Слово 2, о Сыне

First of all, let us glorify the Son, whose blood is the cleansing of our infirmities. For because of the evil, suicidal tongue that has risen up against God, it is necessary for mortals to help those in heaven. Nothing existed before the great Father, because He has everything in Himself. And He is known by the inseparable from the Father - the Father-born, flightless Son, the Word of the great God, the Image of the Archetype, the Nature equal to the Parent. For the glory of the Father is the great Son. And how He appeared from the Father - only the Father and He who appeared from the Father knows, because no one was near the Divinity. However, it is undoubtedly known to every person and to me that my birth, that is, the course, the inglorious section, cannot be attributed to the Divine. If I become a parent not without suffering, because I am made up of parts, then it does not follow from this that He who is not at all composite and incorporeal should be subject to suffering. For what is surprising if those who are far from each other by nature have different births? If time is older than me, then it is not before the Word, Whose Parent is flightless. Just as the Father leaves nothing for mental representation above the beginningless Deity; so the Son of the Father has the beginning of the flightless Father, just as the beginning of light is the great and most beautiful circle of the sun. However, any likeness is lower than the great God, and it is dangerous that, by placing something between the ever-present Father and the ever-present Son, we should not tear the King-Son away from the King-Father. For to suppose that time, or will, is before God, in my opinion, means dissecting the Divinity. The Parent is great as God, as the Parent. But if for the Father of all things to have no cause of venerable Deity; then it is no less high for the revered Birth of the great Father to have such a beginning. Do not cut God off from God; because you don’t know a son who is far from the Father. But the words unbegotten and birth from the Father are not equivalent to the word Divinity. Otherwise, who produced these two kinds of Deity? In relation to God, both of them are not included in the concept of essence; nature, in my understanding, is uncut. If birth belongs to the Word; then the Father, being incorporeal, does not accept anything characteristic of the flesh (the human mind will never reach such wickedness as to think this); and you have a Son-God, worthy of the glory of the Parent. If you, the vain-wise one, wanting to exalt the Divinity of the Great Father and in vain instilling empty fear in the heart, rejected birth, and relegated Christ to the ranks of creatures; then you have insulted the Deity of both. The Father is deprived of your Son, and Christ is not God, if only He is created. For everything that has never been belongs to creatures; and the Begotten, for important reasons, remains, and always will be, equal to God. What is the basis for the fact that you, the best, through Christ’s sufferings, later, when you move from here, you will become a god, and Christ a slave like you; instead of Divine honor, will only superiority among slaves be attributed to Him? If, just as a forger, intending to make a chariot, prepares a hammer, so the great God later on created a useful tool in order to acquire me with his first-born hand; then the creation in many respects will be superior to the heavenly Christ, if only the Word is for the creature, and not the creature for Christ. But who would assert this? If He took on flesh to help your infirmities, and for this you bring into measure the glorious Divinity, then He who had mercy on you has sinned. And for me, He is all the more wonderful because He did not diminish the Divinity, and saved me like a doctor, touching my stinking scabs. He was mortal, but God; the race of David, but Adam's Creator; flesh-bearing, but incorporeal; according to the Virgin Mother is described, but immeasurable. The manger contained Him, but the star led the wise men to Him, and those who brought gifts came and knelt before Him. As a man, He was in struggle, but, as irresistible, He defeated the tempter in a threefold struggle. He ate food, but fed thousands, and turned water into wine. He was baptized, but cleansed his sins, but the Spirit loudly proclaimed Him the Son of the Beginning. Like a mortal, He fell into sleep and, like God, tamed the sea. He was weary on the way, but He strengthened the strength and the knees of those who were weary. He prayed, but who heeded the tender prayers of the dying? He was a Victim, but also a Bishop; Priest, but also God; brought blood as a gift to God, but cleansed the whole world; lifted up to the cross, but sin nailed him to the cross. Why list everything in detail? He venerated the dead, but was raised from the dead, and before He Himself raised the dead. If one showed the poverty of a mortal; the other is the wealth of the Ethereal One. At least you, seeing in Him what is characteristic of mortals, do not dishonor the Divine. It made glorious the earthly image, which the incorruptible Son formed out of love for you. You might be interested in: