Hilary of Poitiers — Commentary on Scripture

John 1:18

The Truth of His Nature did not seem sufficiently explained by the name of Son, unless, in addition, its peculiar force as proper to Him were expressed, so signifying its distinctness from all beside. For in that, besides Son, he calls Him also the Only-Begotten, he cut off altogether all suspicion of adoption, the Nature of the Only-Begotten guaranteeing the truth of the name.

John 2:5

On the wedding day in Galilee water was made wine. Have we words to tell or senses to ascertain what methods produced the change by which the tastelessness of water disappeared, and was replaced by the full flavour of wine? It was not a mixing; it was a creation, and a creation which was not a beginning, but a transformation. A weaker liquid was not obtained by admixture of a stronger element; an existing thing perished and a new thing came into being. The bridegroom was anxious, the household in confusion, the harmony of the marriage feast imperilled. Jesus is asked for help. He does not rise or busy Himself; He does the work without an effort. Water is poured into the vessels, wine drawn out in the cups. The evidence of the senses of the pourer contradicts that of the drawer. They who poured expect water to be drawn; they who draw think that wine must have been poured in. The intervening time cannot account for any gain or loss of character in the liquid. The mode of action baffles sight and sense, but the power of God is manifest in the result achieved.

On the Trinity 3.5

John 2:9

(iii. de Trin. c. 5) Water is poured into the waterpots; wine is drawn out into the chalices; the senses of the drawer out agree not with the knowledge of the pourer in. The pourer in thinks that water is drawn out; the drawer out thinks that wine was poured in. When the ruler of the feast had tasted the water that was made wine, and knew not whence it was, (but the servants who drew the water knew,) the governor of the feast called the bridegroom. It was not a mixture, but a creation: the simple nature of water vanished, and the flavour of wine was produced; not that a weak dilution was obtained, by means of some strong infusion, but that which was, was annihilated; and that which was not, came to be.

(as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274) Catena Aurea by Aquinas

John 2:9

On the wedding day in Galilee, water was made wine. Do we have appropriate words or senses to ascertain what methods produced the change by which the tastelessness of water disappeared and was replaced by the full flavor of wine? It was not a mixing; it was a creation, and a creation that was not a beginning but a transformation. A weaker liquid was not obtained by admixture of a stronger element; an existing entity perished, and a new entity came into being. The bridegroom was anxious, the household in confusion, the harmony of the marriage feast imperiled. Jesus is asked for help. He does not get up or busy himself. He does the work without any effort. Water is poured into the vessels, wine drawn out in the cups. The evidence of the senses of the pourer contradicts that of the one who draws it out. Those who poured expect water to be drawn; those who draw out think that wine must have been poured in. The intervening time cannot account for any gain or loss of character in the liquid. The mode of action baffles sight and sense, but the power of God is manifest in the result achieved…

On the wedding day in Galilee, water was made wine. Do we have appropriate words or senses to ascertain what methods produced the change by which the tastelessness of water disappeared and was replaced by the full flavor of wine? It was not a mixing; it was a creation, and a creation that was not a beginning but a transformation. A weaker liquid was not obtained by admixture of a stronger element; an existing entity perished, and a new entity came into being. The bridegroom was anxious, the household in confusion, the harmony of the marriage feast imperiled. Jesus is asked for help. He does not get up or busy himself. He does the work without any effort. Water is poured into the vessels, wine drawn out in the cups. The evidence of the senses of the pourer contradicts that of the one who draws it out. Those who poured expect water to be drawn; those who draw out think that wine must have been poured in. The intervening time cannot account for any gain or loss of character in the liquid. The mode of action baffles sight and sense, but the power of God is manifest in the result achieved.

ON THE TRINITY 3.5

John 2:19-21

By the power to take his soul again and to raise the temple up, he declares himself God and the resurrection his own work: yet he refers all to the authority of his Father’s command. This is not contrary to the meaning of the apostle, when he proclaims Christ, the “power of God and the wisdom of God,” thus referring all the magnificence of his work to the glory of the Father. For whatever Christ does, the power and the wisdom of God does.… Christ was raised from the dead by the working of God, for he himself worked the works of God the Father with a nature indistinguishable from God’s. And our faith in the resurrection rests on the God who raised Christ from the dead.

ON THE TRINITY 9.12

John 3:7-8

Though I have received faith by my regeneration, I am still in ignorance. And yet, I have a firm hold on a reality I do not understand. I am born again, capable of rebirth, but without conscious perception of it. Moreover, the Spirit has no limits. He speaks when he wants, what he wants and where he wants. We are conscious of his presence when he comes, but the reason for his approach or his departure remains unknown to us.

ON THE TRINITY 12.56

John 3:13

It is not possible by the laws of bodies for the same object to remain and to descend. The one is the change of downward motion, the other the stillness of being at rest. The infant wails but is in heaven: the boy grows but remains ever the immeasurable God. By what perception of human understanding can we comprehend that he ascended where he was before, and he descended who remained in heaven? The Lord says, “What if you should behold the Son of man ascending to where he was before?” The Son of man ascends where he was before. Can sense apprehend this? The Son of man—who is in heaven—descends from heaven. Can reason cope with this? The Word was made flesh—can words express this? The Word becomes flesh, that is, God becomes man. The man is in heaven: the God is from heaven. He ascends who descended, but he descends and yet does not descend. He is as he ever was, yet he was not ever what he is. We pass in review of the causes, but we cannot explain the manner. We perceive the manner but cannot understand the causes. Yet, if we understand Christ Jesus even in this way, we shall know hi…

It is not possible by the laws of bodies for the same object to remain and to descend. The one is the change of downward motion, the other the stillness of being at rest. The infant wails but is in heaven: the boy grows but remains ever the immeasurable God. By what perception of human understanding can we comprehend that he ascended where he was before, and he descended who remained in heaven? The Lord says, “What if you should behold the Son of man ascending to where he was before?” The Son of man ascends where he was before. Can sense apprehend this? The Son of man—who is in heaven—descends from heaven. Can reason cope with this? The Word was made flesh—can words express this? The Word becomes flesh, that is, God becomes man. The man is in heaven: the God is from heaven. He ascends who descended, but he descends and yet does not descend. He is as he ever was, yet he was not ever what he is. We pass in review of the causes, but we cannot explain the manner. We perceive the manner but cannot understand the causes. Yet, if we understand Christ Jesus even in this way, we shall know him. If we seek to understand him further, we shall not know him at all.

On the Trinity 10.54

John 3:13

(de Trin. c. 16.) Or, His descending from heaven is the source of His origin as conceived by the Spirit: Mary gave not His body its origin, though the natural qualities of her sex contributed its birth and increase. That He is the Son of man is from the birth of the flesh which was conceived in the Virgin. That He is in heaven is from the power of His everlasting nature, which did not contract the power of the Word of God, which is infinite, within the sphere of a finite body. Our Lord remaining in the form of a servant, far from the whole circle, inner and outer, of heaven and the world, yet as Lord of heaven and the world, was not absent therefrom. So then He came down from heaven because He was the Son of man; and He was in heaven, because the Word, which was made flesh, had not ceased to be the Word.

(as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274) Catena Aurea by Aquinas

John 3:13

"Descended from heaven" refers to his origin from the Spirit. For though Mary contributed to his growth in the womb and birth all that is natural to her sex, his body did not owe to her its origin. The “Son of man” refers to the birth of the flesh conceived in the Virgin; “who is in heaven” implies the power of his eternal nature—an infinite nature, which could not restrict itself to the limits of the body—of which it was itself the source and base. By the virtue of the Spirit and the power of God the Word, though he sojourned in the form of a servant, he was ever present as Lord of all within and beyond the circle of heaven and earth. So he descended from heaven and is the Son of man, yet is in heaven. For the Word made flesh did not cease to be the Word. As the Word, he is in heaven, as flesh he is the Son of man. As Word made flesh, he is at once from heaven, and Son of man and in heaven. For the power of the Word, abiding eternally without body, was present still in the heaven he had left. The flesh owed its origin to him and to no one else. So the Word made flesh, though he was…

"Descended from heaven" refers to his origin from the Spirit. For though Mary contributed to his growth in the womb and birth all that is natural to her sex, his body did not owe to her its origin. The “Son of man” refers to the birth of the flesh conceived in the Virgin; “who is in heaven” implies the power of his eternal nature—an infinite nature, which could not restrict itself to the limits of the body—of which it was itself the source and base. By the virtue of the Spirit and the power of God the Word, though he sojourned in the form of a servant, he was ever present as Lord of all within and beyond the circle of heaven and earth. So he descended from heaven and is the Son of man, yet is in heaven. For the Word made flesh did not cease to be the Word. As the Word, he is in heaven, as flesh he is the Son of man. As Word made flesh, he is at once from heaven, and Son of man and in heaven. For the power of the Word, abiding eternally without body, was present still in the heaven he had left. The flesh owed its origin to him and to no one else. So the Word made flesh, though he was flesh, nonetheless never ceased to be the Word.

On the Trinity 10.16

John 3:16

(vi. de Trin. c. 40) If it were only a creature given up for the sake of a creature, such a poor and insignificant loss were no great evidence of love. They must be precious things which prove our love, great things must evidence its greatness. God, in love to the world, gave His Son, not an adopted Son, but His own, even His Only Begotten. Here is proper Sonship, birth, truth: no creation, no adoption, no lie: here is the test of love and charity, that God sent His own and only begotten Son to save the world.

(as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274) Catena Aurea by Aquinas

John 3:16

God, who loved the world, gave his only begotten Son as a manifest token of his love. If the evidence of his love is this, that he bestowed a creature on creatures, gave a worldly being on the world's behalf, granted one raised up from nothing for the redemption of objects equally raised up from nothing, such a cheap and petty sacrifice is a poor assurance of his favor toward us. Gifts of price are the evidence of affection: the greatness of the surrender is evidence of the greatness of the love. God, who loved the world, gave no adopted son but his own, his only begotten [Son]. Here is personal interest, true sonship, sincerity; not creation, or adoption, or pretence. Here is the proof of his love and affection, that he gave his own, his only begotten Son.

ON THE TRINITY 6.40

John 3:18

“He who believes,” says Christ, “is not judged.” And is there any need to judge a believer? Judgment arises out of ambiguity, and where ambiguity ceases, there is no call for trial and judgment. And so, not even unbelievers need to be judged, because there is no doubt about their being unbelievers. But after exempting believers and unbelievers alike from judgment, the Lord added a case for judgment of the human agents on whom it must be exercised. For there are some who stand midway between the godly and the ungodly, having affinities to both but strictly belonging to neither class, because they have come to be what they are by a combination of the two.… For many are kept within the pale of the church by the fear of God, yet they are tempted all the while to worldly faults by the allurements of the world. They pray, because they are afraid; they sin, because it is their will.… These, then, are they whom the judgment awaits that unbelievers have already had passed on them and believers do not need.

HOMILY ON PSALM 1.21-22

John 4:6

If we do not understand the mystery of his tears, hunger and thirst, let us remember that … he who thirsted gave from himself rivers of living water.… When he ate and drank, it was a concession not to his own necessities but to our habits.

ON THE TRINITY 10.24

John 4:24

We see that the woman, her mind full of inherited tradition, thought that God must be worshiped either on a mountain, as at Samaria, or in a temple, as at Jerusalem.… The prejudices of both confined the all-embracing and illimitable God to the crest of a hill or the vault of a building. God is invisible, incomprehensible, immeasurable. The Lord said that the time had come when God should be worshiped neither on mountain nor in temple. For the Spirit cannot be shut up, as if in a cabin, or confined. It is omnipresent in space and time, and under all conditions it is present in its fullness. Therefore he said that they are the true worshipers who shall worship in the Spirit and in truth. And these who are to worship God the Spirit in the Spirit shall have the One for the means, the Other for the object, of their reverence. For each of the two stand in a different relation to the worshiper. The words “God is Spirit” do not alter the fact that the Holy Spirit has a name of his own and that he is the gift to us.… The imparted gift and the object of reverence were clearly shown when Christ…

We see that the woman, her mind full of inherited tradition, thought that God must be worshiped either on a mountain, as at Samaria, or in a temple, as at Jerusalem.… The prejudices of both confined the all-embracing and illimitable God to the crest of a hill or the vault of a building. God is invisible, incomprehensible, immeasurable. The Lord said that the time had come when God should be worshiped neither on mountain nor in temple. For the Spirit cannot be shut up, as if in a cabin, or confined. It is omnipresent in space and time, and under all conditions it is present in its fullness. Therefore he said that they are the true worshipers who shall worship in the Spirit and in truth. And these who are to worship God the Spirit in the Spirit shall have the One for the means, the Other for the object, of their reverence. For each of the two stand in a different relation to the worshiper. The words “God is Spirit” do not alter the fact that the Holy Spirit has a name of his own and that he is the gift to us.… The imparted gift and the object of reverence were clearly shown when Christ taught that God, being Spirit, must be worshiped in the Spirit, and revealed what freedom and knowledge, what boundless scope for adoration, lay in this worship of God the Spirit, in the Spirit.

ON THE TRINITY 2.31

John 4:24

(ii. de Trin. c. 31) Or, by saying that God being a Spirit ought to be worshipped in spirit, He indicates the freedom and knowledge of the worshippers, and the uncircumscribed nature of the worship: according to the saying of the Apostle, Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. (2 Cor. 3:17)

(as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274) Catena Aurea by Aquinas

John 5:14-18

(vii. de Trin. c. 15) The Evangelist here explains why the Jews wished to kill Him.

(as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274) Catena Aurea by Aquinas

John 5:17

He refers to the charge of violating the sabbath, brought against him. My Father works up to this time, and I work. He means that he had a precedent for claiming the right he did, and that what he did was in reality his Father’s doing who acted in the Son. And to quiet the jealousy that had been raised, because by the use of his Father’s name he had made himself equal with God, and to assert the excellence of his birth and nature, he says, “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of himself, but what he sees the Father do.”

ON THE TRINITY 7.17

John 5:17

Their anger was so kindled against him that they wanted to kill him, because he did his works on the sabbath. But let us see also what the Lord answered: “My Father is still working, and I also am working.” … He speaks that we may recognize in him the power of the Father’s nature employing the nature that has that power to work on the sabbath. The Father works in him while he works. Without doubt, then, Jesus works along with the working of the Father.… We must regard Jesus as referring to that very work of the Father’s which he was then doing since it implies the working of the Father at the very time of his words.… If the Father works and the Son works, no union exists between them that merges them into a single person.

ON THE TRINITY 9.44

John 5:19-20

(vii. de Trin. c. 17) He refers to the charge of violating the sabbath, brought against Him. My Father worketh hitherto, and I work; meaning that He had a precedent for claiming the right He did; and that what He did was in reality His Father's doing, who acted in the Son. And to quiet the jealousy which had been raised, because by the use of His Father's name He had made Himself equal with God, and to assert the excellency of His birth and nature, He says, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of Himself, but what He seeth the Father do. (vii. de Tr. c. 17.) Lest then that assertion of His equality, which must belong to Him, as by Name and Nature the Son, might throw doubt upon His Nativityf, He says that the Son can do nothing of Himself. (vii. de Tr. c. 17) That the wholesome order of our confession, i. e. that we believe in the Father and the Son, might remain, He shows the nature of His birth; viz. that He derived the power of acting not from an accession of strength supplied for each work, but by His own knowledge in the first instance. And this knowledge He…

(vii. de Trin. c. 17) He refers to the charge of violating the sabbath, brought against Him. My Father worketh hitherto, and I work; meaning that He had a precedent for claiming the right He did; and that what He did was in reality His Father's doing, who acted in the Son. And to quiet the jealousy which had been raised, because by the use of His Father's name He had made Himself equal with God, and to assert the excellency of His birth and nature, He says, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of Himself, but what He seeth the Father do.

(vii. de Tr. c. 17.) Lest then that assertion of His equality, which must belong to Him, as by Name and Nature the Son, might throw doubt upon His Nativityf, He says that the Son can do nothing of Himself.

(vii. de Tr. c. 17) That the wholesome order of our confession, i. e. that we believe in the Father and the Son, might remain, He shows the nature of His birth; viz. that He derived the power of acting not from an accession of strength supplied for each work, but by His own knowledge in the first instance. And this knowledge He derived not from any particular visible precedents, as if what the Father had done, the Son could do afterwards; but that the Son being born of the Father, and consequently conscious of the Father's virtue and nature within Him, could do nothing but what He saw the Father do: as he here testifies; God does not see by bodily organs, but by the virtue of His nature.

(vii. de Tr. c. 18) Or thus; All things and the same, He says, to show the virtue of His nature, its being the same with God's. That is the same nature, which can do all the same things. And as the Son does all the same things in a like way, the likeness of the works excludes the notion of the worker existing aloneg. Thus we come to a true idea of the Nativity, as our faith receives it: the likeness of the works bearing witness to the Nativity, their sameness to the Nature.

(vii. de Trin. c. 19) It must not be supposed that the Only Begotten God needed such showing on account of ignorance. For the showing here is only the doctrine of the nativityh; the self-existing Son, from the self-existing Father.

(vii. de Trin. c. 19) Nor did the heavenly discourse lack the caution, to guard against our inferring from these words any difference in the nature of the Son and the Father. For He says that the works of the Father were shown to Him, not that strength was supplied Him for the doing of them, in order to teach that this showing is substantially nothing else than His birth; for that simultaneously with the Son Himself is born the Son's knowledge of the works the Father will do through Him.

(as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274) Catena Aurea by Aquinas

John 5:21-23

(de Trin. vii. c. 19) For to will is the free power of a nature, which by the act of choice, resteth in the blessedness of perfect excellence. (de Trin vii. c. 20) Having said that the Son quickeneth whom He will, in order that we might not lose sight of the nativity, and think that He stood upon the ground of His own unborn power, He immediately adds, For the Father judgeth no man, but hath given all judgment unto the Son. In that all judgment is given to Him, both His nature, and His nativity are shewn; because only a self-existent nature can possess all things, and nativity cannot have any thing, except what is given it. (vii. de Trin. c. 20) All judgment is given to Him, because He quickens whom He will. Nor can the judgment be looked on as taken away from the Father, inasmuch as the cause of His not judging is, that the judgment of the Son is His. For all judgment is given from the Father. And the reason for which He gives it, appears immediately after: That all men may honour the Son even as they honour the Father. (vii. de Trin. c. 21) The conclusion then stands good agains…

(de Trin. vii. c. 19) For to will is the free power of a nature, which by the act of choice, resteth in the blessedness of perfect excellence.

(de Trin vii. c. 20) Having said that the Son quickeneth whom He will, in order that we might not lose sight of the nativity, and think that He stood upon the ground of His own unborn power, He immediately adds, For the Father judgeth no man, but hath given all judgment unto the Son. In that all judgment is given to Him, both His nature, and His nativity are shewn; because only a self-existent nature can possess all things, and nativity cannot have any thing, except what is given it.

(vii. de Trin. c. 20) All judgment is given to Him, because He quickens whom He will. Nor can the judgment be looked on as taken away from the Father, inasmuch as the cause of His not judging is, that the judgment of the Son is His. For all judgment is given from the Father. And the reason for which He gives it, appears immediately after: That all men may honour the Son even as they honour the Father.

(vii. de Trin. c. 21) The conclusion then stands good against all the fury of heretical minds. He is the Son, because He does nothing of Himself: He is God, because, whatsoever things the Father doeth, He doeth the same; They are one, because They are equal in honour: He is not the Father, because He is sent.

(as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274) Catena Aurea by Aquinas