Gregory of Nyssa

Since we recognize two natures in Christ, one divine and the other human, the divine by nature but the human in the incarnation, we accordingly claim for the Godhead that which is eternal, and that which is created we ascribe to his human nature. For as, according to the prophet, he was formed in the womb as a servant, so also, according to Solomon, he was manifested in the flesh by means of this servile creation. But when [the Arians] say, “If he was, he was not begotten, and, if he was begotten, he was not,” let them learn that it is not fitting to ascribe to his divine nature the attributes which belong to his fleshly origin. For bodies that do not exist are generated, and God makes those things to be that are not. But does not he come into being from that which is not? For this reason also Paul calls him “the brightness of glory.” He does this so that we may learn that, just as the light from the lamp is of the nature of that which sheds the brightness and is united with it (for as soon as the lamp appears the light that comes from it shines out simultaneously), in like manner the Son is related to the Father, and the Father is never without the Son. It is impossible that glory should be without radiance, as it is impossible that the lamp should be without brightness. It is clear that his being brightness is a testimony to his being in relation with the glory, for if the glory did not exist, the brightness shed from it would not exist. Therefore, to say that the brightness “once was not” is a declaration that once the glory also was not, that is, when the brightness was not, for it is impossible that the glory should be without the brightness. As therefore it is not possible to say in the case of the brightness, “If it was, it did not come into being, and, if it came into being, it was not,” so it is in vain to say this of the Son, seeing that the Son is the brightness. Let those who speak of “less” and “greater,” in the case of the Father and the Son, learn from Paul not to measure things immeasurable. For the apostle says that the Son is the express image of the person of the Father. It is clear then that, however great the person of the Father is, so great also is the express image of that person, for it is not possible that the express image should be less than the person contemplated in it. And this the great John also teaches when he says, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God.” For in saying that he was “in the beginning” and not “after the beginning,” he showed that the beginning was never without the Word. In declaring that “the Word was with God,” he signified the absence of defect in the Son in relation to the Father, for the Word is contemplated as a whole together with the whole being of God. For if the Word were deficient in his own greatness so as not to be capable of relation with the whole being of God, we are compelled to suppose that that part of God which extends beyond the Word is without the Word. But in fact the whole magnitude of the Word is contemplated together with the whole magnitude of God, and consequently, in statements concerning the divine nature, it is not admissible to speak of “greater” and “less.”

When, according to the prophetic word, people were alienated from the life-giving womb through sin and went astray from the womb in which they were fashioned, they spoke falsehood instead of truth. Because of this, the Mediator, assuming the first fruit of our common nature, made it holy through his soul and body, unmixed and unreceptive of all evil, preserving it in himself. He did this in order that, having taken it up to the Father of incorruptibility through his own incorruptibility, the entire group might be drawn along with it because of their related nature, in order that the Father might admit the disinherited to “adoption” as children and the enemies of God to a share in the Godhead. And just as the first fruit of the dough was assimilated through purity and innocence to the true Father and God, so we also as dough in similar ways will cleave to the Father of incorruptibility by imitating, as far as we can, the innocence and stability of the Mediator. Thus, we shall be a crown of precious stones for the only begotten God, having become an honor and a glory through our life. For Paul says, “Having made himself a little lower than the angels because of his having suffered death, he made those whose nature had previously become thorny through sin into a crown for himself, transforming the thorn through suffering into honor and glory.” And yet, once he has “taken away the sins of the world” and taken upon his head a crown of thorns in order to weave a crown of “honor and glory,” there is no small danger that someone may be discovered to be a burr and a thorn because of his evil life, and then be placed in the middle of the Master’s crown because of sharing in his body. The just voice speaks directly to this one: “How did you get in here without a wedding garment? How were you, a thorn, woven in with those fitted into my crown through honor and glory?”

Let [the one who is waiting for the Lord’s second coming] therefore wait for that time then which is, necessarily, in the same time frame as the development of humanity. For even while Abraham and the patriarchs desired to see the promised better things, they did not stop seeking the heavenly country. This is what the apostle says when he declares that even now they are in a condition of hoping for that grace: “God having provided some better thing for us,” according to the words of Paul, “that they without us should not be made perfect.” If those then, who by faith alone and by hope saw the good things “afar off” and “embraced them”—if they bear the delay as the apostle bears witness, and if they place the certainty that they will enjoy the things for which they hoped in the fact that they “judged him faithful who has promised,” what should the rest of us do who perhaps do not have a grasp of that better hope from the character of our own lives?Even the prophet’s soul fainted with desire, and in his psalm he confesses this passionate love, saying that his “soul has a desire and longing to be in the courts of the Lord.” [He still has this desire] even if he has to be demoted to a place amongst the lowest, since it is a greater and more desirable thing to be last there than to be first among the ungodly tents of this life. Nevertheless he was patient during the delay, considering, indeed, the life there blessed, and accounting a brief participation in it more desirable than “thousands”[of days] of time. For, he says, “one day in your courts is better than thousands.” And yet, he did not become dejected at the necessary dispensation concerning existing things. He thought it was sufficient bliss for a person to have those good things even by way of hope. This is why he says at the end of the psalm, “O Lord of hosts, blessed is the man that hopes in you.”

A fire that lies in wood hidden below the surface is often unobserved by the senses of those who see or even touch it but is manifest when it blazes up. So too, at his death (which he brought about at his will, who separated his soul from his body; who said to his own Father, “Into your hands I commit my spirit”; who, as he says, “had power to lay it down and had power to take it again”24) he—who, because he is the lord of glory, despised that which is shame among men—having concealed, as it were, the flame of his life in his bodily nature, by the dispensation of his death, kindled and inflamed it once more by the power of his own Godhead, fostering into life that which had been brought to death. Having infused with the infinity of his divine power that humble firstfruits of our nature, he made it also to be that which he himself was—making the servile form to be Lord, and the human born of Mary to be Christ, and him who was crucified through weakness to be life and power, and making all that is piously conceived to be in God the Word to be also in that which the Word assumed. Thus these attributes no longer seem to be in either nature by way of division, but the perishable nature, being, by its commixture with the divine, made anew in conformity with the nature that overwhelms it, participates in the power of the Godhead, as if one were to say that mixture makes a drop of vinegar mingled in the deep to be sea, by reason that the natural quality of this liquid does not continue in the infinity of that which overwhelms it. This is our doctrine.