The Great Commentary of Cornelius a Lapide: the First Epistle of S. John
But it may be asked, (1.) why does S. John call the Son, the Word ? 1st, Because both in his Gospel and Epistle he refers to that beginning which Moses speaks of. 2d, Because the Word Who is in the bosom of the Father has all wisdom. And this wisdom S. John sets forth, dwelling more on Christ’s teaching and doctrine, while the other evangelists dwell more on what He did. He therefore calls Christ the Word, because he purposes to recount the sayings of this “Word.” 3d, If he had called Him the Son, they might have imagined Him to be of a bodily and passible nature. But the “ Word ” signifies that His generation was not human but spiritual and divine, and consequently pure, perfect, and incorruptible, generated by the Divine mind as a word is generated in our mind. 4th, Because the “ Word ” signifies the mental conception of God the Father, and this is the generation of the Son, who represents and sets forth the wisdom and will of the Father, as a word would do. And this too is the very reason why the Son, and not the Father or the Holy Spirit, was incarnate, because the Incarnation took place in order to manifest God to man. But it is by a word that anything is manifested. And as the Word was begotten of the Father in the Spirit, so did it become Him to be born of His mother in the flesh. S. John therefore leads us to the Word, and through Him to God, in order to teach us ever to hold sweet converse with Him. As Seneca says, “ As the rays of the sun reach the earth, but dwell in their own source, so does a noble soul, which is sent among us to bring a closer knowledge of divine things, hold converse indeed with us, but is not separated from its own source.” It is wedded to the eternal word, as S. Ambrose says and S. Augustine (Serm. xxxviii. nunc Serm . cxvii.), “ A man becomes happy by attaining to that which ever continues happy, and is itself perpetual happiness, and that by which man lives is perpetual life, that by which he becomes wise is perpetual wisdom, and that by which he is enlightened is perpetual light.”
2d. But why is the Son called Λόγος ? (1.) That word can be translated ‘ wisdom.’ And just as wisdom is intimately connected with ourselves, so is the Son with the Father. And (2.) as reason or knowledge proceeds from the mind, so does the Word or the Son proceed from the Father. So Origen, S. Chrysostom, Theophylact, Euthymius in John i., Nazianzen, Orat . iv., S. Basil, &c. And (3.) because He makes us subject to reason. See Rupertus on John i., and
Eusebius, Demetrius, Evang. v. 5. “ The Word has in Himself the reasons of all created things, and is accordingly termed the Wisdom and the Word of God.” But this word ‘reason’ does not express so clearly His procession from the Father. (See S. Augustine, Quæst. lxiii. inter lxxxvii.) Besides which the word ‘reason’ speaks of the Essence of God and is common to the Whole Trinity, and is not merely personal as [Pseudo]-Dionysius says (De Divinis Nominibus).
But lastly, ‘reason’ can exist in one who at the time does not understand (as when sleeping), but the ‘Word’ only in one who actually understands.
2d. The word may mean ‘work.’ For the Word is the coequal work of the Father as God. See Wisd. vii. 25.
3d. It may mean ‘ power.’ For the Word is the arm of the Father, He created all things (as God), and by whom He redeemed
4th. It may mean ‘ the form.’ For the Word is the brightness of the Eternal Light. Wisd. vii. 26 ; Heb. i. 3. [Pseudo]-Dionysius speaks of the Father as the primordial Fount of Godhead, and the Son and the Holy Ghost as shoots (so to speak) of Godhead. And accordingly S. Augustine (de Trin . vi. 10) says, “ A certain person (S. Hilary, de Synod) says that when he wished to express in the clearest manner the properties of the several Persons in the Trinity, he used to say that ‘Eternity was in the Father, His Image in the Son, His use in the gift, t.e. the Holy Spirit the gift of the Father and the Son.’ ” And (as above) “ The Word increases not as we know Him, but ever remains one and the same, whether we adhere to or withdraw from Him, ever abiding in Himself, and renewing all things. The Form (or pattern) of all things, unfashioned Himself, independent of time and space.”
5th, It can mean ‘definition,’ because He definitely and fully sets forth the nature of the Father, and of all things besides. As S. Gregory Nazianzen says, “The Son has the same relation to the Father as the definition to the thing defined. For he who sees the Son, sees the Father : for the Son is a brief and simple setting forth of the Father’s nature.” See Euthymius on John i. Again, it may mean ‘ a computation ; ’ for the Word is the standard by which all things are computed.
6th. Again, it may mean the ‘cause,’ for the Word was both the efficient cause of all creatures, and also the idea which conceived them.
7th. Beza and others suppose it to be the promised Word, foretold by the Prophets. But Salmeron states in reply, that He was before all Prophets, and was with God. In fact, Beza denies the Λόγος quite as much as do the Alogians (see Epiph. Hær. li.), as do also the Magdeburg Centuriators, and thus are semi-atheists.
8th. But the best meaning is that He is the ‘Word,’ not of the mouth and voice, but of the heart and mind. For as we conceive anything in our mind, so did the Eternal Father, knowing what was His own Essence and all its capacities, form and produce this Word from eternity in every respect equal and like to Himself, and consequently God, the Son of God, begotten of the Father. (See Suarez, lib. ix. de Deo Trin. cap. 4, 6, and others.)
Here note that the Word of God has a twofold sense, first, essential , because He is the very essence, mind, and will of the Father which He communicates to the Son and the Holy Spirit. The Arians believed this, but added that God began to be the Father only in time. (2.) There is the personal sense of the word, viz. the Word begotten of the Father, and a Person subsisting by Himself. Of Him S. John speaks both here and in his Gospel. S. Cyril ( Thesaur . vii. 1) says, “S. John chose the name of the ‘Word’ as most appropriate, and significative of the Godhead, and the procession of the second Person of the Trinity.” But S. Augustine (de Trin. xv. 14), “the Father knoweth all things in Himself — in Himself essentially , but in the Son as His Word.”
The word Λόγος is the same as discourse , or speech. Accordingly, Tertullian, S. Cyprian, S. Ambrose, Jerome, use the word ‘ Sermo.’ Erasmus adopted this in the passage before us. For this innovation he was sharply handled by theologians, but defended by Calvin.
The term ‘ word ’ (verbum) is more appropriate — (1.) as the simplest ; (2.) the most general term ; (3.) because it is the proper word for any mental conception, and the Son is the conception of the Father’s mind ; (4.) a word is uttered by the mouth, and so did the Father make known His will through the Word, as S. Epiphanius expressly says (Hær. lxxi.), and S. Augustine (de Fide et Symb . cap . iii.), “ He is called the Word of the Father, because the Father is made known through Him. For just as we by our words make our mind known to a hearer, so is that Wisdom, whom the Father begat, most fittingly called the Word, because it is through Him that the very secrets of the Father are made known.” S. John here and elsewhere calls Christ the Word by reason of His Godhead and not His manhood.
S. Basil, describing the dignity and attributes of the Word (lib. ii. contr . Eunom.), says, “ In order to have a worthy understanding of His generation from God, we should consider it to be impassible, indivisible, before all time, like a ray shooting forth from a light, not carefully wrought out at some subsequent time, but as existing together with its prototype, which gave it its being, and coexisting with it, like the impression of a seal, or as when teachers impart knowledge, without losing anything themselves, and yet instructing their hearers.” And Tertullian (adv. Praxeam, ch. ix.) uses the same comparisons. “ God brought forth His Word, as a root produces a plant, a fountain the river, and the sun its rays. But yet we cannot separate them from each other, as the Word cannot be separated from God.” This doctrine is fully set forth in the Creed which S. Gregory Thaumaturgus is said to have received from S. John himself, at the bidding of the Blessed Virgin. The Gentiles knew this truth in a shadowy way, having learned it either from the Old Testament or from the Sibylline Books, or even from the light of nature, or Divine Inspiration. Plato accordingly was called the Attic Moses (Eusebius, de Prep . Evan. xiii. ; and Theodoret, de Curando Græc. Affect. lib. ii.). Lactantius (de Sap. iv. 9) says, “Philosophers were not ignorant of this divine Word. For Zeno calls the Orderer of Nature and the Maker of the Universe the Λόγος.”