper to the Word himself by nature, but proper to the flesh itself by nature.

...the sufferings be known. Let no one, therefore, be scandalized by the human things, but rather let him know that the Word himself is by nature impassible, and yet, because of the flesh he put on, these things are said about him, "since these are proper to the flesh," while the body itself is proper to the Savior. And he himself, being impassible by nature, remains as he is, not harmed by these things, but rather he obliterates and destroys them. From the same discourse. We have necessarily examined these things beforehand, so that if we see him acting or speaking divinely through the instrument of his own body, we may know that, being God, he works these things. And again, if we see him speaking or suffering in a human way, we may not be ignorant that, bearing flesh, he became man and thus does and says these things. For knowing what is proper to each, and seeing and understanding both as done by one, we believe rightly and will never be led astray. But if someone, seeing the things done by him alone in a divine manner, denies the body, or seeing the things proper to the body, denies the incarnate presence of the Word, or thinks lowly of the Word from the human things, such a person, like a Jewish huckster mixing wine with water, will consider the cross a "scandal," and like the Greeks, will deem the proclamation "folly," just as the God-fighting Arians have suffered. For seeing the human things of the Savior, they thought him to be a creature. Therefore, they ought, seeing also the divine works of the Word, to have denied the generation of his body and then to have counted themselves among the Manichaeans. From the same discourse.

And just as when he spat, stretched out his hands, and called Lazarus, we did not say that the accomplishments were human, even if they occurred through the body, but divine, so if human things are said about the Savior in the Gospel, again, looking to the nature of what is said and since the things of God are foreign, let us not attribute these to the divinity of the Word, but to the humanity. From the same discourse. And when we hear "he wept" and the like, let us say these are proper to the body, especially since in each of these it is reasonable to have the starting point, that one is written as about God, the other is said because of his human body. For in a bodiless being, the things of the body would not occur, unless he had taken on a body that was perishable and mortal. For holy Mary, from whom the body came, was mortal. Therefore, of necessity, in a suffering, weeping, and weary body, these things, which are proper to the flesh, are said of him together with the body. So then, if he wept and was troubled, it was not the Word, insofar as he is Word, who wept and was troubled, but this was proper to the flesh. And if he also asked for the cup to pass by, it was not the divinity that was timid, but this passion and the saying "Why have you forsaken me?" were proper to the humanity.