A Commentary on the Apostles' Creed 7
7 Section 7 PL 21, 346
7. When you hear the word “Son,” you must not think of a nativity after the flesh; but remember that it is spoken of an incorporeal substance, and a simple and uncompounded nature. For if, as we said above, whether when the understanding generates a word, or the mind sense, or light brings forth brightness from itself, nothing of this sort is sought for, or any manner of weakness and imperfection imagined in this kind of generation, how much purer and more sacred ought to be our conception of the Creator of all these!
But perhaps you say, “The generation of which you speak is an unsubstantial generation. For light does not produce substantial brightness, nor the understanding generate a substantial word, but the Son of God, it is affirmed, was generated substantially.” To this we reply, first, When in other things examples or illustrations are used, the resemblance cannot hold in every particular, but only in some one point for which the illustration is employed. For instance, When it is said in the Gospel, “The kingdom of heaven is like leaven, which a woman hid in three measures of meal,” are we to imagine that the kingdom of heaven is in all respects like leaven, so that like leaven it is palpable and perishable so as to become sour and unfit for use? Obviously the illustration was employed simply for this object—to shew how, through the preaching of God’s word which seems so small a thing, men’s minds could be imbued with the leaven of faith. So likewise, when it is said, “The kingdom of heaven is like unto a net cast into the sea, which draws in fishes of every kind,” are we to suppose that the substance of the kingdom of heaven is likened in all respects to the nature of twine of which a net is made, and to the knots with which the meshes are tied? No; the sole object of the comparison is to shew that, as a net brings fishes to the shore from the depths of the sea, so by the preaching of the kingdom of heaven men’s souls are liberated from the depth of the error of this world. From whence it is evident that examples or illustrations do not answer in every particular to the things which they are brought to exemplify or illustrate. Otherwise, if they were the same in all respects, they would no longer be called examples or illustrations, but rather would be the things themselves.
Filium sane cum audis, nolo cogitationem carnalis nativitatis assumas, sed memento hoc de incorporea dici substantia et naturae simplicis. Si enim ut supra jam diximus, vel in eo quod cor generat verbum, vel mens sensum, vel lux ex se parit splendorem, nihil horum requiritur, nec ulla in tali generatione fragilitas cogitatur: quanto purius et sacratius de horum omnium creatore censendum est? Sed fortasse dicas, ista quam memoras insubstantiva est generatio: neque enim lux substantivum facit splendorem, aut cor substantivum generat verbum: Filius autem Dei substantialiter asseritur generatus. Ad hoc [Al. haec] primo omnium illud dicimus, cum etiam in caeteris proferantur exempla, non per omnia tamen 64 similitudinem servare possunt rei illius, cui praebere putantur exemplum: sed unius alicujus partis, pro qua videntur assumta, similitudinem tenent. Verbi gratia, ut cum in Evangelio dicitur: Simile est regnum coelorum fermento, quod abscondit mulier in farinae mensuris tribus . Numquidnam putabimus regnum caelorum per omnia simile esse fermento, ut substantia illa ita palpabilis sit ac fragilis, ut et acida fieri possit et corrupta? Sed ad hoc solum exemplum istud videtur assumi, ut ostenderetur ex parva praedicatione verbi Dei humanas mentes fidei fermento posse coalescere. Similiter et cum dicitur: Simile est regnum coelorum reti misso in mare, quod ex omni genere piscium abstrahit [Al. attrahit] . Et in hoc nunquid putandum est, quod naturae lini, quo rete operamur, ac nodis quibus maculae nectuntur, regni caelorum substantia per omnia conferatur? Sed ad hoc solum videtur assumta comparatio, ut ostenderetur, quia sicut rete de profundo maris pisces adducit ad littus: ita de profundo saeculi hujus errore humanae animae regni caelorum praedicatione liberantur. Ex quibus constat, exempla non in omnibus his, quorum exempla sunt, esse similia: alioqui si eadem essent omnia, jam non exempla dicerentur, sed ipsae potius res, de quibus agitur, viderentur. Deinde etiam illud dicendum est, quod nulla creatura talis esse potest, qualis creator ejus: et ideo sicut sine exemplo est divina substantia, ita et 71 sine exemplo est divinitas. Tum etiam illud addimus, quia omnis creatura ex nihilo est. Si ergo insubstantiva scintilla, quae ignis est, ex se creaturam, quae ex nihilo facta est, gignit, et conditionem in hoc servat originis suae: cur illius aeternae lucis substantia, quae semper fuit, quia insubstantivum in se nihil habuit, substantivum ex se splendorem proferre non potuit? Et ideo recte unicus dicitur Filius. Unicus enim et solus est, qui ita natus est, nec comparationem aliquam potest habere, quod unicum est: nec similitudinem in substantia cum facturis [Al. factis] suis habere potest ille, qui factor est omnium. Hic est ergo Christus Jesus filius unicus Dei, qui est et Dominus noster. Unicus et ad filium referri et ad Dominum potest. Unicus est enim et vere Filius, et unus Dominus Jesus Christus. Caeteri quippe filii, licet filii dicantur, adoptionis tamen gratia dicuntur, non veritate naturae. Et si dicuntur alii Domini, concessa tamen non ingenita potestate dicuntur. Hic vero solus est unicus Filius, et solus unicus Dominus: sicut et Apostolus ait: Et unus Dominus Jesus Christus, per quem omnia . Ideo [Al. Igitur] posteaquam propositus ordo fidei ineffabile sacramentum Filii de Patre nativitatis exposuit, nunc ad humanae salutis dignationem dispensationemque descendit: et hunc quem supra dixit unicum Filium Dei, et Dominum nostrum nunc dicit.