By Panagiotis Chrestou
The Incarnation is a paradox and, in a way, an antinomian process which transfers the Creator to the position of the creature. The
Incarnation creates, according to human data and standards, an
unexpected adaptation of the archetype to the antitype. This is a
reversal of the regular course of affairs, but is a necessity because of
the antitype’s inability to adapt to the archetype, as demanded by his
destiny. By an inconceivable process, this movement transfers the
eternal to the sphere of time and eliminates the temporal, that is, it
really abolishes the restrictions of time and space. And this is the
greatest mystery – the greatest miracle in the history of the world. The
fact that God created the world is within the boundaries of the
comprehensible. The fact that fire goes upward is within the boundaries
of the natural, but if it went downward, like the heavy bodies, this
would be unnatural and incomprehensible. Therefore, the fact that the
divine presence directs itself downward, deigning to become like that
which lives there (without being transposed, of course), is the most
incomprehensible event and, also, the greatest manifestation of power.
How can that which is sublime be manifested within that which is lowly
without losing its grandeur? Gregory of Nyssa asked: "How is the sublime
seen in the lowly and, yet, does not descend from its height? How can
the Deity, entwined as it is with the nature of man, become this and
still be that."
Yet
this is incomprehensible and strange only to human standards, but not
in God’s eyes. The union of God and man in Christ is the great and
hidden mystery, the happy telos, for which all things were made. According to Maximos the Confessor, it is the preconceived telos: This is the great and hidden mystery. This is the blessed telos for which all things have been made. This is the telos
preconceived before the beginning of things for whose sake all things
exist, while it does not exist for the sake of anything else. Looking
towards this telos, God produced the logoi of beings. This
passage and especially its last phrase, which appears to indicate that
the object of creation is the Incarnation, may seem strange. Yet from a
general survey of Orthodox theology, this concept is correct because it
agrees with the purpose of the creation of man. Theophilos of Antioch
taught that the reason God decided to create man is so that He could be
known by him, to
be revealed to him and to make him a partaker of His glory. All of
patristic theology agrees on this point. Inasmuch as the summit of
revelation is the Incarnation, we could say that this is truly the
purpose of creation, but such an interpretation sounds farfetched. The
passage undoubtedly has this meaning when placed within the context of
Maximos’ whole theological system – the purpose of the creation of man
is his union with God, whose first fruit was the hypostatic union of the
divine and human in Christ.
This remarkable concept was later repeated
by the brilliant theologian, Nicholas Cabasilas, who stated that man was
made precisely for the sake of the new man, Christ. The
first question that is raised as soon as the problem of the Incarnation
is put forth is this: What did the Son of God assume in order to become
Jesus Christ, the God–man? If He assumed an abstract wholeness of
humanity or an idea of man, then all individual men automatically,
immediately and compulsorily would be led to salvation as partakers of
the idea. The Fathers of the Church never supported such a concept
because they did not accept the existence of such wholeness. Gregory of
Nyssa, to whom some modern scholars ascribe it, did not even support
this theory. The Word of God became a concrete man, and even a whole concrete man. The passage of John, "and the Word became flesh", has always incited interpreters to mutilate the human element of the
God–man thinking that the Word assumed only the flesh of man and not
his soul or mind, whose place was occupied by the Word Himself. The
Cappadocians steadily fought against this concept (in its final
formulation by Apollinarios), and the Second Ecumenical Synod condemned
it. What sense would there be in receiving only the flesh when it was
not this component alone that sinned, but the whole man? And, in any
case, did not the mind sin more than the body since it made the first
move towards sin? The Good Shepherd raises the lost sheep as a whole onto His
shoulders and not just its hide. This
was the constant reply to Apollinarios who presented the humanity of
Christ mutilated in that way: "What was not assumed remains unhealed,
while what was united is saved."
The Fathers of Chalcedon decided to give an official dogmatic
formulation on the person of Christ: "We teach with one voice that the
Son of God and our Lord Jesus Christ is to be confessed as one and the
same person, that He is perfect in Godhead and perfect in manhood, true
God and true man ...consubstantial with us as regarding His manhood, made
in all things like us, sin only excepted... This one and the same
Christ, Lord, Only–begotten Son must be confessed to be in two
natures, unconfusedly, indivisibly, inseparably, without the distinction
of natures being taken away by such a union, but rather the peculiar
property of each nature being preserved and being united in one person
and subsistence, not separated or divided in two persons, but one and
the same Son and Only–begotten God, the Word, Lord Jesus Christ." The Divine Word assumed the whole man. The only qualification
concerning the fullness of the assumed nature was that the total man,
who was assumed by the Word, did not have a passionate sinful disposition (which had blinded the human will and had been transmitted from the
first man to his descendants, for they completely inherited and received
Adam and completely transmitted him to their descendants). Christ’s
human acquisition did not inherit the old Adam because that was what
constituted the new Adam (i.e. Christ) together with the Word. This
absence is better understood in light of the enhypostatic concept which
Leontios developed. There were certainly two hypostases, the divine and
the human, which were united in Christ to form one person. However the
human hypostasis was never really an independent entity (which
naturally, would also contain the element of sinfulness), but was united
with the divine nature as enhypostaton from the beginning. This
is the reason theologians avoided speaking about a human hypostasis in
Christ, this nature was united with the divine Word before its
development was completed and before it even started. Therefore, it is
neither a person nor a hypostasis, but an enhypostaton, that is, a
hypostatic component which has never had any existence outside of the
God–man. The word "nature" definitely does not have the same meaning
regarding the divine Word, because in him nature possesses the energy
eternally and is a person eternally. The union of the two natures is so
complete and inseparable that, although we can characterize the
hypostatic components that Christ has as "one thing and another", we
cannot characterize Christ as "one person and another person", that is,
as being composed of two persons; for through their integration the two
hypostatic components became one with the result that God was incarnate
and man was undivided. A unique person came forth out of this integration, and this person is "ομοούσιον ημίν", of the same essence as us because He possesses the whole human essence.
This union, however, is not a natural one. The union was formed neither
by fusing and confusing the two natures, nor, even more so, by
absorbing the human nature into the divine nature. The natures remained
intact, and only the hypostases – obviously the human hypostasis in the
way defined above – were fused into one person. The properties of the
two natures remained unchanged, though their energies became common
because of their combination and union. The God–man is not assimilated
by man not only because he did not assume man’s sinful disposition, but
also because he preserved the whole of divinity. Kenosis simply means
the descent of the Divine to man, which is not a diminutive act, but is,
on the contrary, a fruit of the infinite power of God, who can even
enter incomplete beings, and a sign of his infinite love for mankind.
With this doctrine the Orthodox position on the Christological problem
was defined in relation to the Nestorian doctrine of two persons and the
Monophysitic doctrine of one nature.
A charming Nativity hymn (perhaps
composed by Patriarch Germanos I of Constantinople), which is sung at
the vespers of Christmas, portrays
without rival all of creation’s participation in the great event of the
divine Logos’ Incarnation through its offering: "What shall we offer
you, Christ; for you were seen on earth as a man for us? Every creature
made by you offers you thanks: The angels a hymn, the heavens a star,
the Magi their gifts, the shepherds their amazement, the earth a cave,
the wilderness a manger, and as for us men a virgin mother." The world
and man had a definite destiny as God’s creations, namely, to partake of
the goodness and glory of God, which is possible only through communion
with Him. After the suspension of the course leading to the fulfillment
of that destiny, all of creation, as well as mankind, groans as it
awaits its restoration. All groan because of their separation from one
another, which is due to their detachment from God. Five divisions
prevent the fulfillment of their destiny, according to Maximos the
Confessor. Man was the agent who had the obligation and ability to bridge the
divided elements so that the greatest union might be achieved – the
union of the created and the Uncreated. Since, however he did not
accomplish this, the Son of God came to realize it. He received human
nature which all of creation offered to Him (because it is part of
creation). According to the hymn above, all divisions are abolished by
the Incarnation – male and female no longer exist in the Nativity, the
world is identified with paradise before the Newborn, heaven and earth
participate harmoniously in the event, the tangible and the
intelligible cooperate, and the incarnate God embraces within Himself
the Uncreated and the created.
Source: From Partakers of God.
