Concerning the unified and differentiated Word of God, and what the divine unity and differentiation is.
1. It is the entire divine subsistence—whatever absolute goodness de 636B 636C fines and reveals that to be—which is praised by the scriptures. How else are we to understand the sacred Word of God when it declares that the Deity, speaking of itself, had this to say: "Why do you ask me about what is good? No one is good but God alone." 93.
I have discussed all this elsewhere and I have shown how in scripture all the names appropriate to God are praised regarding the whole, entire, full, and complete divinity rather than any part of it, and that they all refer indivisibly, absolutely, unreservedly, and totally to God in his entirety. Indeed, as I pointed out in my Theological Representations, 94. anyone denying that such terminology refers to God in all that
he is may be said to have blasphemed. He is profanely daring to sun 637A
der absolute unity.
So all this terminology has to be employed in respect to the entire divinity. In fact the absolutely good Word says of himself: "I am good," 95. and one of the inspired prophets lifts a hymn of praise to the ____________________
90.
The Apostolic Constitutions VII.13; see EH 1 372A 8, 377B 18. 91.1 Tm 6:20?
92.Ps 119:43.
93.The question is from Mt 19:17; the answer is from Mk 10:18.
94.On this treatise, see DN 1, note 3, and below, 637C 39-43, 640B 20-22, and 6441) 43f. 95.Mt 20:15, not In 10:11. The name "Good" is the subject of DN 4.
-58-
"good" spirit. 96. The same applies to "I am being." 97. If people force these terms to indicate a part rather than the whole Godhead, how will they understand the following: "Thus says the One who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty" 98. or "Thou art the same" 99. or "The spirit of truth that is and proceeds from the Father"? 100. And if they do not accept that the whole Godhead is life, what truth can there be in the holy words, "As the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so also the Son gives life to whom he will," 101. and "It is the Spirit
that gives life"? 102. And when it comes to the rule of the entire Deity 637B
over all the world, concerning the Fatherhood or the Sonship within God, how often is the term "Lord" used by scripture in regard to both the Father and the Son? 103. The Spirit too is "Lord." 104. So also with "beauty" and "wisdom," which are ascribed to the divinity in its totality. The scriptures also uplift into the praises of the entire divinity the terms "light," "deifying power," and "cause" and whatever other things are of the whole divinity. It is the same with "all things are from God" 105. and, more specifically, "all things were created through him and for him" and "in him all things hold together" 106. and "when thou sendest forth thy Spirit, they are created." 107. Actually it was all summed up by the divine Word himself: "I and the Father are one" 108.
and "all that the Father has is mine" 109. and "all mine are thine and 637C
thine are mine." 110. And, again, whatever belongs to the Father and to himself he also ascribes to the divine Spirit within their shared unity. I am thinking here of the divine works, the worship, the unfailing and inexhaustible Cause, the dispensation of bountiful gifts. Indeed, it ____________________
100.Jn 15:26 is here slightly expanded (by the addition of the phrase "that is") to fit the argument. 101.Jn 5:21.
102.Jn 6:63.
103.For example, 1 Cor 1:2f. 104.2 Cor 3:17.
105.1 Cor 11:12; cf. 1 Cor 8:6.
106.Col 1:16a and 17b; see DN 1, note 19. 107.Ps 104:30.
109.Jn 16:15. 110.Jn 17:10.
96.Ps 143:10; see also Neh 9:20. The expression "inspired prophets" is also used regarding the "Alleluia," a word found frequently in the Psalms (EH 2 396C 33f., EH 4 473A 9f., 485AB 15-21). In Ep. 5 1073A 11-13 the "prophetic" saying is Ps 139:6.
97.Ex 3:14; DN 5.
98.Rv 1:8; Rv 1:4 also uses the term "being," or "who is." 99.Ps 102:27, quoted in Heb 1:12.
-59-
seems to me that only through perversity would anyone, reared on holy scripture, deny that the attributes of God refer in all their truth and meaning to the complete Deity. Therefore, following the brief and fragmentary discussion here—and, in any case, I have elsewhere provided from scripture a lengthy proof and analysis of the question 111. —I will take it that whatever divine name is explicated it refers to the entire Deity.
2. Anyone claiming that this procedure involves a confusion of 637D
the distinctions within God will not be able, I believe, to prove the 640A
truth of his claim, even to himself. And if, in this, he is entirely at loggerheads with scripture, he will be far removed also from what is my philosophy, and if he thinks nothing of the divine wisdom of the scriptures, how can I introduce him to a real understanding of the Word of God? If, on the other hand, he heeds the truth of scripture then here is the standard, here is the light by which, so far as I can, I speak in my own defense and by virtue of which I assert that the Word of God operates sometimes without, sometimes with distinctions. Hence we are not entitled to make distinctions where there are none nor to jumble together what has been distinguished. Rather, we must follow in whatever way we can and we must lift up our eyes to the divine rays. Thus receiving in a divine revelation the loveliest stan
dard of truth, let us preserve the treasures lying therein, adding noth 640B
ing to it and in no way diminishing or distorting it. If we watch over the scriptures we ourselves will be watched over by them, guarding them and being guarded.
3. The unified names apply to the entire Godhead, as I showed at length and by way of scriptural examples in my Theological Representations. Hence, titles such as the following—the transcendently good, the transcendently divine, the transcendently existing, the transcendently living, the transcendently wise. These and similar terms concern a denial in the sense of a superabundance. Likewise, the names which have a causal sense, names like good, beautiful, existent, life-giving, wise, and so forth, are ascribed to the Cause of all good
things because of all the good gifts it has dispensed. 640C
Then there are the names expressing distinctions, the transcendent name and proper activity of the Father, of the Son, of the Spirit. Here the titles cannot be interchanged, nor are they held in common.
____________________
111.Namely, in The Theological Representation, according to 63 C 16f.; see note 3 above, and 640B 20-22.
-60-
Also said to be differentiated is the perfect and unchangeable being of Jesus among us, and the mysteries of his existence and his love for humanity which are manifested here. 112.
4. Still, I think we must go more deeply into explaining the full 640D
manner of speaking about divine unity and differentiation. This is necessary in order to clarify all that I have to say so that, when confusion and obscurity have been removed as far as possible, I may speak, as far as possible, in a distinct, wise, and orderly fashion.
As I said elsewhere, those fully initiated into our theological tradition assert that the divine unities are the hidden and permanent, supreme foundations of a steadfastness which is more than ineffable and more than unknowable. They say that the differentiations within the Godhead have to do with the benign processions and revelations of
God. And, following sacred scripture, they also say that there are cer 641A
tain specific unities and differentiations within the unity and differentiation, as discussed above. Thus, regarding the divine unity beyond being, they assert that the indivisible Trinity holds within a shared undifferentiated unity its supra-essential subsistence, its supra-divine divinity, its supra-excellent
goodness, its supremely individual identity beyond all that is, its oneness beyond the source of oneness, its ineffability, its many names, its unknowability, its wholly belonging to the conceptual realm, the assertion of all things, the denial of all things, that which is beyond every assertion and denial, 113. and finally, if one may put it so, the abiding and foundation of the divine persons who are the source of oneness as a unity which is totally undifferentiated and transcendent. 114.
Let me resort here to examples from what we perceive and from what is familiar. In a house the light from all the lamps is completely
interpenetrating, yet each is clearly distinct. There is distinction in 641B
unity and there is unity in distinction. When there are many lamps in a house there is nevertheless a single undifferentiated light and from all of them comes the one undivided brightness. I do not think that anyone would mark off the light of one lamp from another in the atmosphere which contains them all, nor could one light be seen sepa- ____________________
112.On the trinitarian names, see MT 3 1033A 1-11. 113.This is the argument of MT 5 1048B.
114.This appearance of the Neoplatonic term "moné" (as in the first word in "remaining, procession, and return," see CH 1 note 4) is accompanied by a disclaimer, "if one may put it so," which also appears in 645B 20f. (following note), 648B 19, and DN 4 697B 14f. In each case, this qualification seems to apologize for Neoplatonic language.
-61-
rately from the others since all of them are completely mingled while being at the same time quite distinctive. Indeed if somebody were to carry one of the lamps out of the house its own particular light would leave without diminishing the light of the other lamps or supple
menting their brightness. As I have already explained, the total union 641C
of light, this light that is in the air and that emerges from the material substance of fire, involved no confusion and no jumbling of any parts.
But turn now to that unity above being. I say that it surpasses not only the union of things corporeal, but also the union of souls, and even that of minds themselves. These minds purely, supernaturally, and thoroughly possess the godlike and celestial lights, but they do so in a participation proportionate to their participations in the unity which transcends all things.
5. Theology, in dealing with what is beyond being, resorts also 641D
to differentiation. I am not referring solely to the fact that, within a unity, each of the indivisible persons is grounded in an unconfused and unmixed way. I mean also that the attributes of the transcendentally divine generation are not interchangeable. The Father is the only source of that Godhead which in fact is beyond being and the Father is not a Son nor is the Son a Father. Each of the divine persons continues to possess his own praiseworthy characteristics, so that one has here examples of unions and of differentiations in the inexpressible unity and subsistence of God.
On the other hand, if differentiation can be said to apply to
the generous procession of the undifferentiated divine unity, itself 644A
overflowing with goodness and dispensing itself outward toward multiplicity, then the things united even within this divine differentiation are the acts by which it irrepressibly imparts being, life, wisdom and the other gifts of its all-creative goodness. It is according to these gifts that the [supreme] things which are participated in, but which do not themselves participate [in anything higher], are praised through the participations and those who participate. Now this is unified and one and common to the whole divinity, that the entire wholeness is participated in by each of those who participate in it; none participates in only a part. It is rather like the case of a circle. The center point of the circle is shared by the surrounding radii. Or take the example of a seal. There are numerous impressions of the seal and these all have a share in the original prototype; it is the same whole seal in each of the impressions and none participates in only a part.
-62-
However, the nonparticipation of the all-creative Godhead rises 644B
far beyond comparisons of this kind since it is out of the reach of perception and is not on the same plane as whatever participates in it.
6. Maybe someone will say that the seal is not totally identical in all the reproductions of it. My answer is that this is not because of the seal itself, which gives itself completely and identically to each. The
substances which receive a share of the seal are different. Hence the impressions of the one entire identical archetype are different. If the substances are soft, easily shaped, and smooth, if no impressions have been made on them already, if they are not hard and resistant,
if they are not excessively soft and melting, the imprint on them will 644C
be clear, plain, and long-lasting. But if the material is lacking in this receptivity, this would be the cause of its mistaken or unclear imprint or of whatever else results from the unreceptivity of its participation. An instance of differentiation is that benevolent act of God in our favor by which the transcendent Word wholly and completely took on our human substance and acted in such a way as to do and to suffer all that was particularly appropriate and exalted within his divinely human activity. This was something in which the Father and the Spirit had no share, unless, of course, one is talking of the benevolent and loving divine will and of the entire supreme and ineffable act of God performed in the human realm by him who as God and as Word of God is immutable.
And so it is that in our argument we try to differentiate or to unify
the divine attributes according as these are undifferentiated or differ 644D
7. All the causes of the unions or differentiations in the divine nature as revealed by scripture were systematically discussed by me
to the best of my abilities in my Theological Representations, by consid 645A
ering what is appropriate to each one. Some of these causes I explicated by putting forward a true
explanation and in this way I tried to lead the pure and holy mind to the shining visions of the scriptures. As for the others, I have followed divine tradition and I have tried to come to grips with these mysteries in a manner that went beyond the workings of intellect. For the truth is that everything divine and even everything revealed to us is known only by way of whatever share of them is granted. Their actual nature, what they are ultimately in their own source and ground, is beyond all intellect and all being and all knowledge. When, for instance, we give the name of "God" to that transcendent hiddenness, when we call it "life" or "being" or "light"
-63-
or "Word," what our minds lay hold of is in fact nothing other than certain activities apparent to us, activities which deify, cause being, bear life, and give wisdom. For our part, as we consider that hiddenness and struggle to break free of all the working of our minds, we
find ourselves witnessing no divinization, no life, no being which 645B
bears any real likeness to the absolutely transcendent Cause of all things. Or, again, we learn from the sacred scriptures that the Father is the originating source of the Godhead and that the Son and the Spirit are, so to speak, divine offshoots, the flowering and transcendent lights of the divinity. 115. But we can neither say nor understand how this could be so.
8. The procession of our intellectual activity can at least go this
far, that all fatherhood and all sonship are gifts bestowed by that su 645C
preme source of Fatherhood and Sonship on us and on the celestial powers. This is why Godlike minds come to be and to be named "Gods" or "Sons of Gods" or "Father of Gods." 116. Fatherhood and Sonship of this kind are brought to perfection in a spiritual fashion, that is incorporeally, immaterially, and in the domain of mind, and this is the work of the divine Spirit, which is located beyond all conceptual
immateriality and all divinization, and it is the work too of the Father and of the Son who supremely transcend all divine Fatherhood and Sonship. In reality there is no exact likeness between caused and cause, for the caused carry within themselves only such images of their originating sources as are possible for them, whereas the causes themselves are located in a realm transcending the caused, according
to the argument regarding their source. 117. Take a familiar example. 645D
Joys and woes are said to be the cause in us of joy and woe without themselves being the possessors of such feelings. The fire which warms and burns is never said itself to be burnt and warmed. Similarly, it would be wrong, I think, to say that life itself lives or that light itself is enlightened, unless such words happened to be employed in a different sense to suggest that the caused things preexist more fully and more truly in the causes. ____________________
115.The "lights" may refer to Jas 1:17. The term "flowering" may come from The Chaldean Oracles through Proclus. See Saffrey, "Nouveaux liens," p. 13; MT 3 1033A 4-7, Ep. 9 1105A 4. The disclaimer (here translated as "so to speak") is identical to that in 641A 11; see note 114, above. 116.As discussed below in DN 12 972B (see note 260) and in CH 12 293B.
117.This passage could be used to protect the author from the charge of pantheism.
9. The most evident idea in theology, namely, the sacred incar 648A
nation of Jesus for our sakes, is something which cannot be enclosed in words nor grasped by any mind, not even by the leaders among the front ranks of the angels. That he undertook to be a man is, for us, entirely mysterious. We have no way of understanding how, in a fashion at variance with nature, he was formed from a virgin's blood. We do not understand how with dry feet and with his body's solid weight he walked on the unstable surface of the water. 118. And we do not understand whatever else has to do with the supernatural nature of Jesus.
I have said enough about this elsewhere and my famous teacher has marvelously praised in his Elements of Theology 119. whatever he learned directly from the sacred writers, whatever his own perspica
cious and laborious research of the scriptures uncovered for him, or 648B
whatever was made known to him through that more mysterious inspiration, not only learning but also experiencing the divine things. 120. For he had a "sympathy" 121. with such matters, if I may express it this way, and he was perfected in a mysterious union with them and in a faith in them which was independent of any education. And I would like to present in the briefest way the many wonderful visions of his outstanding judgment. Regarding Jesus, this is what he has to say in his Elements of Theology: