Expositio super symbolum Apostolorum

And in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord.

Just as the first article pertains to the Father, so the second pertains to the Son. And just as the first was composed by Peter, so the second was composed by his companion Paul. He says therefore:

And in Jesus.

Jesus in Hebrew, soter in Greek, saluator in Latin. This name fits the Son insofar as he is God, because by divine authority he saved the world. It also suggests human nature, by whose ministry he accomplished the mystery of our redemption. It follows:

Christ.

Christ in Greek, Messiah in Hebrew, anointed in Latin. This is appropriated to him, although elsewhere this name "Christ" is used as an adjective and an appellative. Hence in the Old Testament kings and priests were called "christs," that is, anointed ones, because they alone were anointed. But this name Christ was given to him from an event, and thus it is his surname, because he was anointed with the oil of gladness above his companions.¹ Hence he was not always called Christ, but from the point at which, according to his human nature, he was anointed, just as Scipio was not called Africanus from his birth but after he came to Africa.

Since, then, in these two names two natures of Christ are understood, the heresy of Eutyches is confounded, who taught that Christ was not of diverse natures but of one nature in which two were confused, the divine and the human, neither the divine truly divine nor the human truly human, but made one out of the mixture of the two. Just as mead is a mixture of water and honey, and yet the water there is not water, nor is the honey honey, but from both mead is made. It follows:

His only Son,

namely of the Father, of whom it was said "I believe in God the Father." Christ is called God's only Son against the view of those who said that the faithful are sons of God by the same reasoning as Christ, namely by adoption, not by the truth of nature. Hence they also said: what dignity does Christ claim for himself above other men in being the Son of God, when we too, by the same reasoning, can be sons of God if we wish?

But he himself is the only Son of God by the truth of nature, others by the bestowal of grace, and therefore he himself is our Lord, because he himself is full of grace and truth,² and of his fullness we have all received.³ He is also spiritually our Lord and God, namely of the faithful, of whom he is God not only through creation but also through re-creation. Hence it is added:

Our Lord.

Into this article the second article of the Nicene Creed is reduced, which, as has been said, was composed for three reasons: for supplementing, for expounding, for weakening heresies. Hence it says And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, which is what is said in the aforesaid article, "And in Jesus Christ." And to show from whom he was born, it follows, And born of the Father. And lest it be believed that he was born of the Father in time, as Arius falsely taught, who said he had his origin in the beginning of time so that all things might be made in him, it follows, Before all ages, that is, eternally, so that through this reaching back before time we might understand eternity, and so that his true and natural birth might be understood, in which what is begotten is properly of the same nature as the begetter.

It follows, God from God, light from light, true God from true God. What follows is inculcated for a greater expression of his true birth, especially against Arius, who denied that Christ was the true Son of God, whose heresy flourished greatly in the early church. To weaken it, the early fathers said many things by way of insistence. Hence it follows, Begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father. This too is said against Arius, who taught that the Son of God was made by the Father, not begotten, and that, because begotten of the Father, he is therefore consubstantial with the Father.

Note that this preposition "con-," which is a conjoining one, denotes not the identity of substance nor mere conformity, just as the pronoun "same" denotes identity, when it is said the Son is consubstantial with the Father, that is, of the same singular nature with the Father; but it denotes conformity when it is said the Son is consubstantial with his mother.

Hence John Damascene says that Christ is homoousios with the Father and homoousios with his mother, that is, of one substance with the Father and with the mother, and because he is consubstantial with the Father. Because by authority all things are from the Father, the same things are also from the Son, and so it follows, Through whom all things were made. Here too the error of the Manichean is confounded, who taught that only invisible things were from Christ, not visible ones. The error of certain others is also refuted, who say that good actions are from Christ but not bad ones, even insofar as they exist, whereas Saint Augustine says: God makes it so that men do the things that do not fit together, but they themselves make it so that the things they do do not fit together.

Likewise an authority says, on that passage of the Song of Songs, "Let him kiss me with the kiss of his mouth"⁴: every motion is from God, but the use he makes of it is from man. Likewise an authority says: all things, insofar as they exist, are good. Augustine says: every property, every structure, is from God.

And note that the things contained from that place, "And in one Lord," up to this place, are enclosed under one article according to the aforesaid rule, because all these things so cohere with one another that one is understood in the other. For they all pertain to one condition of the Son, that is, to his eternal generation.