In the 4th century, one
Old Testament text, Proverbs 8:22, became a heated point of contention during
the Arian controversy. Interestingly enough, two of the factions involved in
the debate—the pro-Arians and the pro-Nicene Church Fathers—introduced
interpretations of the text that went against an almost universal understanding
by the pre-Nicene Church Fathers who cited it. Though all three parties applied
the passage to Jesus Christ, each did so differently. The pro-Arians believed
the passage taught that the pre-existent Jesus was created ex nihilo (out
of nothing) by God the Father. Some of the pro-Nicene Fathers believed that the
passage was a reference to Jesus' human nature only, and had nothing to do with
his pre-existence (for an early example of this interpretation see Athanasius',
Expostio Fidei, circa 328 A.D. - NPNF - Second Series 4.85).
Both of these interpretations ran contrary to the pre-Nicene Fathers who taught
that the passage did in fact refer to Jesus' pre-existent causation by God the
Father (to date, I have found only one explicit exception), while clearly
rejecting the pro-Arian novelty that this causation was ex nihilo.
All three interpretations
utilized the Septuagint version of Proverbs 8:22 which reads:
κύριος ἔκτισέν με ἀρχὴν ὁδῶν αὐτοῦ εἰς ἔργα αὐτοῦ
Sir Lancelot C. L. Brenton's English translation (1851),
reads as follows:
The Lord
made [i.e. created] me the beginning of his ways for his works. (Brenton, The
Septuagint With Apocrypha - Greek and English, Hendrickson Publishers 1986
reprint of the 1851 edition, page 795.)
Because
the pro-Arians maintained that everything which exists, apart from God the
Father Himself, came into being 'out of non-existence' (ἐξ ούκ ὄντων) by God's creative
will, this meant for them that God's pre-existent Son (His Wisdom/Word) came
into being out of nothing. It was Arius himself who introduced this theological
novum (scholars have not been able to identify any Christian writer
prior to him who taught that the Son was created ex nihilo). Concerning
this teaching of Arius, the modern patristic scholar, R.P.C. Hanson wrote:
The
part of Arius' doctrine which most shocked and disturbed his contemporaries was
his statement that the Father made the son 'out of non-existence' (ἐξ ούκ ὄντων). (Hanson, The
Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, 1988, p. 24.)
And
a bit later:
Scholars
have usually been completely at a loss to account for its ancestry, and those
few who suggest that Arius derived it from one or another of the Middle
Platonist philosophies have not explained that any philosopher who appears to
derive some ultimate reality from non-existence in fact assumes that the
creation 'from nothing' took place from already existing formless matter. It is
likely that Arius, with his usual ruthless logic, decided that as God had
created everything out of nothing (a doctrine which was well established in his
day), and as the Son was created, so the Son must have been created out of
nothing. (Ibid.)
What
Arius and his followers failed to grasp is that when the Church Fathers who
wrote prior to the Arian controversy applied the term "created" [Gr. κτίζω] to the pre-existent
Son of God, they did so with the understanding that it was a synonym of
"beget" [Gr. γεννάω]. In other words, in a Christological context, "created"
meant "procreated". This understanding seems to fit quite well with
Biblical terminology and themes (e.g. God as Father and Jesus as the Son of
God, the only begotten of the Father, the only begotten Son, etc.), and is
embedded in the broader context of the Proverbs 8.22 passage, for just three
verses after Wisdom has been identified as being created/made [Gr. ἔκτισέν] by the Lord/Jehovah, we read that the same Lord/Jehovah "begets"
[Gr. γεννᾷ] the same Wisdom.
With the above in place, it is now time to examine how
the pre-Nicene Fathers made use of Proverbs 8:22. Two important points will
emerge: first, the passage, with only one clear exception, is used with
reference to the pre-existent Jesus (contra Athanasius and some other
post-Nicene Fathers); and second, the surrounding context does not allow for
the Arian sense. I will start with the Greek Fathers, all of which make use of
the Septuagint version, and then the Latin Fathers, who also used the LXX, but,
of course, translated into Latin.
Justin Martyr -
"I shall give you another testimony, my friends," said I, "from the Scriptures, that God begat before all creatures a Beginning, [who was] a certain rational power [proceeding] from Himself, who is called by the Holy Spirit, now the Glory of the Lord, now the Son, again Wisdom, again an Angel, then God, and then Lord and Logos ; and on another occasion He calls Himself Captain, when He appeared in human form to Joshua the son of Nave (Nun). For He can be called by all those names, since He ministers to the Father's will, and since He was begotten of the Father by an act of will ; just as we see happening among ourselves : for when we give out some word, we beget the word ; yet not by abscission, so as to lessen the word [which remains] in us, when we give it out : and just as we see also happening in the case of a fire, which is not lessened when it has kindled [another] , but remains the same ; and that which has been kindled by it likewise appears to exist by itself, not diminishing that from which it was kindled. The Word of Wisdom, who is Himself this God begotten of the Father of all things, and Word, and Wisdom, and Power, and the Glory of the Begetter, will bear evidence to me, when He speaks by Solomon the following : 'If I shall declare to you what happens daily, I shall call to mind events from everlasting, and review them. The Lord made me the beginning of His ways for His works [Prov. 8.22: Κύριος ἔκτισέ με ἀρχὴν ὁδῶν αὐτοῦ εἰς ἔργα αὐτοῦ - PG 6.616]. From everlasting He established me in the beginning, before He formed the earth, and before He made the depths, and before the springs of waters came forth, before the mountains were settled ; He begets me [Prov. 8.25b: γεννᾷ με - PG 6.616] (Dialogue with Trypho, 61 - ANF 1.227, 228.)
"I shall give you another testimony, my friends," said I, "from the Scriptures, that God begat before all creatures a Beginning, [who was] a certain rational power [proceeding] from Himself, who is called by the Holy Spirit, now the Glory of the Lord, now the Son, again Wisdom, again an Angel, then God, and then Lord and Logos ; and on another occasion He calls Himself Captain, when He appeared in human form to Joshua the son of Nave (Nun). For He can be called by all those names, since He ministers to the Father's will, and since He was begotten of the Father by an act of will ; just as we see happening among ourselves : for when we give out some word, we beget the word ; yet not by abscission, so as to lessen the word [which remains] in us, when we give it out : and just as we see also happening in the case of a fire, which is not lessened when it has kindled [another] , but remains the same ; and that which has been kindled by it likewise appears to exist by itself, not diminishing that from which it was kindled. The Word of Wisdom, who is Himself this God begotten of the Father of all things, and Word, and Wisdom, and Power, and the Glory of the Begetter, will bear evidence to me, when He speaks by Solomon the following : 'If I shall declare to you what happens daily, I shall call to mind events from everlasting, and review them. The Lord made me the beginning of His ways for His works [Prov. 8.22: Κύριος ἔκτισέ με ἀρχὴν ὁδῶν αὐτοῦ εἰς ἔργα αὐτοῦ - PG 6.616]. From everlasting He established me in the beginning, before He formed the earth, and before He made the depths, and before the springs of waters came forth, before the mountains were settled ; He begets me [Prov. 8.25b: γεννᾷ με - PG 6.616] (Dialogue with Trypho, 61 - ANF 1.227, 228.)
"And now I shall again recite the words which I have spoken in proof of this point. When Scripture says, 'The Lord rained fire from the Lord out of heaven,' the prophetic word indicates that there were two in number : One upon the earth, who, it says, descended to behold the cry of Sodom ; Another in heaven, who also is Lord of the Lord on earth, as He is Father and God ; the cause of His power and of His being Lord and God. Again, when the Scripture records that God said in the beginning, 'Behold, Adam has become like one of Us,' this phrase, 'like one of Us,' is also indicative of number ; and the words do not admit of a figurative meaning, as the sophists endeavour to affix on them, who are able neither to tell nor to understand the truth. And it is written in the book of Wisdom : 'If I should tell you daily events, I would be mindful to enumerate them from the beginning. The Lord created me the beginning of His ways for His works. [Prov. 8.22: Κύριος ἔκτισέ με ἀρχὴν ὁδῶν αὐτοῦ εἰς ἔργα αὐτοῦ - PG
6.777]. From everlasting He established me in the beginning, before He formed the earth, and before He made the depths, and before the springs of
waters came forth, before the mountains were settled ; He begets me [Prov. 8.25b: γεννᾷ με - PG 6.777] before all the hills.'" When I repeated these words, I added : "You perceive, my hearers, if you bestow attention, that the Scripture has declared that this Offspring was begotten by the Father before all things created ; and that that which is begotten is numerically distinct from that which begets, any one will admit." (Dialogue with Trypho, 129
- ANF 1.264.)
Irenaeus -
I have also largely demonstrated, that the Word, namely the Son, was always with the Father ; and that Wisdom also, which is the Spirit, was present with Him, anterior to all creation. He declares by Solomon : "God by Wisdom founded the earth, and by understanding hath He established the heaven. By His knowledge the depths burst forth, and the clouds dropped down the dew." And again: "The Lord created [Lat. creavit
- PG 7/1.1033.58] me the beginning of His ways in His work : He set
me up from everlasting, in the beginning, before He made the earth, before He established the depths, and before the fountains of waters gushed forth ; before the mountains were made strong, and before all the hills, He brought me forth [Lat. genuit -
PG 7/1.1033.58]. "And again : "When He prepared the heaven, I was with Him, and when He established the fountains
of the deep ; when He made the foundations of the earth strong, I was with Him preparing [them]. I was He in whom He rejoiced, and throughout all time I was daily glad before His face, when He rejoiced at the completion of the world, and was delighted in the sons of men." (Against
Heresies, 4.20.3 - ANF 1.488.)
[NOTE: The above passage
is the only exception I have found to the almost universal application of Prov.
8:22 to the pre-existent Jesus. Also, though Irenaeus originally wrote in
Greek, the Greek for this section is not extant, and has been preserved in
Latin.]
Athenagoras -
That we are not atheists, therefore, seeing that we acknowledge one God, uncreated, eternal, invisible, impassible, incomprehensible, illimitable, who is apprehended by the understanding only and the reason, who is encompassed by light, and beauty, and spirit, and power ineffable, by whom the universe has been created through His Logos, and set in order, and is kept in being — I have sufficiently demonstrated. [I say "His Logos"], for we acknowledge also a Son of God. Nor let any one think it ridiculous that God should have a Son. For though the poets, in their fictions, represent the gods as no better than men, our mode of thinking is not the same as theirs, concerning either God the Father or the Son. But the Son of God is the Logos of the Father in idea and in operation ; for after the pattern of Him and by Him were all things made, the Father and the Son being one. And, the Son being in the Father and the Father in the Son, in oneness and power of spirit, the understanding and reason (νοῦς καὶ λόγος) of the Father is the Son of God. But if, in your surpassing intelligence, it occurs to you to inquire what is meant by the Son, I will state briefly that He is the first product of the Father, not as having been brought into existence [i.e. not ἐξ ούκ ὄντων] (for from the beginning, God, who is the eternal mind [νοῦς], had the Logos in Himself, being from eternity instinct with Logos [λογικός] ; but inasmuch as
He came forth to be the idea and energizing power of all material things, which lay like a nature without attributes, and an inactive earth, the grosser particles being mixed up with the lighter. The prophetic Spirit also agrees with our statements. "The Lord," it says, "made me, the beginning of His ways to His works." [Prov. 8:22: Κύριος γὰρ, φησὶν, ἔκτισέ με ἀρχὴν
ὁδῶν αὐτοῦ εἰς ἔργα αὐτοῦ - PG 6.909.70.]
(A Plea for the Christians, 10.3 - ANF 2.133.)
Clement of Alexandria -
Why repeat to you the mysteries of wisdom, and sayings from the writings of the son of the Hebrews, the master of wisdom ? "The Lord created me the beginning of His ways, in order to His works." [Prov. 8:22: Κύριος ἔκτισέ με ἀρχὴν ὁδῶν αὐτοῦ εἰς ἔργα αὐτοῦ -PG 8.192.54] And, "The LORD giveth wisdom, and from His face proceed knowledge and understanding." "How long wilt thou lie in bed, O sluggard ; and when wilt thou be aroused from sleep?" "but if thou show thyself no sluggard, as a fountain thy harvest shall come," the "Word of the Father, the benign light, the Lord that bringeth light, faith to all, and salvation." For "the Lord who created the earth by His power," as Jeremiah says, "has raised up the world by His wisdom ; " for wisdom, which is His word, raises us up to the truth, who have fallen prostrate before idols, and is itself the first resurrection from our fall. (Exhortation to
the Heathen, ch. 8 - ANF 2.194, 195.)
Origen -
In the first place, we must note that the nature of that deity which is in Christ in respect of His being the only-begotten Son of God is one thing, and that human nature which He assumed in these last times for the purposes of the dispensation (of grace) is another. And therefore we have first to ascertain what the only-begotten Son of God is, seeing He is called by many different names, according to the circumstances and views of individuals. For He is termed Wisdom, according to the expression of Solomon : " The Lord created me —the beginning of His ways, and among His works, before He made any other thing; [Prov.
8:22: Dominus creavit me initium viarum suarum, et in opera sua antequam
aliquid faceret, ante saecula fundavit me. - PG 11.130.8] He founded me before the ages. In the beginning, before He formed the earth, before He brought forth the fountains of waters, before the mountains were made strong, before all the hills. He brought me forth." [Lat. generat - PG 11.130.8]
He is also styled First-born, as the
apostle has
declared : " who is the first-born of every creature." The first-born, however, is not by nature a different person from the Wisdom, but one and the same. (De Principiis, 1.2.1
- ANF 4.245, 246.)
[NOTE:
De Principiis was originally written in Greek, but the Greek for this
section is not extant. However, the LXX version of Prov. 8:22 has been
preserved in Greek in Origen's Hexpla, and reads: Κύριος ἔκτισέ με ἀρχὴν ὁδῶν αὐτοῦ εἰς ἔργα αὐτοῦ - PG
16/2.1337-1338.]
Now this Son was begotten of the Father's will, for he is
the 'image of the invisible God' and the 'efflulgence of his glory and impress
of his substance', 'the firstborn of all creation', a thing created, wisdom.
For wisdom itself says: 'God created me in the beginning of his ways for his
works'. [Prov.
8:22: ὁ θεὸς ἔκτισέ με ἀρχὴν ὁδῶν αὐτοῦ εἰς ἔργα αὐτοῦ - GCS
22.349.] If he is an 'image of the invisible God', he is an invisible image;
and I would dare add that as he is a likeness of the Father there is no time he
did not exist. (Origen on First Principles - Being Koetschau's Text of
DePrincipiis Translated Into English, by G. W. Butterworth, 1973, 4.4.1,
pp. 314, 315.)
(101) And in relation to this, we will be able to
understand what is meant by the beginnning of creation, and what Wisdom says in
Proverbs: "For God,'" she says. "created me the beginning of his
ways for his works." [Prov. 8:22: Ὁ Θεὸς γὰρ, φησὶν, ἔκτισέ με ἀρχὴν
ὁδῶν αὐτοῦ εἰς ἔργα αὐτοῦ - PG 14.53.75] It is possible, of course,
for this also to be referred to our first meaning, i.e. that pertaining to a
way, because it is said, "God created me the beginning of his ways."
[Prov.
8:22: Ὁ
Θεὸς ἔκτισέ με
ἀρχὴν ὁδῶν αὐτοῦ εἰς ἔργα αὐτοῦ - PG 14.53.75]
(102)
But someone will say with good reason that the God of all things is clearly a
beginning too, proposing that the Father is the beginning of the son, and the
creator, is the beginning of the things created and, in general, God is the
beginning of the things which exist. And by understanding the Son to be the
Word, he will justify his view by the statement, "In the beginning was the
Word," because what is said to be in the Father is in the beginning. (Commentary on the
Gospel According to John - Books 1-10, CUA Press, The Fathers of the
Church, vol. 80, trans. Ronald E. Heine, pp. 54, 55.)
(111) But it is as the
beginning that Christ is creator, according to which he is wisdom. Therefore as
wisdom he is called the beginning. For wisdom says in Solomon, "God
created me the beginning of his ways for his works," [Prov. 8:22: Ὁ Θεὸς ἔκτισέ με ἀρχὴν ὁδῶν αὐτοῦ εἰς ἔργα αὐτοῦ - PG 14.56.80] that "the Word might
be in the beginning," in wisdom. It is wisdom which is understood, on the
one hand, taken in relation to the structure of the contemplation and thoughts
of all things, but it is the Word which is received, taken in to the
communication of the things which have been contemplated to spiritual beings. (Commentary
on the Gospel According to John - Books 1-10, CUA Press, The Fathers of
the Church, vol. 80, trans. Ronald E. Heine, pp. 56. 57.)
(221)
But if there are letters of God, as there are, which the saints read and say
they have read what is written in the tablets of heaven, those letters are the
thoughts about the Son of God wich are broken up into alpha and the letters
that follow to omega, that heavenly matters might be read through them.
(222)
And again the same one is beginning and end, but he is not the same insofar as
the aspects are concerned. For he is the beginning insofar as he is wisdom, as
we have learned in Proverbs. Therefore it has been written, "God created
me the beginning of his ways for his works." [Prov. 8:22: Ὁ Θεὸς ἔκτισέ με ἀρχὴν ὁδῶν αὐτοῦ εἰς ἔργα αὐτοῦ - PG 14.84.36.] (Commentary on the Gospel
According to John - Books 1-10, CUA Press, The Fathers of the Church, vol.
80, trans. Ronald E. Heine, p. 77.)
(289)
Our proposal was to see clearly "In the beginning was the Word." As
for "beginning," it has been demostrated according to the testimonies
of Proverbs (see Prov. 8:22) that Wisdom is spoken of and that the notion of
wisdom precedes the word that annouces it. So it must be understood that the
Word always exists in the beginning, that is, in Wisdom. Since he is in Wisdom,
which is called "beginning," he is not hindered from being "with
God" and he is God, and he is not simply "with God," but, being
"in the beginning" in Wisdom, he is "with God."
("Commentary on John, Book 1", in Joseph W. Trigg, Origen, 1998,
p. 149.)
[NOTE:
For a reason(s) unknown me, Origen, in all his Prov. 8:22 citations in his
Commentary on John, and the De Principiis 4.4.1 passage, has substituted
"Lord" (Κύριος)
with "The God" (Ὁ Θεὸς).]
Eusebius of Caesarea -
And the first to teach us this is Job, saying: 'But whence was wisdom found? And what is the place of understanding? Man knoweth not the way thereof, nor yet was it found among men, ... but we have heard the fame thereof. The Lord established the way thereof, and He knoweth the place thereof.'
And David also somewhere in the Psalms, addressing Wisdom by another name, says: 'By the word of the LORD were the heavens established': for in this manner he celebrated the Word of God the Organizer of all things. Moreover, his son Solomon also speaks as follows in the person of Wisdom herself, saying: 'I Wisdom made counsel my dwelling, and knowledge and understanding I called unto me. By me kings reign, and rulers decree justice.' And again:
'The LORD
created me as the beginning of His ways unto His works [Prov.
8:22: Κύριος ἔκτισέ με ἀρχὴν ὁδῶν αὐτοῦ εἰς ἔργα αὐτοῦ - PG
21.541.75.],
from everlasting He founded me, in the beginning or ever He made the earth, and
before the depths were made, . . . before the mountains were settled, and
before all hills He begat me [Prov. 8.25b: γεννᾷ με - PG
21.541.75]; . . . when He was preparing the heaven I was
beside Him; . . . and as He was making safe the fountains beneath the heaven, .
. . I was with Him arranging. I it was in whom He daily delighted, and I was
rejoicing before Him in every season when He was rejoicing in having completed
the habitable world.' (Preparation of the Gospel - Part 1,
7.12, trans. Edwin Hamilton Gifford, Baker 1981 reprint, pp. 320, 321.)
IN regard then to the
First Cause of all things let this be our admitted form of agreement. But now
consider what is said concerning the Second Cause, whom the Hebrew oracles
teach to be the Word of God, and God of God, even as we Christians also have
ourselves been taught to speak of the Deity.
First then Moses expressly
speaks of two divine Lords in the passage where he says, 'Then the LORD rained
from the LORD fire and brimstone upon the city of the ungodly ': where he
applied to both the like combination of Hebrew letters in the usual way; and
this combination is the mention of God expressed in the four letters, which is
with them unutterable.
In accordance with him
David also, another Prophet as well as king of the Hebrews, says, 'The LORD
said unto my Lord, sit Thou on My right hand,'
indicating the Most High God by the first LORD, and the second to Him by
the second title. For to what other is it right to suppose that the right hand
of the Unbegotten God is conceded, than to Him alone of whom we are speaking?
This is He whom the same
prophet in other places more clearly distinguishes as the Word of the Father,
supposing Him whose deity we are considering to be the Creator of the universe,
in the passage where he says, 'By the Word of the LORD were the heavens made
firm.'
He introduces the same
Person also as a Saviour of those who need His care, saying, 'He sent His Word
and healed them.'
And Solomon, David's son
and successor, presenting the same thought by a different name, instead of the
'Word' called Him Wisdom, making the following statement as in her person:
'I Wisdom made prudence my
dwelling, and called to my aid knowledge and understanding.' Then afterwards he adds, 'The LORD formed
[i.e. created] me as the beginning of His ways with a view to His works [Prov.
8:22: Κύριος ἔκτισέ με ἀρχὴν ὁδῶν αὐτοῦ εἰς ἔργα αὐτοῦ - PG 21.884.76.]: from everlasting He established me, in the
beginning before He made the earth, . . . before the mountains were settled,
and before all hills He begat me [Prov. 8.25b: γεννᾷ με - PG
21.884.76]. . . . When He was preparing the heaven, I was beside Him."(Preparation of the Gospel - Part 2, 11.14, trans. Edwin Hamilton Gifford, Baker 1981 reprint,
pp. 531, 532.)
Tertullian
-
Indeed,
as soon as He perceived It to be necessary for His creation of the world, He immediately creates It, and generates It in Himself. "The Lord," says the Scripture, "possessed me, the beginning of His ways for the creation of His works [Prov. 8:22: Dominus,
inquit, condidit me initium viarum suarum in opera sua - PL 2.213]. Before the worlds He founded me; before He made the earth, before the mountains were settled in their places; moreover, before the hills He generated me, and prior to the depths was I begotten." Let Hermogenes then confess that the very Wisdom of God is declared to be born and
created, for the especial reason that we should not suppose
that there is any other being than God alone who is unbegotten and uncreated.
For if that, which from its being inherent in the Lord was of Him and in Him,
was yet not without a beginning, — I mean His wisdom, which was then born and created, when in
the thought of God It began to assume motion for the arrangement of His
creative works, — how much more impossible is it that anything should have been
without a beginning which was extrinsic to the Lord! But if this same Wisdom is
the Word of God, in the capacity of Wisdom, and (as being He) without whom
nothing was made, just as also (nothing) was set in order without Wisdom, how
can it be that anything, except the
Father, should be older, and on this account indeed nobler, than the Son of God,
the only-begotten and first-begotten Word? (Against Hermogenes, ch. 18
– ANF 3.487.)
Listen therefore to Wisdom
herself, constituted in the character of a Second Person: “At the first the Lord created me as the beginning of
His ways [Prov. 8:22: Primo, Dominus creavit me initium viarum in
opera sua - PL 2.161], with
a view to His own works, before He made the earth, before the mountains were
settled; moreover, before all the hills did He beget me;” that is to say, He created and generated me in His
own intelligence. (Against Praxeas, ch. 6 – ANF 3.601.)
[NOTE: In the Against
Hermogenes passage, Tertullian translates the LXX term, ἔκτισέ, as condidit; however, in the Against Praxeas passage, he uses creavit.]
Cyprian -
TESTIMONIES.
I. That Christ is the First-born, and that He is the Wisdom of God, by whom all things were made.
In
Solomon in the Proverbs : "The Lord established me in the beginning of His ways, into His works [Prov. 8:22: Dominus candidit me in initio viarum suarum
, in opera sua ante sæcula fundavit me. - PL 4.696]: before the world He founded me. In the beginning, before He made the earth, and before He appointed the abysses, before the fountains of waters gushed forth, before the mountains were settled, before all the hills, the Lord begot me. (The Treatises of
Cyprian, 12.2 - ANF 5.515.)
Lactantius
-
God, therefore, the contriver and founder of all things, as we have said in the second book, before He commenced this excellent work of the world, begat a pure and incorruptible Spirit, whom He called His Son. And although He had afterwards created by Himself innumerable other beings, whom we call angels, this first-begotten, however, was the only one whom He considered worthy of being called by the divine name, as being powerful in His Father's excellence and majesty...
Assuredly
He is the very Son of God, who by that most wise King Solomon, full of divine inspiration, spake these things which we have added : "God founded me in the beginning of His ways, in His work before the ages. [Prov. 8:22: Deus candidit me in initio viarum suarum
, in opera sua ante secula. - PL 7.462]
He set me up in the beginning, before He made the earth, and before He established the depths,
before the fountains of waters came forth : the Lord
begat me before all the hills ; He made the regions, and the uninhabitable" boundaries under the heaven. When He prepared the heaven, I was by Him : and when He separated His own seat, when He made the strong clouds above the winds, and when He strengthened the mountains, and placed them under heaven ; when He laid the strong foundations of
the earth, I was with Him arranging all things. I was He in whom He delighted : I was daily delighted, when He rejoiced, the world being
completed." (The Divine Institutes, 4.6 - ANF 7.105.)
So
ends my survey of the early Church Fathers use of Proverbs 8:22. I am convinced
the objective reader will discern that their interpretation of the passage is
quite different than that of the pro-Arian and pro-Nicene parties. Whether or
not their interpretation is the best understanding of the passage is another
question I am leaving 'open' at this time...
Grace and peace,
David
Abbreviations:
ANF
=
Ante-Nicene Fathers (American Edition), edited by Alexander Roberts and James
Donaldson
GCS
= Die Griechischen
Christlichen Schriftsteller der ersten Jahrhunderte, edited by Christoph Markschies
NPNF = A Select Library of Nicene and
Post-Nicene Fathers, edited by Philip Schaff and Henry Wace
PL = J. P. Migne's, Patrologia Latina
4 comments:
So how about a post in 2016?
New fitbit active Dave. Its got some bells and whistles. Thumbs up. See ya soon...I mean at Articuli...assuming you are intending to give us something to think about this year.
For those who do not take into account the fact and laws of dogmatic development, and naively or stubbornly look for the final term of a developmental sequence (the dogma formulated in theological jargon) at its very beginning, they will always be unfair to the testimony of tradition. However, those who consider that even the believing mind must get accustomed to such a majestic deep mystery as the Trinity, and that it takes time for the clouds of opinion formed by clumsy goodwill and rationalistic tendencies to disperse, will not lose sight of the following conclusions when evaluating the testimony of the first four centuries.
There's a difference between the simple confession of the mystery as a believer, and its speculative elaboration in the workshop of believing knowledge. The former only requires a reverent disposition. The latter was seriously complicated by the immense and unique mystery of the Trinity, fluctuating terminology, and various unrefined religious and philosophical currents: the Stoics' doctrine of λόγος (λ. ὲνδιάθετος and προφορικός); the Platonic idea that tempted them to equate the entire world of Platonic ideas with the Λόγος; and finally, the belief fed both by the Jewish doctrine of transcendence (God's absolute transcendence being unattainable to the world as such) and the theories of emanation of the Gnostics, asserting that God needs an intermediary for creation and governance of the world. It's accurate what Athanasius wisely noted about Origen: It's crucial to distinguish between what he asserted as a simple witness of tradition, and what he taught speculatively about the persons of the Trinity and their relations; as a witness, he spoke correctly, but as a speculative theologian, he sometimes missed the mark.
Often, the church fathers were prompted to speak due to heretical biases, so it could easily happen that while they forcefully represented an anti-heretical element, they inadvertently leaned towards the opposite extreme; not in teaching, but in expression; not in content, but in approach. It should be remembered that, due to the rich content of the mystery of the Trinity, our limited mind cannot adopt a viewpoint that adequately and proportionately values all its elements: If we start from the persons (like the Greeks), we can drift towards tritheism; if from the divine reality (like Augustine), the danger of Sabellianism looms. The great fathers and theologians, however, avoided the pitfalls of heretical exaggerations.
Not every expression that tastes heretical contains heresy. Especially the often used subordinationist expressions most often allow a completely correct orthodox interpretation:
From the perspective of origin, the Father is first, the Son second, and the Holy Spirit third. This sequence in the Trinity doesn't imply any difference in rank, essence, or time; but in human perception and expression, it assumes a form of subordination. For any reason, whoever comes later in the sequence, our discursive thinking and evaluation are inclined to rank them lower; however, speaking in this way doesn't necessarily mean denying actual equality in essence and rank or teaching heretical subordination.
In the visible missions, the Son appeared in a later stage of salvation history, the Holy Spirit even later; the Father, however, is the eternal sender, who himself isn't sent. Therefore, from this perspective, the Father is invisible, the Son became visible, and similarly, the Holy Spirit. If the early fathers, when shedding light on the mysteries rationally, didn't yet distinguish accurately between mission and manifestation, or between property and attribute (proprium et appropriatum), their teaching isn't heretical.
Among the apologists, Athenagoras wonderingly asks, "How can charges of impiety be levied against those who teach and confess the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, acknowledging both their unity in power and their distinction in order?" The Holy Spirit's power and essence are also divine. Theophilus was the first to apply the term 'triad' (τριάς) to the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, which soon became the regular expression for the mystery of the Trinity. Justin proves that Christians, outside the Creator, honor Jesus Christ in the second place, recognizing him as the true Son of God; and in the third place, the prophetic spirit.
Although these are faithful witnesses to the tradition, when they want to more speculatively define the relation of the second person to the first, influenced by the Stoic doctrine of λόγος, they teach that the Word was with and in the Father from eternity as λόγος ἐνδιάθετος, but only stepped out from him to acquire independent existence (hypostasis) as λόγος προφορικός for the realization of creation. Irenaeus was held back from such speculations by the example of the Gnostics, but he often confesses the trinity and divinity of the persons against them.
Tertullian is also less successful in speculative exposition, viewing the Son, following the Greek apologists, as conceived from the Father from eternity and born in time to realize creation. They were misled by the two primary meanings of λόγος, verbum: the conceived concept and the uttered word.
https://www.academia.edu/4769826/AGAINST_PRAXEAS_HOW_FAR_DID_TERTULLIAN_ADVANCE_THE_DOCTRINE_OF_THE_TRINITY
https://www.bethinking.org/jesus/the-early-church-fathers-on-jesus
Hello Nincsnevem,
Thanks much for taking the time to share some of your reflections on doctrinal development and the Trinity. I concur with almost all that you wrote. One exception concerns the following:
>>From the perspective of origin, the Father is first, the Son second, and the Holy Spirit third. This sequence in the Trinity doesn't imply any difference in rank, essence, or time; but in human perception and expression, it assumes a form of subordination. For any reason, whoever comes later in the sequence, our discursive thinking and evaluation are inclined to rank them lower; however, speaking in this way doesn't necessarily mean denying actual equality in essence and rank or teaching heretical subordination.>>
Because I believe the Son is truly God from God the Father, I maintain that when the Father communicated His essence to the Son, He did so fully, without any notion of loss; as such the Father and Son are equal in essence.
However, the fact that the Son owes His existence to the Father (both essence and person), I believe that they are not equal in “rank”. Interesting enough, one of the links you provided affirms this too. Note the following quote from Tertullian that was provided by Dr. Carl:
“He proceeds forth from God, and in that procession He is generated; so that He is the Son of God, and is called God from unity of substance with God . . . that which has come forth out of God is at once God and the Son of God, and the two are one . . .He is made second in manner of existence – in position, not in nature.”
Would like to hear what you think about the above.
Grace and peace,
David
Post a Comment