It seems that Irenaeus, he certainly didn't have a comprehensive plan when he began of how he was going to do this whole treatise. In fact, I doubt very much that he expected to write five books as he finally did. But each time, I think he would begin to see a new point of view which would strengthen his arguments and then so he would go on. He'd begin to see a new approach or to see that there's something that he'd left undone. Some writings, for instance, of the New Testament that he had not yet used and that's what happens in Book 5. See, in Book 4, he's using a lot of the New Testament. In Book 5, he says, now I'd like to go on, having used the words of Jesus, I'd like to go on to the writings of Paul. But then the subject of the Resurrection emerges and that occupies most of Book 5, which supplies a very logical conclusion to Irenaeus' work because what he's really writing about is this whole taking recapitulation of the creation which finds its fullness in the Resurrection.

[01:10]

So there's more than meets the eye there. In other words, there's a theme which finally emerges, which has been the central core of his whole writing. So he himself is a practitioner of recapitulation, you see, just as he speaks of his pictures and of God's work as being in that form. Now, Book 4 has three parts. The first part is about the unity of the two Testaments, the Old Testament and the New Testament, proved by the words of Jesus that are fairly clear. The second part is about the Old Testament being a prophecy of the New Testament, that is, how the New Testament is sort of latent in the Old, so taking Old Testament passages. The third part is the parables of Jesus, largely, and how they strengthen, how they prove the unity of the two Testaments. So notice, at first, it's kind of retrospect, it's the clear words of Jesus looking back towards the Old Testament. Secondly, it's prospect, it's looking forward, from the Old Testament looking towards the

[02:16]

New. And finally, he takes the parables, which seem to be, for him, a kind of synthesis of the two. However, note that the Gnostics use the parables of the New Testament in their own way. Because a parable has two levels of meaning, the surface story, as it were – I'm seeing a parable in the kind of usual sense we use it, not in the accurate script, for instance. Because it has two levels of meaning, you can say that the spiritual interpretation of the thing is something which does not correspond with... It gives you an escape hatch, in other words, for finding another level in the scripture different from, and even contrary to, the ordinary theme of scripture, or the ordinary thrust or message of scripture. So that's what he gives his Gnostics of doing, is in taking a spiritual interpretation of those parables, which is contrary to the rest of the Word, which is contrary to the Logos. Okay, so all of those three parts of Book Four are concerned with the relationship between

[03:19]

the Old Testament and the New Testament. Now, this is an argumentative thing for Eroneous, but it's also a theological thing. It's a very important question, not only against the Gnostics, but even the interior structure of Revelation swings around this hinge between the Old Testament and the New Testament. We could go on forever talking about that. But what happens when Jesus comes into the world? He doesn't come into the world as if the Word had not been there before. He comes into the world which the Word has already come into, and in fact has set up a kind of resistance to itself, and has set up a kind of falsified Word, a kind of congealed Word, which is hardened and is unable to receive the full Word, the Word in its divinity. And so there's this... The tension that you really find in the New Testament is not between Jesus and simply unconverted pagans, is it? See, there's a drama of sin and repentance and salvation, which is touching, fundamental,

[04:20]

but it's not the conflict. I mean, that wouldn't have resulted in the death of Jesus, and the death of Jesus and his resurrection are the pivot around which everything swings. But the tension that produces the central drama of the New Testament is the tension between the Old and the New. But it's the tension between the Old Testament, conceived in a certain way, frozen in a certain way, appropriated by man and hardened, which has lost... It's in some way taken the Word of God and taken it away from God. It's the conflict between that and the living and true Word of the living God. So this is not just an argument of Irenaeus, this is kind of the hinge of all of theology. It's true of theology, it's true also of spirituality. Because if you look at our own interior conflicts, if you look at what's happening in us, the dialectic or the drama that's going on in us as we follow God and as we resist him, it's the same thing. It's the old man in us who really, though, is a Christian old man, or it's an old man

[05:26]

who claims to be a believer, versus the new man. It's the false spiritual self, or false Christian self, or false monastic self, versus the true. Now that false monastic or spiritual or Christian self is the scribe and the Pharisee and the high priest and the whole deal that Jesus runs into in the New Testament. So it's deeper than it looks. On this whole subject, in the exegesis of the Middle Ages, mostly of the Western Middle Ages, but not only, the one who has written most opiously about this is David Buck, in his four volumes of Exegesis Medieval, Medieval Exegesis, and part of it has been condensed in a much smaller book called Sources of Revelation, which we have in the library, which, when you read it at first, it seems like a very dull book, because the author is always saying one thing. And what he's saying is that the Old Testament contains the New Testament within it, and

[06:26]

that the New Testament is the fulfilment of the Old Testament. So it seems very heavy and repetitious, until you discover that this is a kind of initiation into reality. See, the scripture is always saying the same thing, too, and so our ear gets heavy, but actually that's what it's about. And so it's a matter not just of hearing that word and saying, okay, now I know, but of finding it, where it's happening, and discovering that the whole dialectic in ourselves is like that. So I won't say any more about that now. We'll see what we pick up from Irenaeus himself. Last time we looked at the preface to Book Four, which was on page 462, the number two of the preface, and then number four. And you remember the simple statement, or simple picture that Irenaeus is giving us is one that opens up to great vistas, and that is the creation of the human person by the two hands of God, the Word and the Spirit, and in the image of God, and the kind of Trinitarian

[07:31]

pattern that emerges there, which remains with Irenaeus throughout. Now, it's important for us to get a grasp, as well as we can, of Irenaeus. You can call it a very primitive, very simple, even anthropomorphic idea of the Trinity, but very important. And most of the ways of thinking about the Trinity later on in our theology do not have, I think, the totality, the, what would you call it, holism of Irenaeus. So let's keep that picture, it's precious. And he had to use it to fight people who were, the first people who were sort of making Christianity into a kind of spiritual balloon, so he anchored it down to earth, and in doing so, I think he pinned down, really, the foundations of the Christian thing, of Christian reality, which means the foundations of the earth. Now, the next text that we have there is Book 4, Chapters 5, 6, and 7. Now, this is a long text, and so we'll only be able to touch some spots in it.

[08:36]

I hope that you have read it. Chapter 5. And Irenaeus is always hammering at the same points, and that seems very dull, too, in a sense, because he's always saying, well, there's one God. Okay, we know there's one God, we say that in our creed, you know, we said it last Sunday and it stopped, you know, but he doesn't stop people, does he? And he says that there's one Christ. But, look at it from the other end, and see what it opens up to. See what he's really saying when he says that there's one God. Why was it that people were able to find their whole lives involved in a struggle like that? In some way, the idea, or the thought, was rooted in life, rooted in experience, and rooted in humanity much more than it is now. And we can throw ideas around in a kind of dispassionate way. Not so in those days. So, when they talked about it, it was a question of whether God was one or whether there was another God beyond him. That is an existential fact. We were talking about experience. So, you have to try to find it. Number 1. God, therefore, is one and the same. He rolls up the heavens as a book and renews the face of the earth.

[09:39]

Now, we begin to get into this language of the pedagogy of God. Remember his creation. His creation by the two hands, which keep a hold of what he has made. The hands keep teaching, keep constructing, keep drawing. It's by the same word and spirit that we're brought to our maturity. Who made the things of time for man. Man is a reason. Every person is a reason for this. So that, coming to maturity in them, he may produce the fruit of immortality. Sounds like the fruit of immortality is something that comes out from within us, doesn't it? Indeed, I think it is. Remember the parable of the virgins and the oil lamps and so on. And who, through his kindness, also bestows upon him eternal things. So, this pattern of the things of time and then the things of eternity. And somehow, within the things of time, we're trained for the things of eternity. As a child. Remember 1 Corinthians 15. It's important. When I was a child. But he had to be a child first. He had to live among the things of a child before he could be a man.

[10:42]

Who was announced the same God. Who was announced by the law and the prophets whom Christ confessed as his father. Now, he is the creator and he it is who is God over all. Now, here's one of those places where you read Irenaeus and he's saying one thing on the surface. And then these images are moving underneath. And they come close to the surface now. Now, here's one where the quotation that he makes is significant. In other words, he's writing on more than one level. As Isaiah said, I am witness, saith the Lord God, of my servant whom I have chosen, that you may know and believe and understand that I am. Now, the servant there, I suppose, is the prophet. But, the servant ultimately. What chapter of Isaiah is that? Yeah, that's Isaiah 43. That's one of the servant poems. That's good. That you may know and believe and understand that I am. Now, this ordinarily would make us think of another passage in Exodus 3 where God appears to Moses in a burning bush and says, I am, I am who he is.

[11:50]

And that second reference, I think, is present in Irenaeus' mind because it will come out as an extra third and a fourth as he goes on. So, he really weaves with these things. It's not just one level, it's just one colour. And the statement, I am, that is somehow the statement of the knowledge of God. For neither an ambitious, nor an arrogant, nor boastful man are you. He's not just bragging. Sometimes it can sound like that in the Prophet Isaiah. It's not what God has found in his chest. Since it was impossible without God to come to a knowledge of God, he teaches men through his word to know God. He's saying these things. He's using that word, that pronoun, I, so strongly in Isaiah. And already in Exodus. So they will know it. He has to shout. So, no good imagining another father who says, you err not knowing the scriptures nor the power of God. And there's a beautiful sequence here where he goes on. Then he skips to the New Testament where Jesus is in this argument with the Sadducees,

[12:52]

who say there's no resurrection. And that's what Jesus says to them. They don't know the scriptures nor the power of God. Now, behind that passage is the passage of Moses at the burning bush, in Exodus 3. It's not Isaiah that's behind that. Did both indicate a resurrection and reveal God, saying to them, you err not knowing the scriptures nor the power of God. There are two things there, the resurrection and the revelation of God. And somehow they relate to those other two things. The power of God and the resurrection. The scriptures and the knowledge of God. The scriptures and the manifestation of God through his word. He is not the God of the dead but of the living, for all live to him. He who spoke to Moses out of the bush and declared himself to be the God of the fathers, he is the God of the living. For who is the God of the living unless he who is God and above whom there is no other God? Then he quotes Daniel. He is the living God. He then who was adored by the prophets is the living God. He is the God of the living. And his word is he who also spoke to Moses.

[13:53]

So it was the word that spoke to Moses. It was the word that appeared to Moses. It's always the word. In the Old Testament, according to our knowledge, it manifests God. And yet it uses that word I. The word uses the word I. I am. Who put the Sadducees to silence who also bestowed the gift of resurrection. Our Lord is himself the resurrection. As he does himself declare, I am the resurrection and the life. I am. But the fathers are his children. That's the scoop of our knowledge. We'll see it afterwards. He does the same thing to Abraham. Abraham seeing the day of Christ and rejoicing. There's a backward movement in history through the word. Christ himself therefore together with the father is the God of the living who spoke to Moses and who is also manifested to the fathers. Now he's got this thing about your father Abraham rejoiced that he should see my head.

[14:54]

The day of Abraham and the fire in the bush and the light that Irenaeus is continually talking about. There's a kind of harmony and consistency in the very imagery that he uses. And he uses very often the image of light and sometimes of fire. And when he's speaking of the living God, there's a weaving in between what he's saying in the concepts and what he's saying with his images. And then that passage that I read to you on Sunday. Having left his earthly tender, this is up on top of it. He followed the word of God walking as a pilgrim with the word that he might afterwards have as a goad with the word. It's as if nobody knows God except in knowing the word in the Old Testament. And the word is a lot more than word for them. The word is experienced in all these different ways. The apostles also followed the word. For in Abraham man had learned beforehand and had been accustomed to follow the word of God. Chapter six.

[15:56]

The Lord revealing himself to his disciples that he himself is the word who imparts knowledge of the Father. And says that Jews claimed and imagined they had the knowledge of God while they rejected his word that came in person. And that's somehow the pattern. That's what happens to us. Word is a funny thing, because a word can be not what the reality is. What happens? We appropriate the word. We appropriate the level of word. And then the word comes along in the reality and we reject it. And that's the kind of irony of life, of Christian life, of the servants of God and the people who believe in him. And that's the dynamic also of the Old Testament. Then they use this passage of Matthew, the famous words of Jesus. Nobody knows the Father except the Son and nobody knows the Son except the Father. But the way the Gnostics interpret it is this. Therefore nobody knew the Father, the true Father, before Jesus came into the flesh.

[17:03]

You see how they get a second meaning in it. A spiritual meaning to disown the Creator. They say that nobody knew God until the Incarnation. So they split the Father from the Son, as it were. They split the Creator from the Son. The old dispensation from the new dispensation. They explain it as if the true God were known to none prior to our Lord's advent. And that God who was announced by the prophets, they elect not to be the Father of Christ. But if Christ could then only begin to have existence when he came into the world as man. And then he begins to joke. And if the Father only remembered in the times of Tiberius Caesar to provide for the wants of men. Which is irony. God forgot everybody until just before Christmas. And if his word was shown not to have always coexisted with his creatures. Then the thing to explain is how God could be so forgetful.

[18:04]

Not to be with another God. That's right. He says it here and then it comes out a little more clearly later on. That the word is always there. Somehow the word too, and this is one of the most powerful things that I've found in here. The word speaks through the creation itself. In other words, what you know in the creation itself is the word. And somehow everything lives by the word, even things that don't have reason. We'll get to that later on. Very mysterious thing. Everything lives by the knowledge of God. Even things that we don't think know him. Because what's created is a manifestation of God. In other words, that vision, manifestation, word, thinking of God is very deep. A Trinitarian thinking. Justin Wells says, I would not have believed the Lord himself if he had announced any other God

[19:13]

than he who is our framer, maker and nourisher. Have you heard any other statements like that? Somebody will say, well, if I had to choose between truth and Christ, I'd choose the truth. Something like that. That's a statement which really staggers us. Or Teilhard said at one point, I have two loves now, Christ and the world. And then at one point he said, he had one basic love and one really fundamental love, and that was for the world. But how could he say that possibly and still be a Christian? And then he was a perfect Christian. It's related to what Father Elroy was talking about this morning. Do you want a Christ who somehow exempts you from the reality which you don't? In other words, who presents a whole different ballgame to you. Do you want a Christ who liberates you from what exists? Or do you want a Christ who brings you through what exists? Do you want a Christ who frees you from all of the other reality that's around? Or a Christ who somehow gives you the key to living that reality,

[20:16]

so as to become fully yourself? So it's somehow to include all things within yourself, as he does. That's the fundamental question. Which is connected with this question of the mind. Why worry about the mind? Well, the Logos is the knowledge of God, is the thought of God, is, as Ignatius says, the mind of God. And somehow he's going to stretch our mind. It's not only our feelings we're going to get stretched, it's our mind. And if we don't work hard with that mind of God, not maybe with a lot of ideas in it, not with a complicated track, maybe a little complicated, not necessarily, then our faculty, our organs, sort of, for knowing the Word, the Logos, and for knowing God, will atrophy. And then we're gradually going to test our mind. Not to sleep, no. Not the written test, not the oral test, but the existential test. St. Thomas More. I would not have believed the Lord himself if he had announced any other than he was our frame, our maker, our nourisher.

[21:21]

What is that that we're talking about, though? What is it to the person? Well, make a person feel that. As a demand for wholeness, a demand for human wholeness, he's not going to settle for living in a corner of himself, or for believing in a God who permits him somehow to live in a corner of his own being, or makes him live in a corner of reality. The Word of God, what is produced by God, the witness for God, must conform somehow to the totality of reality. It's kind of a Catholic conviction. Summing up his own handiwork in himself, my faith towards him is steadfast, and my love to the Father immovable. You see the kind of reaches of those lines that come through this very simple point that he keeps insisting on. How is it that when you confess what's in a creed, that you somehow state everything? Why is it that when you somehow confess your faith in the three persons of the Trinity,

[22:25]

in this very simple work of salvation, that you practically align yourself with all of reality? That you are somehow subscribed to everything that can be known, to all truth. It's a convergence of all these lines coming together. Now, number three. No one can know the Father unless through the Word of God, that is, unless by the Son revealing Him. Neither can he have knowledge of the Father unless through the good pleasure of the Father. The Son performs the good pleasure of the Father, for the Father sends and the Son is sent and comes. And yet, I believe that he believes that a lot of people know the Father, but they might not think they know the Father, and they know Him through the Word. They might not think that they know the Word. We'll see how that comes out later on. Wherefore, the Son reveals the knowledge of the Father through His own manifestation. For the manifestation of the Son is the knowledge of the Father.

[23:27]

It sounds again like a redundancy, but look at it closely. It's in these very simple statements sometimes that there's a great deal of wisdom, and they seem to be like a word doubling back on itself. We'll have to look at them long and hard until they open up for us. The manifestation of the Son is the knowledge of the Father. For all things are manifested through the Word. Now, there are a couple of other phrases that Ernest has that we're going to come into pretty soon, which reflect that and which make it a little easier to grasp. We'll turn towards the end of number four. For the Lord taught us that no man is capable of knowing God unless he be taught of God. That is, that God cannot be known without God. Another silly assignment statement, but he's going to elaborate on that too. But that this is the express will of the Father, that God should be known. God wants to be known. And that's why He revealed Himself through the Son. The Father, therefore, has revealed Himself to all by making His Word visible to all.

[24:34]

Strangely, He used the word visible. And conversely, the Word has declared to all, the Father and the Son, since He has become visible to all. The Word at first was heard, and then the Word became visible. I hadn't thought about that before, but that's what happens in the Incarnation. The Word is heard, and then the Word becomes visible. And then something else happens afterwards, a third condition. Very nice to talk about His Word. Now, number six, which is pretty dense and pretty important. On the top of 469. For by means of the creation itself, the Word reveals God the Creator. So the Word somehow is the principle of intelligibility in the creation itself. And you remember how St. Paul said that those who don't believe in God are not hearing and not seeing what's already before them.

[25:36]

For God has revealed Himself to all. What does he say? The power and His divinity by the things that are made, by the things that are visible. By means of the world, the Lord is declared the Maker of the world. And by means of the formation of man, the artifice of a maiden. And by the Son, that Father who begot the Son. Once again, there's a series. He loves these sequences. And this is part of a larger one. And these things will indeed address all men in the same manner. But all do not in the same way believe Him. And he's talking about all who have heard the Word of Christ because he talked about the Incarnation. His second phase. By the Law and the Prophets did the Word preach both Himself and the Father alike. Through the Word Himself, third phase, who had been made visible and palpable, the first of all, John, to be the name, was the Father shown forth. Although all did not equally believe in Him, but all saw the Father and the Son. For the Father is the invisible of the Son,

[26:38]

but the Son the visible of the Father. Now, that's the statement that I said was going to clarify the other one about the manifestation of the Son, the knowledge of the Father. The Father is the invisible of the Son, but the Son the visible of the Father. That's a magnificent statement. So the Father and the Son are one. And what is it that distinguishes the Father from the Son? And this is a deep metaphysical statement. What is it that distinguishes the Father from the Son as far as we're concerned? Aside from the fact that the Father is ungenerated and the Son is generated. The Son is the manifestation of the Father and it is the same. Amen.

[27:45]

And for this reason, all spoke with Christ and were always present upon earth and they named Him God. Even the demons. It depends on which of the gospels you read. All these different witnesses. And even those principles which are hostile or contrary to somehow confess the Word of God involuntarily. It happens a number of times in the New Testament where the demon is present. Once also with Saint Paul and his companion, a girl who loves the demon and the demon came out. There was a foretelling or something. These are servants of the Most High God, isn't it? It's strange. And the demons had come up to Jesus and possessed Him and said, You are the Holy One of God. He received testimony This is down at the bottom of the left hand column. He received testimony from all that He was very man, true man and He was true God from the Father, from creation itself, from man, from apostate spirits

[28:52]

and demons, from the enemy and last of all from death itself which had to, as it were, spit Him out which had to be recapitulated itself. So is there some other witness? Death witness too. Except by Saint Henry. I don't know. Lazarus too. Lazarus and then himself. As if death had to respond to his word, to his command. See, this is the recapitulation pattern of what herein is. Again, manifesting itself in another form, another vermin, through a series of witnesses. You know, you've got a series of covenants, a series of revelations, a series of witnesses, a series of blessings, all of these things. For the Son is the knowledge of the Father but the knowledge of the Son is in the Father and has been revealed through the Son. Another one of those statements. But the most trenchant expression is that Greek is fine.

[29:53]

The Son is the visible of the Father and the Father the invisible of the Son. Translation implies that a word has already been spoken which is then put into other words. You know. And it's true but when Irenaeus says visible and invisible I think it cuts deeper. You can say that a theologian translates the word, or translates God, or takes one language to another. But that translation doesn't leave enough room for the mystery in a sense. Because the word is already evident somewhere there when you start. But here you have this vast mystery which then is made visible and manifested or expressed through the Son.

[30:55]

So it wasn't with reference to the future alone that Jesus spoke these words in Matthew 11. It applies indifferently throughout all time. For the Son being present with his own handiwork from the beginning reveals the Father to all. So, Romeo, this is what you were saying. This is another expression. The word is always speaking to humanity. To whom he wills and when he wills and as the Father wills. Therefore then in all things and through all things there is one God, the Father, and one word, and one Son, and one Spirit, and one salvation to all who believe in him. Now this thing about does God reveal himself to say non-Jews or non-Christians is very strongly implicit in what Nehemiah is saying. He doesn't talk about it but it's implicit because in some way he's going to say God reveals himself even to through the word even to things which have no reason. He means that all of creation is a revelation in some way. That every creature depends somehow on the vision of God and the knowledge of God. It's going to come up later.

[31:57]

And it brings us back into that metaphysics of the visible of the Father and the invisible of the Father. We're just looking at a mystery but it's a really deep thing. Yes. But the pagans have sinned because they didn't recognize God. They refused to recognize God in one way or another. So that was a word. Creation bore a word for them which they refused to hear. It contained within it some kind of obligation a positive word They should have glorified what they saw in creation. Okay. Irenaeus is not talking about that. He's not putting any burden on the pagans as it were on the Gentiles. It's because it's already

[33:00]

it's the only place we can go. It's not only it's the only place creation can go. I'm not sure it's anything you can prove from outside itself. That's something that a person has to convince himself of. That being itself demands it's God in some way. Or that creation or life or humanity itself is a question that demands that answer. And once the answer is somehow available in tradition it seems that man is obliged to accept it. To relate himself to that truth in the best way that it's offered to him which differs in various traditions. And it may be very obscured in some tradition. Anyway, one has to keep going Irenaeus' basic prediction of the world and tries to steal

[34:01]

from it. This is right but particularly somehow this accessibility is very dark for Irenaeus. And it means also that he's got a very much stronger perception of the vestiges of the creation than he does of the reality. What does that tell you? I think it's I don't know what it follows. It doesn't follow the logic anymore but I think it follows the experience that vestiges of God in the art of fire and so on. So

[35:02]

it seems that there are very many people who believe in some sort of enlightenment who believe in some sort of enlightenment. Yes. And why it can be obligatory I don't know. If Irenaeus were asked that question he might say God has spoken to me in other words there's a word there that he's saying actually that the human person is never abandoned by God is never left bereft of God he never abandons his handiwork and so he's always revealing himself to us. Now with that revelation we can call it an obligation

[36:02]

that's not the best word for it. But in a sense he's always showing himself to us in some way so that we may receive his salvation. That's his thesis. And I think it's that of St. Paul too. There's always a presence there's always a word there's always a revelation and therefore his hand is always extended. And the other angle of it is that we have no place else to go. If he did abandon man then after this life there would be nowhere for him to go. I think it's also related to my research. It doesn't have to be said that every living person exists and actually experiences this pleasure. But I think anyone who has any kind of time would need a long period of post-mortem. People are very acutely responsible to spend time in this holy place. You would be very impressed

[37:03]

by that that you would be able to be certain when they are placed before a yes or a no time to be healed. It's very hard to say. And it seems to be that people get it at certain unexpected moments several times in their life. And of course you can actually be fairly conscious of deadness whether you are relieved or not of deadness by the way you use your mind to [...] hear in voices as they do in real life. See, I think that's one of the main aspects of the mind that happens to people when they are in this thing of the mind which says that I can then find this commitment which I believe in but especially in the mind it seems to me that there are these arguments to be made and I think a lot of people today feel that in a certain way. Yes, I think

[38:03]

in the terms in which we are facing this is of course complicated and let's say obviously one of the problems with one of the things defined as that of the mind was exactly how to explain to other people and I thank you for that because it is certainly not the case in any kind of organised set of arguments you see I don't think I think it's an argument in much of what the poetics is the argument is much more like a poem Well couldn't it be also like they were speaking out about the consequences in which it seemed they were yes I think they were certainly speaking in much more rationalistic terms in this way because people have all the scriptures there and people don't really argue about that I don't think on the previous page in section five I was paralleling Augustine about

[39:04]

this being some uncharitable and so on and you'll know how Augustine some of his metaphors it's very significant to us to use to explain a line out of virtue that was drawn by those sorts of things which aren't there's such things which all people have said that this is not always in my argument that something that can be confused and put under pressure let's say I suppose you can only say something you can only well I didn't see this as persuasive you might sometimes try to say well now you're right on particular meaning also what I feel is going on here is that churches approach answering today to

[40:31]

of faith especially to allow the community to have this word deep in the person's mind and for some people it may take them 5 years the problem today is a lot of still under to get something through the process in one year we still feel that pressure because I feel they have a sense of being loosed you know they may go to another destination but what I feel is going on is exactly the tremendous responsibility of the word upon the whole community people always say go to a priest and find out what happened we get this extra problem when people have already been somehow rendered impermeable to the word because they live in a Christian tradition which is no

[41:31]

longer Christian where the word has become a dead husk in such a way that it bounces off of the word that's really where the problem of atheism comes up because you can say the belief in God is natural to the human person but then we have to say what do you mean by God and when we define God in a certain way we are already communicating ourself along with it and that may not be acceptable so I think also probably what Sir was just saying goes along with what I see in the story of my crusading yesterday about the academic advances in my services how long did it take to get sorted is what I think about today so if I work any harder is what I think about 20 years if I give all my energy to get all done without stopping at all this I need to do and so the story works on this kind

[42:32]

of way in other ways it is the exact reverse so what Jack does in the industry is learn up in the master's face and then eventually he gets hit on the head by the sword first of all so he becomes a master in about four or five years of course he's not a canon of course I'm sorry that seems a little I think it is quite relevant to the sort of thing we're talking about isn't it he's writing a work which he's writing which about in other chapters of human beings he wants wrong answer though he wants the right

[43:32]

answer This is about starting the, going through the Old Testament with Abraham, knowing already the day of Christ, knowing already the day of Jesus, and he rejoiced, and Simeon also. Notice this theme of vision coming throughout, because he was going to see the day, he was going to see the daylight of the Lord, of the Word. And Simeon says, well my eyes have seen the revelation of the Lord, a light, the revelation of the Lord, and the angels, and the rejoicing of Abraham descends upon those who sprang from him. Well, on the other hand, there was a reciprocal rejoicing that passed backwards from the children to Abraham. So, when he rejoiced to see the day of the Lord, that was kind of washing back of this joy of the coming of the day of the Lord and Jesus. Number two. For not only upon Abraham's account did he say these things, but also that he might point out how all who have known God from the beginning, and have foretold the advent of Christ, have

[44:33]

received the revelation of the Son himself. So they all knew Christ, they all knew it, and they knew of his coming through himself in some way. See, this Trinitarian theology here in Isis is very deep, so that whatever you know, you know in the Word, especially if you know about the coming of the Word. You know it because you know the Word. Jesus did this business about raising up children unto Abraham out of stones. Now, this Jesus did by drawing us off from the religion of stones, and bringing us over from hard and fruitless cogitations, and establishing in us a faith like to Abraham. Now, there again, in a very simple, kind of crude way, you have this dialectic between the Old and the New, between the Old Testament and the New Testament, which is a thing that's not just out there or back there, but which is in our own life. Drawing us over from hard and fruitless cogitations, to a kind of a living Word, a living Word, which is like a heart, the center of things, and also contains things. Neither without the good will of the Father, nor without the agency of the Son, can any

[45:40]

man know God. Wherefore did the Lord say to his disciples, I am the way, the truth, and the life, and no man comes to the Father but by me. Okay, so much for that text. Chapter 14, I have something, but that's not on your list, so let's keep that one open. Our next text on our list is chapter 20, pages 487 to 492. This is a long text, but it's a central one, so we have to give it some attention. It starts on 487. Chapter 20, that one God formed all things in the world by means of the Word and the Holy Spirit. All these variations on the same theme, that there's one God, that his work is one.

[46:42]

And although he is invisible and incomprehensible in this world, nevertheless he is not unknown. His works declare him, and his word is shown, that he may be seen and known. It's the same theme. Now he makes a distinction between knowing God according to his greatness and knowing God according to his love. The language may not immediately, you see what he means. You can't know God by your own power, and you can't know him as a work, according to his greatness, not your greatness, but you can know him by the way of love. You can't know him by the way of greatness, you can know him by the way of love. And yet we know his greatness, but we only know it because it manifests itself to him in his love. And in his love, which somehow contacts the point of love in ourselves, so that our knowledge in some way is centered on love. As they say, we only know him, God only knows him. Our knowledge has to be knowledge of love. It's not the other kind of knowledge, the kind of knowledge of power. Even though St. Paul would say he's known by his power and his divinity and his creation. It's not possible to know God with regards to his greatness, but with regards to his

[47:52]

love. ...group words or group or something like that. Because he uses very simple terms, he's got all these resonances in it. He uses several layers of meaning. He picks the words up with a lot of, he picks up a plant with a lot of earth still on its roots and things like that. It was not angels therefore who made us nor who formed us, neither had angels power to make an image of God. Angels could not make an image of God. Here again is that logic, not only of salvation here, but of creation from the Father. God, only God can make his own image. Because the making of that image is of an intimacy far beyond just a photograph, far beyond some kind of manufacture. Nor anyone else except the word of the Lord nor any power remotely distant from the Father of all things. As if he did not possess his own hands, for with him were always present the word and

[48:54]

wisdom, the Son and the Spirit, and the Spirit's wisdom for him, by whom and in whom freely and spontaneously he made all things, to whom also he speaks saying, let us make man after our image and likeness. Now if he says that, remember, let us make man after our image and likeness, it begins to suggest an image of the word spirit, duality in man, which he doesn't go into further. Well, he does when he talks about the image and likeness, because when he makes man in his image, he's making him after the word. When he makes him in his likeness, he's making him after the spirit. He taking from himself the substance of the creatures formed and the pattern of things made and the type of all the adornments in the world. Taking it from himself. We interpret that creation out of nothing. It says this in terms of creation, but no, it isn't. Because if nothing is nothing, you can't create anything out of nothing. Towards the end of number three.

[49:59]

Reason. A long sentence. No one is able, either in heaven or on earth or under the earth, to open the book of the Father, this is in Revelation, to behold him with the exception of the Lamb, because remember the Lamb is the word. It's unheard of, the word in the book. Who was slain and who reinduced with his own blood, receiving power over all things from the same God, who made all things by the word and adorned them by his wisdom. Notice the kind of succession there in word and wisdom. He made all things by his word, but the adornment seems to go beyond the making, as later with the image and likeness, when the word was made flesh. But even as the word of God had the sovereignty in the heavens, so he might also have sovereignty on earth. He himself being made the first begotten of the dead, and that all things, as I've already said, might behold their king. Is it all things? Now, imagine the original, I've backed up, I didn't look it up, but this is important later on. Because it gives a revelation to every creature, to all things, not just to all things. And that the paternal light might meet with and rest upon the flesh of our Lord.

[51:10]

The paternal light is a magnificent expression. Remember, light is the spirit, light is the word, light is a paternal light to us, as if there were three lights in one. That the paternal light might meet with and rest upon the flesh of our Lord and come to us from his resplendent flesh. Seeing the light of the Father upon the flesh of Christ, so we recognize him as king. And that thus man might attain to immortality, having been invested with the paternal light, because the paternal light that we see from the vision of God that gives us immortality. Immortality is conferred through seeing, through seeing God. I think we've lost our sense of the richness and the depth of that word, of immortality of creation. I guess it's only when we have a deep sense of mortality that we can see what's a complete immortality. Also sometimes it's a kind of a pregnancy, an extreme immortality. Not so much when we're young. Number three. I've also largely demonstrated that the word, namely the Son, was always with the Father,

[52:12]

and that wisdom also, the spirit, which is the spirit, is present with him until ritual creation. Number four. There is therefore one God, who by the word and wisdom created and arranged all things. But this is the creator, the demigod. The demigod is not of the Father. As regards his greatness, he is indeed unknown to all the earth and made by him. As regards his love, he is always known through him by him, which means he ordained all things. Now this is his word, our Lord Jesus Christ, who in the last time has made a man among men, that he might join the end to the beginning, that is man to God. Join the end to the beginning. He sees man as somehow the end of God's work, the end of his creation. This, indeed, brought back to the beginning, recapitulates all things. It's as if the end recapitulates everything in itself, and then when the end is brought back to the beginning, all things are one. Wherefore the prophets, receiving a prophetic gift from the same word, announced his advent

[53:13]

according to the flesh, by which the blending and communion of God and man took place, according to the good pleasure of the Father, that's in the incarnation. The word of God foretelling from the beginning that God should be seen by men and hold converse with them upon earth, and that, you know, recalls Genesis where God worked with, walked with Adam and Eve and God and talked with them. But then it refers to Jesus walking with men and conversing with them, should confer with him and should be present with his own creation, saving it and becoming capable of being perceived by it, and freeing us from the hands of all that hate us. Now, in this also there's a notion that aside from what happened before the incarnation, this carries on to us. So there's this notion of the word always being with you in a personal living form. In other words, aside from even reading the words of scripture, that the word is always with you, speaking to you, because the word is speech, the word is manifestation, the word is revelation. And therefore the word is also presence.

[54:15]

And the idea that that's already there, like the pressure that was mentioned. Maybe a pressure may also become a want, or an expansion. But the word is always with us, as if we're walking with it. In order that man, having embraced the Spirit of God, might pass into the glory of the Father. Now, the relation of spirit and glory in Irenaeus is very mysterious, but somehow the continuity which carries us into the Father and into glory is the body that's contained in the spirit. Another person might have said faith, but he talks more about bearing the spirit than he does about walking in faith, except when he talks about living. Now, down in, this is a very long chapter. It's down in number five, in the middle of, in the middle of page 489 in the left-hand column. For man does not see God by his own power, but when he pleases, when God pleases, he is

[55:18]

seen by men, by whom he wills and when he wills and as he wills. Having been seen at that time prophetically through the Spirit, adoptively through the Son, he shall also be seen paternally in the kingdom of heaven. So in the Old Testament, he was seen prophetically through his spirit, also through the word of the number. So he alternates back and forth between word and spirit. But notice that he assigns three stages according to the persons of the Trinity. First comes the spirit. In another verse he says that the spirit draws us to the word, draws us to his Son, and the Son draws us to the Father. Here he's known prophetically through the spirit. Now, prophetically, of course, the prophecy is the prophecy of the coming of the Son and of his word. Adoptively through the Son. Now, I think that doesn't just mean in the New Testament, that as the people recognize Jesus in the New Testament, it means, I believe, in being in him, being begotten sons of God,

[56:20]

as John says in the Koran, through those who believe in him after his incarnation. This is the second phase. And the third phase is glory. He shall also be seen paternally in the kingdom of heaven. Now, remember the paternal life. Okay, so that's the last stage. The spirit truly preparing man in the Son of God, and the Son leading him to the Father, while the Father too confers upon him incorruption for eternal life, which comes to everyone from the fact of his healing breath. So there's this thread of vision that runs throughout the whole thing. He's talked about it as education in another place, or as formation. And the fact that he's molding you now, that's going to come up again. He's molding you with his hands. He's educating you, training you, leading you. And now you're seeing him throughout, but you see him in different ways as you go on. So he uses each of the senses to express the fullness and the intimacy of his relationship

[57:20]

with God. And this notion of vision is a very powerful one. Now, for that I refer you to Lasky, who has put all the text together in this book that I've found, which I've found on there. Let's just finish this part here real quickly today. The spirit truly preparing man in the Son of God, the Son leading him in the Son is curious. I didn't look in the... I didn't look in the original. In the Son of God, the Son leading him to the Father, where the Father confers his corruption. For those who see the light are within the light, and partake of its brilliancy. Remember the other Eastern authors of that too. The Leviticus, Metallius, and so on. Lasky has gone off this whole tradition. Right down to the... The Hesychus and Thymus. For those who see the light are within the light, and partake of its brilliancy.

[58:23]

The notion of participation, that's a key expression. And here, notice, that's one kind of philosophical word that he doesn't use anymore. For those who see God are in God, and receive of his splendor. Notice how vision is knowing, and knowing is life. Once again, it's a unitary notion. And behind that oneness of life, and seeing, and knowing, is also a unitary pattern. He doesn't try to be precise in the lines between the work of the word and the person. His splendor divifies them. Now splendor and glory are the same thing, of course. That's that paternal life. His splendor divifies them. Those, therefore, who see God do receive life. And for this reason he, beyond comprehension, boundless and invisible, rendered himself visible and comprehensible within the capacity of those who believe. And he might divify those who receive, and reward them through faith,

[59:27]

until they receive faith. That's adoptively. But also, since it's adoptively, it means the life of God is in him. It is not possible to live apart from life. And the means of life is found in fellowship with God. But fellowship with God is to know God, and to enjoy his goodness. Sounds very much like Saint John. Okay, I think that's enough for today. But one thing I want to point out, maybe you've been here. We talked about it before. But this is this business of the whole creation, everything that exists, everything that lives, living through the knowledge of God in some way, through the manifestation of God. Because the creation itself is a manifestation of God. So, if a lizard lives by eating flies, somehow he's living by the manifestation of God, because the creation itself is a manifestation of God. That's a miserable thing.

[60:27]

But, you see what I mean? Everything right down to the bottom is part of this theology of vision. Part of this theology of the manifestation of God, of the knowledge of God. So you see the depth in which he really believes in that. That logos. The depth in which he believes in that. He's able to build a whole metaphysics on it. Without talking philosophical terms at all. This is over in number six. Where all things learn through his words that there is one God, the Father, who contains all things and who grants existence to all. Now, that's not all people, all human beings, but all things. And then later on, up at the top of page 490 on the left-hand column. For the glory of God is a living man, and the life of man consists in beholding God. For if the manifestation of God, which is made by means of the creation, affords life to all living in the world, that means to everything that lives, much more does that revelation of the Father, which comes through the words of life to those who see God.

[61:29]

That's marvelous. Nobody has ever put the Christian revelation together with so much, as it were, compression, as there are many, as it were. Mold it together. Because it is that way, you know. And find the simple, earth-like unity of all of its parts. Now, he doesn't say anything about the Eucharist here, does he? But you see how the Eucharist fits into this? Jesus has the bread of life, who is the bread of life by revealing the Father, then the bread of life by giving himself to us in the sacrament. But the word and the sacramentality are based upon this, somehow, ontology of manifestation of God, by which everything lives by the manifestation of God. And everything somehow is the manifestation of God. He's very rich. So, maybe we'll come back and just touch that next time when we go on. Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit,

[62:37]

as it was in the beginning, as it is now, and to the future, and to the world, and to heaven. There's one article in the Summa Contra Gentilis, I think, that talks about participation in the work we are doing in the Garden. Everything exists and lives by participation. I'm going to have to find that. Do you want to go on? Oh, you want to go on. I've got a lot more questions.

[63:03]

@Text_v004
@Score_JJ