Then Jesus answered, and said to them: Amen, amen, I say unto you, the Son cannot do any thing of himself, but what he seeth the Father doing: for what things soever he doth, these the Son also doth in like manner.

“(vii. de Trin. c. 17) He refers to the charge of violating the sabbath, brought against Him. My Father worketh hitherto, and I work; meaning that He had a precedent for claiming the right He did; and that what He did was in reality His Father’s doing, who acted in the Son. And to quiet the jealousy which had been raised, because by the use of His Father’s name He had made Himself equal with God, and to assert the excellency of His birth and nature, He says, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of Himself, but what He seeth the Father do.”

“(Hom. xxxviii. 4) Or thus; That the Son can do nothing of Himself, must be understood to mean, that He can do nothing contrary to, or displeasing to, the Father. And therefore He does not say that He does nothing contrary, but that He can do nothing; in order to shew His perfect likeness, and absolute equality to the Father. Nor is this a sign of weakness in the Son, but rather of goodness. For as when we say that it is impossible for God to sin, we do not charge Him with weakness, but bear witness to a certain ineffable goodness; so when the Son says, I can do nothing of myself, it only means, that He can do nothing contrary to the Father.”

“(Tr. xviii. 3, 5) Some who would be thought Christians, the Arian heretics, who say that the very Son of God who took our flesh upon Him, was inferior to the Father, take advantage of these words to throw discredit upon our doctrine, and say, You see that when our Lord perceived the Jews to be indignant, because He seemed to make Himself equal with God, He gave such an answer as shewed that He was not equal. For they say, he who can do nothing but what he sees the Father do is not equal but inferior to the Father. But if there is a greater God, and a less God, (the Word being God,) we worship two Gods, and not onee.”

“Here he hands down the teaching concerning the life-giving power. And first the teaching itself is set forth; second, its confirmation, at the place, "If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true." Concerning the first he does two things. First he sets forth his teaching about the life-giving power in general; second, in particular, at the place, "and greater works than these will he show him." Concerning the first he does three things. First he intimates the origin of his power; second, the greatness of that same power, at the place, "for whatever things he shall have done, these the Son also does in like manner"; third, he assigns the reason for both, at the place, "for the Father loves the Son." Now it must be considered, concerning the first point, that the Arians strive to confirm their error from these words which the Lord here speaks, "the Son cannot do anything of himself," etc. — namely, that the Son is less than the Father — because, according to what the Evangelist said, the Jews were persecuting Christ because he was making himself equal to God. The Lord, seeing that the Jews were moved by this, wishing to exclude this (so the Arians say), added such words in order to show that he was not equal to the Father, saying: "Amen, amen I say to you, the Son cannot do anything of himself, but what he shall have seen the Father doing"; as if he were saying: do not understand me, by what I said, "my Father works, and I work," to work in such a way as though I were equal to him, since I can do nothing of myself. Since therefore the Son cannot do anything except what he shall have seen the Father doing, he is indeed less than the Father, as they themselves say. But this understanding is false and erroneous: because if the Son were not equal to the Father, then the Son would not be the same as the Father, which is against that word below, John 10:30: "I and the Father are one." For equality is considered according to magnitude, which in divine things is the very essence. Hence if he were unequal to the Father, he would differ from him according to essence. But for the true understanding of this, it must be known that, concerning those things which seem to import a lessening in the Son, it could be said by some that these things are said of Christ according to the assumed nature, just as it is said below, John 14:28: "the Father is greater than I." Hence according to this they would want to say that what the Lord says, "the Son cannot do anything of himself," must be understood of the Son according to the assumed nature. This indeed cannot stand, because according to this it would be necessary to say that all the things which the Son of God did in the assumed nature, the Father had done before him — for instance, that he had walked upon the sea with dry feet, just as Christ walked, otherwise it would not be said "except what he shall have seen the Father doing." But if it be said that whatever things Christ did in the flesh, God the Father also did, insofar as the Father works in him, according to that word below, John 14:10: "but the Father abiding in me, he himself does the works"; so that the sense would be: "the Son cannot do anything of himself, except what he shall have seen the Father doing" — in himself, namely in the Son — but neither can this stand, because according to this the words that follow could not be adapted to it, namely, "whatever things he shall have done, these the Son also does in like manner." For the Son never, according to the assumed nature, created the world, as the Father created it. Therefore what is said is not to be referred to the assumed nature. According to Augustine, however, there is another way of understanding those things which seem to import a lessening in the Son, although they do not: namely, that they be referred to the origin of the Son from the Father. For although the Son is equal to the Father in all things, nevertheless he has this very thing from the Father through eternal generation; but the Father has it from no one, since he is unbegotten. Hence according to this it continues thus: Why are you scandalized, because I have called my Father God, and because I have made myself equal to God? Amen, amen I say to you, the Son cannot do anything of himself; as if he were saying: I am indeed equal to the Father, in such a way that I am from him, not he from me; and whatever I have, so that I may do it, is mine from the Father. According to this manner, then, mention is made in these words of the power of the Son, through this word "can," and of his operation through this word "do." And therefore both can be understood here: namely, so that first the derivation of the Son's power from the Father may be shown; and second, so that the conformity of the Son's operation to the operation of the Father may be shown. As to the first, Hilary explains it in this way. Above, the Lord said that he was equal to the Father. But certain heretics, on account of the authorities of Scripture which speak of the unity and equality of the Son with the Father, attribute to the Son that he is unbegotten — as the Sabellians, saying that the Son is the same as the Father in person. Lest, then, you should understand it thus, he says: "the Son cannot do anything of himself," for the power of the Son is the same as his nature. From him, therefore, the Son has his power from whom he has his being; but he has his being from the Father — below, John 16:28: "I came forth from the Father, and have come into the world" — from whom also he has his nature, because he is God from God; therefore from him he has his power. Thus, then, what he says: "the Son cannot do anything, except what he shall have seen the Father doing," amounts to as much as if it were said: the Son, just as he does not have being except from the Father, so too he does not have the power to do anything except from the Father. For in natural things, a thing receives its power to operate from the same source from which it receives its being, just as fire receives its capacity to ascend upward from that from which it receives its form and being. Nor, however, is inequality implied by his saying, "the Son cannot do anything of himself"; for this pertains to relation, whereas the question of equality and inequality pertains to quantity. But by his saying, "except what he shall have seen the Father doing," a false understanding might creep in for someone, so that he would believe the Son to act in this way because he saw the Father doing it — namely, that the Father did it first, and having seen this, the Son afterward began to do it, after the manner of two craftsmen, namely a master and a disciple, where the disciple makes a chest according to the manner in which he has seen the master make it. But this indeed is not true of the Word; for above it is said: "all things were made through him." Therefore the Father did not make anything in such a way that the Son would see it being made and learn it thereby. But this is said in order to designate the communication of fatherhood to the Son through generation, which is fittingly designated by this word "shall have seen," because through sight and hearing knowledge is poured into us from another. For indeed through sight we receive knowledge from things, but through hearing from words. But the Son is nothing other than Wisdom, according to that word, Ecclesiasticus 24:5: "I came forth from the mouth of the Most High, the firstborn before every creature." And thus the derivation of the Son from the Father is nothing other than the derivation of divine wisdom. Since, therefore, vision designates the derivation of knowledge and wisdom from another, the generation of the Son from the Father is rightly designated through vision, so that thus for the Son to see the Father doing is nothing other than to proceed by an intelligible procession from the Father who operates. But another reason can also be assigned concerning this matter, according to Hilary; namely, that by his saying "shall have seen," every imperfection may be excluded from the generation of the Son or the Word. For in material generation, that which is generated is led little by little, through increments of time, from the imperfect to the perfect; for a thing is not yet perfect when it begins to be generated. But this has no place in the eternal generation, since it is the generation of a perfect one from a perfect one. And therefore he says, "except what the Son shall have seen the Father doing." For since to see is the act of one who is perfect, it is manifest that the Son was begotten perfect at once, as one seeing at once, and is not led to perfection through increments of time. As to the second point, Chrysostom explains it — namely, in order to show the conformity of the Father to the Son as regards operation — in this way. I say that it is lawful for me to work on the Sabbath, because my Father too works continually, to whom I cannot work contrary; and this because "the Son cannot do anything of himself," etc. For then does someone do a thing of himself, when in doing it he does not conform himself to another. But whoever is from another, if he is at variance with him, sins — below, John 7:18: "he who speaks of himself, seeks his own glory." Whoever, therefore, existing from another, works of himself, sins; but the Son is from the Father; therefore if he works of himself, he sins — which is impossible. By this, then, that the Lord says, "the Son cannot do anything of himself," etc., he intimates nothing other than that the Son cannot sin. As if he were saying: you unjustly persecute me for the breaking of the Sabbath, because I cannot sin, since I do not work contrary things to my Father. Now Augustine gives both explanations, namely that of Hilary and that of Chrysostom, though in different places. Next, when he says, "for whatever things he shall have done, these the Son also does in like manner," the greatness of Christ's power is set forth, and he excludes in these words three things concerning his power: namely, particularity, diversity, and imperfection. Particularity: because, since there are diverse agents in the world, and the first universal agent has power over all agents, while the other agents, which are from it, are of a power the more particular, the more they are lower in the order of causality, someone might believe from this that, since the Son is not of himself, he has a particular power with respect to certain existing things, and not a universal power with respect to all things, as the Father has. And therefore, excluding this, he says, "for whatever things he" — that is, the Father — "shall have done" — that is, to all things to which the power of the Father extends, the power of the Son also extends. Above, John 1:3: "all things were made through him." Diversity, however: because sometimes one thing, existing from another, can indeed do whatever that from which it is does, and yet nonetheless the things which it does are not the same as those which the one from whom it is does. As if one fire, existing from another, can do whatever the other does, for instance to burn — yet this one burns certain things, and that one others, although the burning of each is the same according to species. Lest, therefore, you understand the operation of the Son to be thus diverse from the operation of the Father, he says "these" — that is, not diverse, but the same. Imperfection, however: because sometimes it happens that one and the same thing comes about from two agents, but from one indeed as from a principal and perfect agent, and from the other as from an instrument and an imperfect agent; but not in like manner, because the principal agent acts in one way, and the instrument in another, since the instrument acts imperfectly, inasmuch as it acts in the power of another. Lest, therefore, you understand in this way that the Son does whatever the Father does, he adds "in like manner" — that is, by the same power by which the Father acts, the Son also acts; because there is the same power and the same perfection in the Father and the Son; Proverbs 8:30: "I was with him forming all things." Next, when he says, "for the Father loves the Son," he assigns the reason for both — namely, of the origin and of the greatness of the power of the Son; and this reason indeed is assigned from the love of the Father, who loves the Son; hence he says: "for the Father loves the Son." But in order to know how the love of the Father for the Son is the reason for the origin, or for the communication of the power of the Son, it must be attended to that a thing is loved in two ways. For since only the good is lovable, some good can be related to love in two ways: namely, either as the cause of love, or as caused by love. In us, however, the good causes love; for the cause of our love toward someone is his goodness. For he is not good because we love him; rather we love him because he is good; hence in us love is caused by the good. But in God it is otherwise, because the very love of God is the cause of goodness in the things loved; for because God loves us, therefore we are good, for to love is nothing other than to will good to someone. Since, therefore, the will of God is the cause of things — because "whatever the Lord willed, he has done," as Psalm 113:3 says — it is manifest that the love of God is the cause of goodness in things. Hence Dionysius says, chapter 6 of On the Divine Names, that the divine love did not permit him to be without offspring. Therefore, if we consider the origin of the Son, let us see whether the love with which the Father loves the Son is the principle of that origin, or proceeds from it. Now love in divine things is taken in two ways: namely, essentially, according as the Father loves, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit; and notionally, or personally, according as the Holy Spirit proceeds as love. But in neither of these two ways can love, so called, be the principle of the origin of the Son. For insofar as it is taken essentially, it imports thus an act of the will. If, then, it were the principle of the origin of the Son, it would follow that the Father had begotten the Son by will, not by nature — which is erroneous. Likewise also not love taken notionally, insofar as it pertains to the Holy Spirit, because then it would follow that the Holy Spirit was the principle of the Son — which is erroneous; indeed no heretic has ever said this. For although love taken notionally is the principle of all the gifts which are given to us by God, nevertheless it is not the principle of the Son; rather it itself proceeds from the Father and the Son. Thus, then, it must be said that this reason is not taken from love as from a principle, but as from a sign. For since likeness is the cause of love (for every animal loves its like), where the perfect likeness of God is found, there also the perfect love of God is found. Now the perfect likeness of the Father is in the Son, according to that word, Colossians 1:15: "who is the image of the invisible God"; Hebrews 1:3: "who, since he is the brightness, glory, and figure of his substance." Perfectly, therefore, is the Son loved by the Father; and therefore, because he loves him perfectly, it is a sign that the Father has shown him all things and has communicated to him his power and nature. And of this love it is said above, John 2:35: "the Father loves the Son, and has given all things into his hand." And Matthew 3:17: "this is my beloved son." Concerning, however, what follows, "and he shows him all things which he himself does," it must be known that someone can show his works to another in two ways. Either as to sight, as a craftsman shows to his disciple the things which he makes; or as to hearing, as when he instructs him by word. In whichever of these two ways, then, "shows" is taken, a twofold unfitting consequence can follow — which, however, is not present in that showing by which the Father shows the Son. For if the Father is said to show the Son as to sight, first indeed it follows, in these lower things, that he first works something which he shows to another; and second, that he works it apart from the one to whom he shows it. But the Father does not show the Son things which he made beforehand, because the Son himself says, Proverbs 8:22: "the Lord possessed me in the beginning of his ways, before he made anything." Nor, likewise, things which he makes apart from the Son; because the Father works all things through the Son — above, John 1:3: "all things were made through him." But if the showing be taken as to hearing, two things seem to follow: for he who teaches by word first shows to one who is ignorant; and second, the word stands between the one showing and the one to whom the showing is made. But the Father shows the Son in neither of these ways: not indeed as to one ignorant, since the Son is the wisdom of the Father — 1 Corinthians 1:24: "Christ, the power of God and the wisdom of God"; nor by some other word as intermediary, because the Son himself is the Word of the Father — above, John 1: "the Word was with God." The Father, therefore, is said to show the Son all things that he does, insofar as he communicates to him the knowledge of all his works; for thus a master is said to show his disciple, insofar as he gives him knowledge of the things which he does. Hence, according to Augustine, for the Father to show the Son is nothing other than for the Father to beget the Son. And for the Son to see what the Father does is nothing other than for the Son to be and to receive his nature from the Father. That showing, however, can be said to be similar to the visual kind, inasmuch as the Son himself is the brightness of the Father's vision, as it is said, Hebrews 1:3: for the Father, seeing and understanding himself, conceives the Son, who is the concept of this vision. It can also be similar to that which comes about through hearing, inasmuch as the Son proceeds from the Father as the Word. So that it might be said that the Father shows the Son all things, insofar as he produces him as the brightness, and the concept of his wisdom, and the Word. This, then, that he says "shows," is referred to what he said above: "the Son cannot do anything of himself, except what he shall have seen the Father doing." But this, that he says "all things," is referred to what he said: "for whatever things he shall have done, these the Son also does in like manner."”

“Verify, Verify , &c. . . . cannot: “not from defect of power,” says Euthymius, “but on account of inseparability. For i Digitized by V^rOOQie 174 it is impossible that the Son should do anything which the Father does not 1 ' So S. Chrysostom and S. Augustine. Except , or unless. This word is not here exceptive, signifying the same as but only . It has the same meaning in Matt, xil 4. What He seeth : Greek, , #>., may see. For it is not before He worketh, but as soon as He seeth the Father working, that He, Christ, worketh with Him. For Christ as God does not produce what is similar, but what is identical with the work of the Father. For the action of the Father, which both see and work together, is the same. I say action, but not the Hypostatic Union, nor the things which depend upon it, for this union has not to do with action, but with the terminus in quo . Wherefore, although the whole Blessed Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, by their Divine action, have brought about this Hypostatic Union, yet the union itself is terminated in the Son, and does not extend to the Father and the Holy Ghost Wherefore the Son only, not the Father and the Holy Ghost, became incarnate, and died, &c. Observe, Christ in this place only means to say that He has received from God the Father His Divine Essence, power, and working, as from His Author. He makes use of the word see , as if the Son did nothing except what He seeth the Father do, or what He sees to be the work of His Father. For children and pupils are wont to imitate the ways and deeds of their fathers and teachers. Christ is speaking after the manner of men, or as amongst men it becomes a son to speak of his father. It may be added that Christ in a proper and theological sense uses the word see, because He proceeds from the Father as the Word, which is the term of the vision and the notional cognition of God the Father. For the Father, as seeing and understanding Himself and all things, produces and begets the Word, and by this communicates to Him His own vision and action. Therefore the Son neither seeth, nor doeth anything except what He seeth the Father see, or do. For He Himself is the Word and the Idea, in whom, as a Term, the Father expresses and imprints all His own vision and cognition, both speculative and practical. The meaning Digitized by V^rOOQie THE FATHER SHEWETH THE SON. IJT5 then is this, “ Whatever I work, the Father worketh the same, and by altogether the same vision, cognition, will, power, and action. Wherefore if ye accuse Me because I have healed one paralysed on the Sabbath day, ye accuse God the Father also. For He hath wrought this with Me, because He in Me and by Me worketh all things. Indeed, I have received all My work from the Father. Wherefore, if ye believe that God the Father works all things rightly, wisely, and holily, ye ought to believe the same of Me, and therefore that this healing on the Sabbath was a work prudent, holy, and Divine.” Doth likewise: altogether in the same manner, with the same liberty, the same power, the same authority. So S. Gregory Nazianzen (Orat. 2, de FHio). S. Cyril says, “They do likewise , or work in like manner, , who are altogether of the same nature: but as to things which have a diverse essence there cannot be in them the same mode of working. As therefore He (the Son) is God of true God, He is able to do likewise the same things as the Father.””

“Then answered Jesus, and said unto them,.... They charged him with blasphemy for calling God his Father, and making himself equal to him: and his answer is so far from denying the thing, or observing any mistake, or misrepresentation of his words, that he allows the whole, and vindicates himself in so saying: verily verily, I say unto you; nothing is more certain; it may be depended on as truth; I who am truth itself, the "Amen", and faithful witness, aver it with the greatest assurance: the Son can do nothing of himself; or he does do nothing of himself, nor will he do anything of himself; that is, he neither does, nor will, nor can do anything alone or separate from his Father, or in which he is not concerned; not anything without his knowledge and consent, or contrary to his will: he does everything in conjunction with him; with the same power, having the same will, being of the same nature, and equal to each other: for these words do not design any weakness in the Son, or want of power in him to do anything of himself; that is, by his own power: for he has by his word of power spoke all things out of nothing, and by the same upholds all things; he has himself bore the sins of his people, and by himself purged them away, and has raised himself from the dead; but they express his perfection; that he does nothing, and can do nothing of himself, in opposition to his Father, and in contradiction to his will: as Satan speaks of his own, and evil men alienated from God, act of themselves, and do that which is contrary to the nature and will of God; but the Son cannot do so, being of the same nature with God, and therefore never acts separate from him, or contrary to him, but always co-operates and acts with him, and therefore never to be blamed for what he does. The Syriac, Arabic, and Persic versions render it, "the Son cannot do anything of his own will"; so Nonnus; as separate from, or contrary to his Father's will, but always in agreement with it, they being one in nature, and so in will and work. He does nothing therefore but what he seeth the Father do; not that he sees the Father actually do a work, and then he does one after him, as the creation of the world, the assumption of human nature, and redemption of man, or any particular miracle, as if upon observing one done, he did the like; but that he being brought up with him, and lying in his bosom, was privy to the whole plan of his works, and saw in his nature and infinite mind, and in his vast counsels, purposes, and designs, all that he was doing, or would do, and so did the same, or acted agreeably to them; and which still shows and proves their unity of nature, and perfect equality, since there was nothing in the Father's mind but was known to the Son, seen, and observed, and acted up to by him: so Philo the Jew (e) says of the "Father's most ancient Son, whom he otherwise calls the firstborn; that being begotten, he imitates the Father, and seeing, or looking to his exemplars and archetypes, forms species;'' that is, being conversant with the original and eternal ideas of things in the divine mind, acts according to them, which he could not do if he was not of the same nature with, and equal to his Father. Moreover, the Son sees what the Father does by co-operating with him, and so does no other than what he sees the Father do, in conjunction with him: to which may be added, that the phrase shows, that the Son does nothing but in wisdom, and with knowledge; and that as the Father, so he does all things after the counsel of his will: for whatsoever things he doth, these also doth the Son likewise; the Son does the selfsame works as the Father does, such as the works of creation and providence, the government both of the church, and of the world; and he does these things in like manner, with the same power, and by the same authority, his Father does, and which proves him to be equal with him; the very thing the Jews understood him to have asserted, and which they charged him with: and this he strongly maintained. The Syriac version reads, "for the things which the Father does, the same also does the Son"; and the Persic version, "whatsoever God has done, the Son also does like unto it". (e) De Confus. Ling. p. 329.”

“The Son can do nothing of himself - Because of his inseparable union with the Father: nor can the Father do any thing of himself, because of his infinite unity with the Son. What things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son - God does nothing but what Christ does. What God does is the work of God, and proper to no creature - Jesus does whatsoever God does, and therefore is no created being. The Son can do nothing but what he sees the Father do: now, any intelligent creature may do what God cannot do: he may err - he may sin. If Jesus can do nothing but what God does, then he is no creature - he can neither sin nor err, nor act imperfectly. The conclusion from our Lord's argument is: If I have broken the Sabbath, so has God also; for I can do nothing but what I see him doing. He is ever governing and preserving; I am ever employed in saving.”

“The Son cannot do any thing of himself, [5] but what he seeth the Father do. In like manner, (ver. 30.) Christ says, I can do nothing of myself. As I hear, so I judge. Again (Chap. viii. 28.) I do nothing of myself; but as the Father hath taught me, I speak these things. All these, and the like expressions, may be expounded, with Maldonatus and Petavius, (lib. ii. de Trin. chap. 4.) of Christ, as man. But the ancient Fathers commonly allowed them to be understood of Christ as God, and as the true Son of God proceeding from him from all eternity; as when it is said, the Son cannot do any thing of himself, it is true, because the eternal Son is not of himself, but always proceeds from the Father. 2. Because the works of all the three Persons, by which all things are produced and preserved, are inseparable. 3. When it is said, that the Son doth nothing, but what he seeth the Father doing: that he heareth, as the Father hath taught him, or shewed to him: these expressions bear not the same sense as when they are applied to men, or to an inferior or a scholar, who learns of his master, and follows him; but here, says St. Augustine, to see, to hear, to be taught by the Father, is no more than to proceed from him, to do and produce by the same action, all that the Father doth and produceth. This is the general interpretation of the ancient Fathers: St. Athanasius, St. Basil, St. Gregory of Nazianzus, St. Chrysostom, St. Cyril, St. Ambrose, St. Augustine. The words immediately following, confirm this exposition, when it is said: For what things soever he (the Father) doth, these also in like manner the Son doth, i.e. the very same things by an unity of nature, of will, and of action: nor could these words be true, unless the Son was the same true God with the Father. (Witham) — This must be understood, that he cannot do any thing contrary to the will of the Father. He does not say, “The Son does nothing of himself, but the Son can do nothing of himself, in order to shew their likeness and perfect equality.” For by saying this, he does not betray any want of power in the Son; but, on the contrary, shews his great power. For when we say that God cannot sin, we do not esteem it a want of power; so when the Son says he cannot do any thing of himself, his meaning is, that he cannot do any thing contrary to the will of the Father; which certainly is a great perfection. (St. Chrysostom, hom. xxxvii. in Joan.)”

“the Son can do nothing of himself--that is, apart from and in rivalry of the Father, as they supposed. The meaning is, "The Son can have no separate interest or action from the Father." for what things, &c.--On the contrary, "whatever the Father doeth that same doeth the Son," likewise--"in the like manner." What claim to absolute equality with the Father could exceed this: not only to do "the same things," but to do them as the Father does them?”