Of God the Son — C. The Logos

C. The Logos

Whereas the Synoptics portray Christ mainly on His human side, St. Paul emphasizes the Godman, and St. John, who was the Saviour’s favorite disciple, raising his eagle eye to the very Heavens, shows us Christ subsisting before all time in His Divine Nature as the “Word of God” (Verbum, ὁ Λόγος). This term¹ is of the utmost importance for the proper understanding of the mystery of the Blessed Trinity. The use of the term “Logos” is peculiar to St. John.² The attempt to trace the Johannine Logos to the teaching of the Jewish philosopher Philo has proved abortive. Aside from the name there is absolutely no similarity between the two conceptions; rather an irreconcilable opposition. It is far more reasonable to regard the teaching of St. John on the Logos as an inspired development of the doctrine of “Uncreated Wisdom” which is set forth in the Sapiential Books of the Old Testament. May we not also assume that St. John was directly enlightened by Him on whose bosom he was privileged to lean?³

The most important portion of the Johannean Gospel, as bearing on the dogma of the Blessed Trinity, is the prologue, which distinctly asserts the personality, the hypostatic difference, and the Divinity of the Logos, who is Christ, the Son of God made flesh.

1. The Logos a Real Person

The Fourth Gospel begins thus: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God” (ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ Λόγος καὶ ὁ Λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν). Inasmuch as St. John distinguishes very clearly between the “Word” and “God,” the “Word with God” (apud Deum) cannot be an absolute divine attribute, e. g., personified wisdom or omnipotence; for wisdom and omnipotence are not “with God” but “in God.” This is clearly apparent from the whole context of the prologue, especially I, 14: “And the Word was made flesh.” It would be impossible for the Divine Nature, or for any one of its attributes, to “become flesh,” because the Divine Nature, as such, is incapable of entering into union with a finite substance, and hence cannot form an undivided synthesis with human nature. Consequently the Logos is truly a person and not a mere personification.

2. The Logos as Second Person of the Blessed Trinity, Distinct From the Father

That the Logos must be conceived as the Second Person of the Divine Trinity, appears from the opposition between ὁ Λόγος and πρὸς τὸν Θεόν. The one is “God,” the other is “with God” as His Logos, and as such is likewise God.⁴ But the Evangelist continues: “He came unto his own (τὰ ἴδια) and his own (οἱ ἴδιοι, i. e., the children of Israel) received him not.” Whence it again appears, first, that the Logos is a real Person, and, secondly, that He cannot be the Father, because the Father never “came into this world.”⁵ Consequently, the Logos must be a different Person from the Father. This conclusion is made certain by verses 14 and 18, in which the Logos is identified with the Son of God. John I, 14: “Et Verbum (ὁ Λόγος) caro factum est et habitavit in nobis; et vidimus gloriam eius [scil. Verbi], gloriam quasi unigeniti a Patre (ὡς μονογενοῦς παρὰ πατρός) — And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw his glory, the glory as it were of the only begotten of the Father.” John I, 18: “Unigenitus Filius (ὁ μονογενὴς υἱός), qui est in sinu Patris, ipse enarravit — The only begotten Son who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.” If the Logos is identically the same Person as the “Son in the bosom of the Father,” there is between the Logos and the Father the same relative opposition which exists between the Son and the Father, and consequently the Logos cannot be identical with the Father. He must be an independent Hypostasis.

3. The Logos as a Divine Person, or God

The fifth of the Scriptural texts⁶ in which the Logos is expressly called “God,” is John I, 1: “In principio erat Verbum, et Verbum erat apud Deum, et Deus erat Verbum — In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” In the last clause of this sentence “Verbum” is the subject and “Deus” the predicate, as a glance at the Greek text — θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος — tells. Therefore the meaning of the clause is: “The Logos was God.” But why did St. John thus transpose subject and predicate? His reason for doing so appears from the context: ὁ Λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν, καὶ Θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος. By bringing τὸν Θεόν and ὁ Λόγος into juxtaposition, the Evangelist desired to emphasize the consubstantiality of the Logos with God the Father, “with” whom He was “from the beginning.” Positively to exclude the thought that the two might be identical in Person, St. John insists:⁷ “Οὗτος (i. e., ὁ Λόγος) ἦν ἐν ἀρχῇ πρὸς τὸν Θεόν”; that is to say, the Logos is indeed “God”; but He is likewise “with God.”

Even if the Logos were not expressly called “God,” His Divinity could be inferred from the divine attributes ascribed to Him by the Evangelist.

a) The Logos is the Creator of all things without exception. John I, 3: “Omnia per ipsum facta sunt, et sine ipso factum est nihil, quod factum est — All things were made by him and without him was made nothing that was made.” John I, 10: “In mundo erat, et mundus (ὁ κόσμος) per ipsum factus est — He was in the world, and the world was made by him.” He who created the world must be God. “Peccatum quidem non per ipsum factum est,” beautifully observes St. Augustine, ”… et idolum non per Verbum factum est, sed … omnis omnino creatura ab angelo usque ad vermiculum. Quid praeclarius angelo in creaturis? Quid extremius vermiculo in creaturis? Per quem factus est angelus, per ipsum factus est vermiculus — Sin indeed was not made by the Word … an idol too was not made by the Word, but every created thing whatever, from an angel to a worm. What created being more excellent than an angel? What lower than a worm? Yet He who made the angel, the very same made the worm also.”⁸ As Creator of the world the Logos is an uncreated Substance, ens a se. As if to refute the later Arian notion that the Logos who created the world was Himself a mere creature, St. John stresses the fact that “all things were made by him” by adding: “And without him was made nothing that was made.”⁹ If absolutely nothing was created without the Logos, the Logos Himself must either be increate, or His own creator, which would involve a contradiction. “Quomodo potest fieri,” says St. Augustine, “ut Verbum Dei factum sit, quando Deus per Verbum fecit omnia? Si et Verbum Dei ipsum factum est, per quod aliud Verbum factum est? … Non enim per se ipsum fieri potuit, per quod facta sunt omnia. Crede ergo Evangelistae. Poterat enim dicere: In principio fecit Deus Verbum, quomodo dixit Moyses: In principio fecit Deus coelum et terram — How could the Word of God be made, when by the Word God made all things? If the Word of God was itself also made, by what other Word was it made? … For that by which all things are made, could not be made by itself. Believe then the Evangelist. For he might have said: In the beginning God made the Word; just as Moses said: In the beginning God made the heavens and the earth.”¹⁰

b) The Logos is eternal. Cfr. John I, 1 sq.: “In the beginning (ἐν ἀρχῇ) was the Word… . The same was in the beginning (ἐν ἀρχῇ) with God.” A pre-existence which antedates time and creation is equal to absolute eternity. To say that the Logos began to be “with God” at some certain time, would be tantamount to asserting that the Father began out of His own substance to beget “the only begotten Son in His bosom.”¹¹ Consequently the Son must be coeternal with the Father. This is further confirmed by a consideration of that attribute of the Divine Logos which may be designated as His divine immanence. By “Word of God” (Verbum, Λόγος) we may understand either the external word of God (verbum oris s. externum), i. e., Divine Revelation; or His internal, immanent word (verbum mentis s. internum). The former, which is something impersonal, accidental, created, temporal, extra-divine, is not mentioned by St. John in the prologue of his Gospel. The Word of which he speaks is manifestly the internal Word, which, being an intrinsic product of generation, immanent in the intellect of the begetting Father, forms part of the Divine Essence. Consequently the Logos is coeternal with the Essence of the Godhead.

c) Lastly, the Logos is the author of the Supernatural, and as such must be God. In Himself “the true light”¹² and “the life,”¹³ He is in His external manifestation “the light [that] shineth in the darkness,”¹⁴ and the principle of our adopted sonship.¹⁵ John I, 12: “Quotquot autem receperunt eum, dedit eis potestatem filios Dei fieri (ἔδωκεν αὐτοῖς ἐξουσίαν τέκνα θεοῦ γενέσθαι), his qui credunt in nomine eius (εἰς τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ) — But as many as received him, he gave them power to be made the sons of God, to them that believe in his name.” Belief in the Logos is a necessary condition of salvation and eternal beatitude. Consequently the Logos is God. From the fulness of His grace we must all draw; it is from Him we receive grace and truth. Cfr. John I, 16 sq.: “Et de plenitudine eius nos omnes accepimus, et gratiam pro gratia; quia lex per Moysen data est, gratia et veritas (ἡ χάρις καὶ ἡ ἀλήθεια) per Iesum Christum facta est — And of his fulness we have all received, and grace for grace. For the law was given by Moses; grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.” The Logos is the author both of nature and of the Supernatural, and therefore very God.

The Logos appeared corporeally on earth in Jesus Christ, for it is to Him and to Him alone that we can apply such Scriptural passages as: “He came unto his own,”¹⁶ “He was in the world,”¹⁷ “John … gave testimony of [Him],”¹⁸ and, lastly,¹⁹ “The Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us.”²⁰ This “Word made flesh,” which is for the first time called “Jesus Christ” in John I, 17, is “the only begotten Son of God.”²¹ Hence Christ is both the Logos and the Son of God. With John I, 15, therefore, begins the story of the life of Jesus Christ.²²

Readings

On the theology of the Son: J. E. Stadler, Über die Identität der Idee der Weisheit mit der des Wortes, Münster 1832; E. Bougaud, The Divinity of Christ (translated by Currie), New York 1906; L. Atzberger, Die Logoslehre des hl. Athanasius, München 1880; M. Beyr, Trinitatis in Unitate Dei Salus Mundi per Iesum Christum Redempti, Graz 1875; K. Müller, Göttliches Wissen und göttliche Macht des johanneischen Christus, Freiburg 1882; P. Keppler, Die Komposition des Johannesevangeliums, Freiburg 1884; G. A. Müller, Christus bei Josephus Flavius, 2nd ed., Innsbruck 1896; Simar, Theologie des hl. Paulus, 2nd ed., Freiburg 1883; Franzelin, De Verbo Incarnato, thes. 2–9, ed. 4, Romae 1893; G. B. Tepe, Instit. Theolog., Vol. II, pp. 234 sqq., Parisiis 1895; J. B. Bartmann, Das Himmelreich und sein König nach den Synoptikern, Paderborn 1904; H. Schell, Jahwe und Christus, Paderborn 1905. An older work of special value on this subject is Prud. Maranus, De Divinitate Domini Nostri Iesu Christi Manifesta in Scripturis et Traditione, Parisiis 1764. Cfr. also St. Thomas, Contr. Gent., IV, 7 (Rickaby, Of God and His Creatures, pp. 344 sqq., London 1905); Bellarmine, Controv. de Christo, l. I; J. Perrone, De D. N. I. Chr. Divinitate adv. huius Aetatis Incredulos, Rationalistas et Mysticos, 3 vols., Taurini 1870; H. P. Liddon, The Divinity of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, London 1867; H. J. Coleridge, S. J., The Preparation of the Incarnation, 2nd ed., London 1894; M. Lepin, Christ and the Gospel, or Jesus the Messiah and Son of God, Philadelphia 1910; A. J. Maas, S. J., Christ in Type and Prophecy, 2 vols., New York 1893–5.