that God formed out of the ground the beasts of the earth, and the fowls of the heavens. So the fowls in this passage are indicated as having been formed out of the earth. Above, also, you have read that God said to the birds: 'Increase and multiply,' undoubtedly ordering increase of generating through the union of male and female. And so we notice, also, that beings that are of the one genus began to be in different ways. Some from the waters, some from the earth, and some from the generation of male and female, and yet that these are of one nature, and do not have a dissimilarity of substance.

(103) What, now, is so much of one nature as our flesh with the true body of the Lord? Yet they have both been brought forth by different causes, have arisen from different beginnings. For the flesh of the Lord, generated when the Spirit came to the Virgin, did not await the customary intercourse of male and female union; but our flesh, unless the male and female sex bring genital seed to the natural channels, cannot be formed within the maternal womb; and yet, although the cause of generation was different, nevertheless the flesh of Christ is of one nature with all men.

(104) For childbirth did not change the nature of the Virgin, but established a new method of generating. So flesh was born of flesh. Thus the Virgin had of her own what she gave; for the mother did not give something of another, but she contributed her own from her womb in an unusual manner, but in a usual function. Therefore, the Virgin had the flesh, which by customary right of nature she transferred to the fetus. Therefore, the nature of Mary, who gave birth, and that of the Begotten are the same according to the flesh, and not unlike His human brethren, because Scripture says: 'In all things to be made like to his brethren."5 Surely the Son of God is like to

4 Gen. 1.22.

us not according to the fullness of divinity but according to our rational soul, and, to speak more clearly, according to the truth of our human body.

(105) Now what shall we say of Adam himself, who, when he was fashioned of the slime of the earth, certainly begot sons as sharers of his nature and partakers of his genus, heirs to his succession?" Different, certainly, were the beginnings of the sons and the parent, but one nature of man's condition, and yet the dissimilarity of origin was not injurious to similarity of substance. So also is the Son like the Father in those things, which on account of the weakness of the condition of man could not have fullness of similarity. How, then, is the true Son unlike to God the Father?

Chapter 10

(106) But many, following the same sect, think that they differ in their kind of argument from those who say that the Son is unlike the Father in all things. So, let us discuss the absurdities also of those who say that the Son is like the Father but not of one substance with the Father.

(107) But things which are not of one nature are certainly of a different and distinct nature, and those which are of a distinct nature cannot consequently be similar, unless, perchance, you say that they are like in appearance, but actually unlike. For there is the same appearance of color in the whiteness of milk and of snow and of a swan, but it preserves the difference of a distinct nature, and the difference of natures is not affected by the similarity of appearance.

(108) How, then, can these men say that the Father and

the Son are similar, who deny their unity of substance? Or do they think that they are similar in form and shape and color? But these are characteristic of the body; they indicate a kind of composition. But how do we adapt similarity according to color and form to the invisible? Or how can a creature be similar to the uncreated? How [can Christ be] the splendor of his glory and the figure of His substance,1 if, as they say, there is a different glory, a different substance.

(109) The Son, they say, is similar in glory and operation to God, and thus the Son is said to be the image of God. If, then, He is similar in some respects, He is not in all; partly similar, partly dissimilar. Moreover, the consequence of this proposition is that, if He is partly similar, not entirely so, the image of God is partly composite, and by this it follows that He also seems to be composite whose image is composite. Moreover, if His composite image preserves a similarity only in part, it cannot be similar in part.

(110) But those who deny that Christ is similar to the Father in unity of nature think that He is like Him in other respects. For they are accustomed to say: 'Why do you think that Scripture gave much to the Son, because it called Him an image, when God himself said to men: "Be ye holy, because I am holy," and when the Son said: "Be ye perfect, as also your heavenly Father is perfect"?' They do not understand that this is added: that not in part but in the fullness and perfection of divinity the Son is like the Father. Then, if many are alike, why is the Son alone called the image of the invisible God, and the mark of His substance, unless because in Him there is the unity of the same nature and the expression of His majesty?

1 Cf. Heb. 1.3.

2 Cf. Lev. 19.2.

(111) For one likeness is according to imitation, another according to nature, which the words also of the examples proposed indicate. For Scripture says: 'Be ye holy,' that man may become so through imitation. So to men it is said: 'Be,' because they are not, but of Himself God says: 'Because I am holy,' surely not by a proficient process but by permanent nature. Then Wisdom says: 'Be you perfect,' that men may begin to have what they do not have. But of the Father it says: 'As your Father, who is in heaven, is perfect.' So the Father, who always is, is perfect. Therefore, either His ovoía in Greek, which is always, or in Latin that which is permanent in His own and does not subsist with the help of another, is called His substance.

(112) Therefore, holy Father and perfect Father, also holy and perfect Son, as it were the image of God. Moreover, the image of God, because all things which belong to God, are seen in the Son, that is, eternal divinity, omnipotence, and majesty. Then, such as is God is seen in His image. Therefore, you ought to believe that His image is such as is God. For, if you detract from the image, this surely will also seem to have been detracted from Him of whom He is the image. If you believe the image lesser, God will appear lesser in the image. For such as you consider the image, such will He seem to you, of whom, the Invisible, the image is. The image said: 'He that seeth me seeth the Father also'. And such as you consider Him, whose image you believe the Son to be, such necessarily must the Son be considered by you. Thus, since the Father is uncreated, the Son also is uncreated; since the Father is not lesser, the Son is not lesser; since the Father is omnipotent, the Son is omnipotent.

4

(113) It is said, then, that, even if they employ what they

do not read, so as to say 'unbegotten,' nevertheless we are not prevented by this word from believing that Christ is of one nature and substance with the Father. But, if He is of one nature, surely He is of one power.

(114) This passage is by no means more difficult for refuting the contentions of the faithless. For how do they deny the omnipotent Christ, which is written, who wish to employ what they teach which is not written? For we have taught before that Christ is omnipotent, and it is indicated in the Apocalypse of John the Evangelist, and in the prophecy of Zachary, and in the Gospel. If anyone thinks that these matters should be reviewed, let him turn back and seek again what was said above.

(115) Nevertheless, what I almost passed over there on account of the mass of testimony, let them say about what they think Amos's prophecy was said, for these are the words: 'The Lord who toucheth the earth, and moves it, and all that dwell therein shall mourn. And it shall rise up as the river of Egypt, because He buildeth His ascension in heaven, and hath founded His bundle upon earth; who calleth the waters of the sea, and poureth them out upon the face of the earth; the omnipotent Lord is His name." Do they not understand that all these things befit the Son, who descended and touched the earth, who in His passion shook the earth, ascended into heaven from earth, and descended upon earth from heaven, just as He Himself had promised?

(116) But why do I labor so about the Son, when Scripture testifies that the Spirit also is omnipotent? For it is written: 'By the word of the Lord, the heavens were established; and all the power of them by the spirit of His mouth."

5 De fide 2.3-4.

6 Amos 9.5,6.