Epistle to the Romans, Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the Gospel of God (which He had promised afore by His prophets in the holy Scriptures) concerning His Son who was made unto Him of the seed of David, according to the flesh, he should have given loyal diligence to the prophetic pages. And finding there the promise of God to Abraham, when He says, In thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed, to avoid all doubt upon the proper meaning of this word "seed," he should have followed the Apostle when he says, To Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He says not “to seeds," as of many; but, as of one to thy seed," which is Christ. He should, too, have apprehended with the inward ear those words of Isaiah: Behold a virgin shall conceive, and bear a Son, and they shall call his name Immanuel, which is being interpreted "God with us.' And he should have read with an honest and faithful heart the words of the same prophet, Unto us a child is born, unto us a Son is given; whose government shall be upon his shoulder, and his name shall be called Angel of the great counsel, wonderful, Counsellor, the mighty God, the prince of peace, Father of the age to come. should Eutyches, speaking with intent to deceive, have said that the Word became flesh in such a way that Christ, born of the Virgin's womb, had the form of man but had not the reality of his mother's body. Or can it be that he supposed

66

Nor

virgo the LXX. has rapeévos (=the maid: Hebr. v, almah). The rendering "virgin" is not justified by the Hebrew word, which means a young woman of marriageable age, without necessarily implying that she is not married: see Skinner, n. on Isaiah vii. 14.

magni consilii angelus: a rendering of the LXX. μeyáλns Bovλîs ayyeλos. The phrase does not occur in the Vulgate.

formam. non... veritatem: as a matter of fact Eutyches himself did in the end admit that Christ's "incarnate presence issued from the flesh of the Virgin, and that He became perfect man for our salvation." But the left wing of his party was certainly infected with Apollinarianism, which denied the perfect

Dominum nostrum JESUM CHRISTUM non nostræ esse naturæ, quia missus ad beatam Mariam semper virginem1 Angelus ait, Spiritus sanctus superveniet in te, et virtus Altissimi obumbrabit tibi: ideoque et quod nascetur ex te sanctum vocabitur Filius Dei? [Luke i. 35] ut quia conceptus Virginis divini fuit operis, non de natura concipientis fuerit caro concepti. Sed non ita intelligenda est illa generatio singulariter mirabilis, et mirabiliter singularis, ut per novitatem creationis proprietas remota sit generis. Fecunditatem enim Virgini Spiritus sanctus dedit, veritas autem corporis sumpta de corpore est; et ædificante sibi sapientia domum, Verbum caro factum est, et habitavit in nobis [John i. 14], hoc est, in ea carne, quam assumpsit3 ex homine, et quam spiritu vitæ rationalis animavit.

ness of Christ's humanity, saying that in Him "God the Word " took the place of the human spirit; Christ, it was declared, is οὔτε ἄνθρωπος ὅλος οὔτε Θεὸς ἀλλὰ Θεοῦ καὶ ἀνθρώπου μίξις. Apol. linarius, Bishop of Laodicea, was condemned explicitly by the Second Ecumenical Council (A.D. 381), and implicitly in the olause of the " Quicunque," which describes Christ as "of a reasonable soul, and human flesh subsisting." It has been pointed out by Dean Plumptre (Christ and Christendom), that the philo. sophic tendency of the great scholastics was towards a modified Apollinarianism, and they have transmitted it to many, both among Romanist and Anglican divines. For a discussion of this suggestive heresy," consult Harnack, History of Dogma, vol. iv., pp. 149 sq.; Gore, Dissertations, pp. 138 sqq. Apollinarius was the first who faced the difficulty that, if all men are sinners, and the Lord was not a sinner, He cannot have been truly man (Gwatkin).

66

that our Lord Jesus Christ was not of our nature because the angel, when sent to the blessed Mary, ever-virgin, declared The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee, therefore also that holy thing that shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God on the supposition that, because the conception of the Virgin was an act of God, therefore the flesh of the Conceived was not of the nature of her that conceived it? But that birth, so uniquely wonderful and so wonderfully unique, ought not so to be understood that the distinctive character of its kind was lost through the novelty of its origin. For the Holy Spirit gave fruitfulness to the Virgin, but the reality of His body was received from her body; and when Wisdom was building herself a house, the Word was made flesh and dwelt in us—that is, in that flesh which He took from man, and which He quickened with the spirit of a rational life.

proprietas (= idɩórns, the distinguishing characteristics) generis— i.e., the true and proper character of the kind, or (as Bindley paraphrases) "the novel mode of the cause of the birth did not remove it from the character of real births." Cf. Tertull. adv. Prax. xxvii., “salva est utrius que proprietas substantiæ"; and Def. Chalc. σωζομένης . . . τῆς ἰδιότητος ἑκατέρας φύσεως. veritas corporis="verum corpus," a genuine body (not a phantom, as the Docetæ supposed).

...

ædificante. . . domum: from Proverbs ix. i.

ex homine, from human nature. Compare the words of the Te Deum, "Tu ad liberandum suscepturus hominem." So Christ is said “induisse hominem," Cyprian, de idol. vanit. vii. 6; Minuc. Fel. xxi. 16; Hilary, de Trin. ix. 7, "homo noster" our manhood. Similarly in Greek, ἄνθρωπος.

rationalis=λoyɩkoû—viz., belonging not to the lower creation, but to man, as made in the divine likeness.

CAP. III.-Fides et consilium Dei circa incarnationem Verbi exponuntur.

Salva igitur proprietate utriusque naturæ et substantiæ,1 et in unam coeunte personam, suscepta est a majestate humilitas, a virtute infirmitas, ab æternitate mortalitas; et ad resolvendum conditionis nostræ debitum, natura inviolabilis naturæ est unita passibili; ut quod nostris remediis congruebat, unus atque idem mediator Dei et hominum, homo JESUS CHRISTUS, et mori posset ex uno, et mori non posset ex altero. In integra ergo veri hominis perfectaque natura verus natus est Deus, totus in suis, totus in nostris. Nostra autem dicimus, quæ in nobis ab initio Creator condidit, et quæ reparanda suscepit. Nam illa, quæ deceptor intulit, et homo deceptus admisit, nullum habuerunt in Salvatore vestigium. Nec quia communionem humanarum subiit infirmitatum, ideo nostrorum fuit particeps delictorum. Assumpsit formam servi sine sorde peccati, humana augens, divina non minuens: quia exinanitio illa, qua se invisibilis visibilem præbuit, et Creator ac Dominus omnium rerum unus voluit esse mortalium, inclinatio fuit miserationis, non defectio po

The opening passage of this chapter occurs, in much the same form, in Sermon 21 (" de nativitate Domini"), where Leo affirms the truth of the union of Godhead and manhood in Christ. The Tome is indeed the basis of the symbolum of the orthodox doctrine of the "Unio Hypostatica "; Bury, Later Roman Empire, vol. i., chap. ix. (Church in Fifth Century). Cf. Cyril's words: opŵμev öti δύο φύσεις συνῆλθον ἀλλήλαις καθ ̓ ἕνωσιν ἀδιάσπαστον ἀσυγχύτως ἀτρέπτως· ἡ γὰρ σάρξ σάρξ ἐστι καὶ οὐ θειότης, εἰ καὶ γέγονε Θεοῦ σápέ, and below, § 4. The latter part of this chapter is repeated in the 22nd Sermon. See Hooker, Eccl. Pol. v. 53, § 2. passibili, capable of suffering: so in §§ 4, 5. Cf. Vinc. Lerin., Commonit. 13. Obviously the word (=πałŋrós) is introduced to

1 omit et substantiæ.

66

§ 3. The property of each nature and substance_remaining, therefore, unimpaired and coming together into one Person, humility was assumed by majesty, weakness by power, mortality by eternity; and, in order to pay the debt of our condition, an inviolable nature was added to a passible nature; so that, as a remedy suitable to our healing, one and the same Mediator between God and men, the Man Jesus Christ, was capable of death in the one nature, and incapable of death in the other. Thus, in the whole and perfect nature of very man, very God was born-complete in what belonged to Him, complete in what belonged to us. And by the words what belonged to us we mean what the Creator formed in us from the beginning and what He took upon him in order to restore; for that which the Deceiver introduced, and man, being deceived, admitted, had no trace in the Saviour. Nor, because He condescended to share human infirmities, was He therefore partaker in our sins. He took upon Him the form of a servant without stain of sin, increasing the human not diminishing the divine; because that self-emptying," whereby the Invisible made Himself visible and by which the Creator and Lord of all willed to be a mortal, was a stooping-down of pity not a failure of power. Accordingly, He who, abiding

emphasize the reality of Christ's humanity against the Docetics: cf. Ignat. Ep. ad Eph. vii.

quod congruebat, as was fitting for our relief.

ex uno... ex altero = from one element . . . from the other (Bright). in suis-viz., in all that pertained to Himself. This passage reappears in the 23rd Sermon (§ 2).

exinanitio, the Kévwois as it is termed: Phil. ii. 6. For an elaborate discussion of this " quæstio vexata," see Gore, Dissertations. Augustine's words are in point here: " nos cecidimus, Ille descendit; nos jacebamus, Ille se inclinavit." Elsewhere (Ep. 165) Leo says: Quæ autem est Ejus exinanitio quæve paupertas nisi formæ servilis acceptio, per quam Verbi majestate velata dispensatio humanæ redemptionis impleta est ?"

inclinatio... potestatis, a statement which went to the root of Eutyches' difficulty.