Tiếng Việt

Hilary of Poitiers

Nicene & Post-Nicene · AD 325–500

625 passages across 25 books of the Bible · Who was this?

On John

20 of 164
  1. John 17:1
    (iii. Tr. c. 10) He doth not say that the day, or the time, but that the hour is come. An hour contains a portion of a day. What was this hour? He was now to be spit upon, scourged, crucified. But the Father glorifies the Son. The sun failed in his course, and with him all the other elements felt that death. The earth trembled under the weight of our Lord hanging on the Cross, and testified that it had not power to hold within it Him who was dying. The Centurion proclaimed, Truly this was the Son of God. (Matt. 27:54) The event answered the prediction. Our Lord had said, Glorify Thy Son, testifying that He was not the Son in name only, but properly the Son. Thy Son, He saith. Many of us are sons of God; but not such is the Son. For He is the proper, true Son by nature, not by adoption, in truth, not in name, by birth, not by creation. Therefore after His glorifying, to the manifestation of the truth there succeeded confession. The Centurion confesses Him to be the true Son of God, that so none of His believers might doubt what one of His persecutors could not deny. (iii. de. Trin) B…
    (iii. Tr. c. 10) He doth not say that the day, or the time, but that the hour is come. An hour contains a portion of a day. What was this hour? He was now to be spit upon, scourged, crucified. But the Father glorifies the Son. The sun failed in his course, and with him all the other elements felt that death. The earth trembled under the weight of our Lord hanging on the Cross, and testified that it had not power to hold within it Him who was dying. The Centurion proclaimed, Truly this was the Son of God. (Matt. 27:54) The event answered the prediction. Our Lord had said, Glorify Thy Son, testifying that He was not the Son in name only, but properly the Son. Thy Son, He saith. Many of us are sons of God; but not such is the Son. For He is the proper, true Son by nature, not by adoption, in truth, not in name, by birth, not by creation. Therefore after His glorifying, to the manifestation of the truth there succeeded confession. The Centurion confesses Him to be the true Son of God, that so none of His believers might doubt what one of His persecutors could not deny.

    (iii. de. Trin) But perhaps this proves weakness in the Son; His waiting to be glorified by one superior to Himself. And who does not confess that the Father is superior, seeing that He Himself saith, The Father is greater than I? But beware lest the honour of the Father impair the glory of the Son. It follows: That Thy Son also may glorify Thee. So then the Son is not weak, inasmuch as He gives back in His turn glory for the glory which He receives. This petition for glory to be given and repaid, shows the same divinity to be in both.

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

  2. John 17:2
    Perhaps the Son is weak in that he receives power over all flesh. And indeed the receiving of power might be a sign of weakness if he were not able to give eternal life to those whom he receives. Yet the very fact of receiving is used to prove inferiority of nature. It might prove such is the case if Christ were not true God by birth as truly as is the Unbegotten. But if the receiving of power signifies neither more nor less than the birth by which he received all that he has, that gift does not degrade the Begotten, because it makes him perfectly and entirely what God is. God Unbegotten brought God only-begotten to a perfect birth of divine blessedness. It is, then, the mystery of the Father to be the author of the birth, but it is no degradation to the Son to be made the perfect image of his author by a real birth. The giving of power over all flesh—and this giving is done in order that eternal life might be given to all flesh—postulates the fatherhood of the giver and the divinity of the receiver. For giving signifies that the One is the Father and, in receiving the power to give…
    Perhaps the Son is weak in that he receives power over all flesh. And indeed the receiving of power might be a sign of weakness if he were not able to give eternal life to those whom he receives. Yet the very fact of receiving is used to prove inferiority of nature. It might prove such is the case if Christ were not true God by birth as truly as is the Unbegotten. But if the receiving of power signifies neither more nor less than the birth by which he received all that he has, that gift does not degrade the Begotten, because it makes him perfectly and entirely what God is. God Unbegotten brought God only-begotten to a perfect birth of divine blessedness. It is, then, the mystery of the Father to be the author of the birth, but it is no degradation to the Son to be made the perfect image of his author by a real birth. The giving of power over all flesh—and this giving is done in order that eternal life might be given to all flesh—postulates the fatherhood of the giver and the divinity of the receiver. For giving signifies that the One is the Father and, in receiving the power to give eternal life, the other remains God the Son. All power is therefore natural and congenital to the Son of God. And though it is given, that does not separate him from his author. For that which is given is the property of his author, that is, power to bestow eternal life and to change the corruptible into the incorruptible. The Father gave all; the Son received all.

    ON THE TRINITY 9.31

  3. John 17:2
    The glory [that the Son would give to the Father] was that the Son, being made flesh, received power over all flesh from the Father, along with the charge of restoring eternal life to ephemeral beings like us who are burdened with the body.

    ON THE TRINITY 3.13

  4. John 17:2
    (iii. de Trin) For being made flesh Himself, He was about to restore eternal life to frail, corporeal, and mortal man.

    (ix. de Trin. 31) If Christ be God, not begotten, but unbegotten, then let this receiving be thought weakness. But not if His receiving of power signifies His begetting, in which He received what He is. This gift cannot be counted for weakness. For the Father is such in that He gives; the Son remains God in that He hath received the power of giving eternal life.

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

  5. John 17:3
    But perhaps by saying “you the only,” Christ severs himself from communion and unity with God. Yes, but after the words “you the only true God,” does he not immediately continue, “and Jesus Christ whom you have sent”? I appeal to the sense of the reader: what must we believe Christ to be when we are commanded to believe in him also, as well as the Father the only true God? Or, perhaps, if the Father is the only true God, there is no room for Christ to be God. It might be so, if, because there is one God the Father, Christ were not the one Lord. The fact that God the Father is one leaves Christ nonetheless the one Lord. And similarly the Father’s one true Godhead makes Christ nonetheless true God. For we can obtain eternal life only if we believe in Christ, as well as in the only true God.… But the faith of the church, while confessing the only true God the Father, confesses Christ also. It does not confess Christ true God without the Father the only true God. Nor does it confess the Father as the only true God without Christ. It confesses Christ true God, because it confesses the Fat…
    But perhaps by saying “you the only,” Christ severs himself from communion and unity with God. Yes, but after the words “you the only true God,” does he not immediately continue, “and Jesus Christ whom you have sent”? I appeal to the sense of the reader: what must we believe Christ to be when we are commanded to believe in him also, as well as the Father the only true God? Or, perhaps, if the Father is the only true God, there is no room for Christ to be God. It might be so, if, because there is one God the Father, Christ were not the one Lord. The fact that God the Father is one leaves Christ nonetheless the one Lord. And similarly the Father’s one true Godhead makes Christ nonetheless true God. For we can obtain eternal life only if we believe in Christ, as well as in the only true God.… But the faith of the church, while confessing the only true God the Father, confesses Christ also. It does not confess Christ true God without the Father the only true God. Nor does it confess the Father as the only true God without Christ. It confesses Christ true God, because it confesses the Father the only true God. Thus the fact that God the Father is the only true God constitutes Christ also as true God. The only-begotten God suffered no change of nature by his natural birth. And he who, according to the nature of his divine origin was born God from the living God, is, by the truth of that nature, inalienable from the only true God.

    ON THE TRINITY 9.34, 36

  6. John 17:3
    (iii. de Tr. c. 14) And in what eternal life is, He then shews: And this is life eternal, that they might know Thee, the only true God. To know the only true God is life, but this alone does not constitute life. What else then is added? And Jesus Christ whom Thou hast sent. (iv. de Tr. c. 9) The Arians hold, that as the Father is the only true, only just, only wise God, the Son hath no communion of these attributes; for that which is proper to one, cannot be partaken of by another. And as these are as they think in the Father alone, and not in the Son, they necessarily consider the Son a false and vain God. (v. de Tr. 3) But it must be clear to every one that the reality of any thing is evidenced by its power. For that is true wheat, which when rising with grain and fenced with ears, and shaken out by the winnowing machine, and ground into corn, and baked into bread, and taken for food, fulfils the nature and function of bread. I ask then wherein the truth of Divinity is wanting to the Son, Who hath the nature and virtue of Divinity. For He so made use of the virtue of His nature…
    (iii. de Tr. c. 14) And in what eternal life is, He then shews: And this is life eternal, that they might know Thee, the only true God. To know the only true God is life, but this alone does not constitute life. What else then is added? And Jesus Christ whom Thou hast sent.

    (iv. de Tr. c. 9) The Arians hold, that as the Father is the only true, only just, only wise God, the Son hath no communion of these attributes; for that which is proper to one, cannot be partaken of by another. And as these are as they think in the Father alone, and not in the Son, they necessarily consider the Son a false and vain God.

    (v. de Tr. 3) But it must be clear to every one that the reality of any thing is evidenced by its power. For that is true wheat, which when rising with grain and fenced with ears, and shaken out by the winnowing machine, and ground into corn, and baked into bread, and taken for food, fulfils the nature and function of bread. I ask then wherein the truth of Divinity is wanting to the Son, Who hath the nature and virtue of Divinity. For He so made use of the virtue of His nature, as to cause to be things which were not, and to do every thing which seemed good to Him.

    (ix. de Trin) Because He says, Thee the only, does He separate Himself from communion and unity with God? He doth separate Himself, but that He adds immediately, And Jesus Christ Whom Thou hast sent. For the Catholic faith confesses Christ to be true God, in that it confesses the Father to be the only true God; for natural birth did not introduce any change of nature into the Only-Begotten God.

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

  7. John 17:3
    But in what does eternal life consist? His own words tell us: “That they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent.” Is there any doubt or difficulty here, or any inconsistency? It is life to know the true God. But the bare knowledge of him does not give life. What, then, does he add? “And Jesus Christ whom you have sent.” In you, the only true God, the Son pays the honor due to his Father. By the addition “and Jesus Christ whom you have sent,” he associates himself with the true Godhead. The believer in his confession draws no line between the two, for his hope of life rests in both. And indeed, the true God is inseparable from him whose name follows in the creed. Therefore when we read, “That they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent,” these terms of sender and of sent are not intended, under any semblance of distinction either in name or interval [of time], to convey a difference between the true Godhead of Father and of Son. Rather, they are meant to be a guide to the devout confession of them as begetter and begotten.

    ON THE TRINITY 3.14

  8. John 17:3
    But it must be clear to everyone that the truth or genuineness of something is evidenced in its nature and powers. For instance, true wheat is what grows to maturity with the beard bristling around it which is then purged from the chaff and ground into flour, baked into a loaf and taken for food. [Wheat] demonstrates the nature and uses that bread is known for.… What element of the Godhead, then, is lacking in the Son who possesses both the nature and power of God? For he had at his disposal the powers of the divine nature to bring into being the nonexistent and to create whenever he wanted.

    ON THE TRINITY 5.3-4

  9. John 17:4-5
    (iii. de Trin) This new glory with which our Lord had glorified the Father, does not imply any advancement in Godhead, but refers to the honour received from those who are converted from ignorance to knowledge.

    (ix. de Trin) After which, that we may understand the reward of His obedience, and the mystery of the whole dispensation, He adds, And now glorify Me with the glory with Thine own Self, with the glory which I had with Thee before the world was.

    (iii. de Trin) Or He prayed that that which was mortal, might receive the glory immortal, that the corruption of the flesh might be transformed and absorbed into the incorruption of the Spirit.

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

  10. John 17:5
    And so, he had not abdicated his own position. And yet, he had taken ours. He prays, then, that the nature that he had assumed may be promoted to the glory that he had never renounced. … This Son, now incarnate, prayed that flesh might be to the Father what the Son had been. He prayed that flesh, born in time, might receive the splendor of the everlasting glory, that the corruption of the flesh might be swallowed up, transformed into the power of God and the incorruption of the Spirit.

    ON THE TRINITY 3.16

  11. John 17:11
    John, who especially brings out the working of spiritual causes in the Gospel, preserves this prayer of the Lord for the apostles that all the others passed over. Notice how he prayed, namely, “Holy Father, keep them in your name.… While I was with them, I kept them in your name: those whom you gave me I have kept.” That prayer was not for himself but for his apostles. He was not in sorrow for himself since he asks them to pray that they won’t be tempted.… And when he prays, he prays for those whom he preserved, so long as he was with them, whom he now hands over to the Father to preserve. Now that he is about to accomplish the mystery of death, he begs the Father to guard them. The presence of the angel who was sent to him (if this explanation is true) is no doubt significant. Jesus showed his certainty that the prayer was answered when, at its close, he commands the disciples to sleep. The effect of this prayer and the security that prompted the command, “sleep,” is noticed by the Evangelist in the course of the passion, when he says of the apostles just before they escaped from th…
    John, who especially brings out the working of spiritual causes in the Gospel, preserves this prayer of the Lord for the apostles that all the others passed over. Notice how he prayed, namely, “Holy Father, keep them in your name.… While I was with them, I kept them in your name: those whom you gave me I have kept.” That prayer was not for himself but for his apostles. He was not in sorrow for himself since he asks them to pray that they won’t be tempted.… And when he prays, he prays for those whom he preserved, so long as he was with them, whom he now hands over to the Father to preserve. Now that he is about to accomplish the mystery of death, he begs the Father to guard them. The presence of the angel who was sent to him (if this explanation is true) is no doubt significant. Jesus showed his certainty that the prayer was answered when, at its close, he commands the disciples to sleep. The effect of this prayer and the security that prompted the command, “sleep,” is noticed by the Evangelist in the course of the passion, when he says of the apostles just before they escaped from the hands of the pursuers, “That the word might be fulfilled which he had spoken, ‘Of those whom you have given me, I lost not one of them.’ ” He himself fulfills the petition of his prayer, and they are all safe. But he asks that those whom he has preserved the Father will now preserve in his own name. And they are preserved; the faith of Peter does not fail: it cowered, but repentance followed immediately.

    ON THE TRINITY 10.42

  12. John 17:20
    Our Lord prays to His Father that those who shall believe in Him may be one, and as He is in the Father and the Father in Him, so all may be one in Them. Why dost thou bring in here an identity of mind, why a unity of soul and heart through agreement of will? For there would have been no lack of suitable words for our Lord, if it were will that made them one, to have prayed in this fashion: Father, as We are one in will, so may they also be one in will, that we may all be one through agreement.... For those first of all is the prayer of whom it is said, That they all may be one. Then the promotion of unity is set forth by a pattern of unity, when He says, as Thou, Father, art in Me, and I in Thee, that they also may be in Us, so that as the Father is in the Son and the Son in the Father, so through the pattern of this unity all might be one in the Father and the Son.

    On the Trinity, Book 8, Section 11

  13. John 17:20
    Now our Lord has not left the minds of His faithful followers in doubt, but has explained the manner in which His nature operates, saying, "That they may be one, as We are one: I in them and Thou in Me, that they may be perfected in one."... If He wished to indicate a mere unity of will, why did He set forth a kind of gradation and sequence in the completion of the unity, unless it were that, since He was in the Father through the nature of Deity, and we on the contrary in Him through His birth in the body, He would have us believe that He is in us through the mystery of the sacraments? And thus there might be taught a perfect unity through a Mediator, whilst, we abiding in Him, He abode in the Father, and as abiding in the Father abode also in us; and so we might arrive at unity with the Father, since in Him Who dwells naturally in the Father by birth, we also dwell naturally, while He Himself abides naturally in us also.

    On the Trinity, Book 8, Sections 13 and 15

  14. John 17:20
    The words of Christ, "I and the Father are one," [heretics] endeavour to refer to a mere concord of unanimity, so that there may be in them a unity of will not of nature, that is, that they may be one not by essence of being, but by identity of will. And they apply to the support of their case the passage in the Acts of the Apostles, "Now of the multitude of them that believed the heart and soul were one," in order to prove that a diversity of souls and hearts may be united into one heart and soul through a mere conformity of will.... Or again, they quote the prayer of our Lord for the salvation of the nations who should believe in Him: "Neither for these only do I pray, but for them also that shall believe on Me through their Word; that they all may be one; even as Thou, Father, art in Me, and I in Thee, that they also may be in Us," to shew that since men cannot, so to speak, be fused back into God or themselves coalesce into one undistinguished mass, this oneness must arise from unity of will, while all perform actions pleasing to God, and unite one with another in the harmonious…
    The words of Christ, "I and the Father are one," [heretics] endeavour to refer to a mere concord of unanimity, so that there may be in them a unity of will not of nature, that is, that they may be one not by essence of being, but by identity of will. And they apply to the support of their case the passage in the Acts of the Apostles, "Now of the multitude of them that believed the heart and soul were one," in order to prove that a diversity of souls and hearts may be united into one heart and soul through a mere conformity of will.... Or again, they quote the prayer of our Lord for the salvation of the nations who should believe in Him: "Neither for these only do I pray, but for them also that shall believe on Me through their Word; that they all may be one; even as Thou, Father, art in Me, and I in Thee, that they also may be in Us," to shew that since men cannot, so to speak, be fused back into God or themselves coalesce into one undistinguished mass, this oneness must arise from unity of will, while all perform actions pleasing to God, and unite one with another in the harmonious accord of their thoughts, and that thus it is not nature which makes them one, but will.

    On the Trinity, Book 8, Section 5

  15. John 17:20
    The world is to believe that the Son has been sent by the Father because all who shall believe in Him will be one in the Father and the Son. And how they will be so we are soon told: "And the glory which Thou hast given Me I have given unto them." Now I ask whether glory is identical with will, since will is an emotion of the mind while glory is an ornament or embellishment of nature. So then it is the glory received from the Father that the Son hath given to all who shall believe in Him, and certainly not will.... It is then with this object that the received glory was bestowed, that all might be one. So now all are one in glory, because the glory given is none other than that which was received.

    On the Trinity, Book 8, Section 12

  16. John 17:21
    (vii de Trin) And this unity is recommended by the great example of unity: As Thou, Father, art in Me, and I in Thee, that they also may be one in Us, i. e. that as the Father is in the Son, and the Son in the Father, so, after the likeness of this unity, all may be one in the Father and in the Son. (viii. de Trin) Heretics endeavouring to get over the words, I and My Father are one, as a proving unity of nature, and to reduce them to mean a unity simply of natural love, and agreement of will, bring forwards these words of our Lord's as an example of this kind of unity: That they may be all one, as Thou, Father, art in Me, and I in Thee. But though impiety can cheat its own understanding, it cannot alter the meaning of the words themselves. For they who are born again of a nature that gives unity in life eternal, they cease to be one in will merely, acquiring the same nature by their regeneration: but the Father and Son alone are properly one, because God, only-begotten of God, can only exist in that nature from which He is derived. (viii. de Trin) Or, the world will believe that t…
    (vii de Trin) And this unity is recommended by the great example of unity: As Thou, Father, art in Me, and I in Thee, that they also may be one in Us, i. e. that as the Father is in the Son, and the Son in the Father, so, after the likeness of this unity, all may be one in the Father and in the Son.

    (viii. de Trin) Heretics endeavouring to get over the words, I and My Father are one, as a proving unity of nature, and to reduce them to mean a unity simply of natural love, and agreement of will, bring forwards these words of our Lord's as an example of this kind of unity: That they may be all one, as Thou, Father, art in Me, and I in Thee. But though impiety can cheat its own understanding, it cannot alter the meaning of the words themselves. For they who are born again of a nature that gives unity in life eternal, they cease to be one in will merely, acquiring the same nature by their regeneration: but the Father and Son alone are properly one, because God, only-begotten of God, can only exist in that nature from which He is derived.

    (viii. de Trin) Or, the world will believe that the Son is sent from the Father, for that reason, viz. because all who believe in Him are one in the Father and the Son.

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

  17. John 17:21
    [This passage] shows that since human beings cannot, so to speak, be fused back into God or themselves coalesce into one undistinguished mass, this oneness must arise from unity of will, as all perform actions pleasing to God and unite with one another in the harmonious agreement of their thoughts. Therefore, it is not nature that makes them one but will.

    ON THE TRINITY 8.5

  18. John 17:22
    Now I ask whether glory is identical with will, since will is an emotion of the mind while glory is an ornament or embellishment of nature. So then, it is the glory received from the Father that the Son has given to all who shall believe in him, and certainly not will. Had will been given, faith would carry with it no reward, for a necessity of will attached to us would also impose faith on us. However, he has shown what is effected by the bestowal of the glory received: “that they may be one, even as we are one.” It is then with this object that the received glory was bestowed, that all might be one. So now all are one in glory, because the glory given is none other than that which was received; nor has it been given for any other reason than that all should be one. And since all are one through the glory given to the Son and by the Son bestowed on believers, I ask how the Son can be of a different glory from the Father’s, since the glory of the Son brings all that believe into the unity of the Father’s glory. Now it may be that the utterance of human hope in this case may be somewh…
    Now I ask whether glory is identical with will, since will is an emotion of the mind while glory is an ornament or embellishment of nature. So then, it is the glory received from the Father that the Son has given to all who shall believe in him, and certainly not will. Had will been given, faith would carry with it no reward, for a necessity of will attached to us would also impose faith on us. However, he has shown what is effected by the bestowal of the glory received: “that they may be one, even as we are one.” It is then with this object that the received glory was bestowed, that all might be one. So now all are one in glory, because the glory given is none other than that which was received; nor has it been given for any other reason than that all should be one. And since all are one through the glory given to the Son and by the Son bestowed on believers, I ask how the Son can be of a different glory from the Father’s, since the glory of the Son brings all that believe into the unity of the Father’s glory. Now it may be that the utterance of human hope in this case may be somewhat immoderate, yet it will not be contrary to faith. For though to hope for this were presumptuous, yet not to have believed it is sinful, for we have one and the same author both of our hope and of our faith.

    ON THE TRINITY 8.12

  19. John 17:22-23
    (viii. de Trin) By this giving and receiving of honour, then, all are one. But I do not yet apprehend in what way this makes all one. Our Lord, however, explains the gradation and order in the consummating of this unity, when He adds, I in them, and Thou in Me; so that inasmuch as He was in the Father by His divine nature, we in Him by His incarnation, and He again in us by the mystery of the sacrament, a perfect union by means of a Mediator was established.

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

  20. John 19:7
    If you [Arians] will not learn who Christ is from those who know him, learn it at least from those who do not.… Can’t you see your fellowship with the … Jews [of Jesus’ day] in which your denial of the divine Sonship has involved you! For they have put on record the reason of their condemnation: “And by our law he ought to die because he made himself the Son of God.” Isn’t this the same charge that you are blasphemously bringing against him, that, while you pronounce him a creature, he calls himself the Son? He confesses himself the Son, and they declare him guilty of death. You too deny that he is the Son of God. What sentence do you pass on him? You have the same repugnance to his claim as had the Jews. You agree with their verdict. I want to know whether you will quarrel about the sentence. Your offense, in denying that he is the Son of God, is exactly the same as theirs, though their guilt is less, for they sinned in ignorance.

    ON THE TRINITY 6.50

All writers