Hilary of Poitiers

A firm faith rejects the captious and useless questions of philosophy, and truth does not become the victim of falsehood by yielding to the fallacies of human absurdities.  It does not confine God within the terms of ordinary understanding, nor does it judge of Christ, in whom “the whole fullness of the deity dwells bodily” [Col2:9], “according to the rudiments of the world.” [Col 2:8]

The guilt of the heretics and blasphemers compels us to undertake what is unlawful, to scale arduous heights, to speak of the ineffable, and to trespass on forbidden places … We are forced to raise our lowly words to subjects which cannot be described.  By the guilt of another we are forced into guilt, so that what should have been restricted to the pious contemplation of our minds is now exposed to the dangers of human speech.

A Patristic Treasury: Early Church Wisdom for Today, edited by James R. Payton, Jr

In these two opening quotes we see the desire of leaving to mystery that which cannot be comprehended by the human mind come into conflict with the necessity of clashing with that which the human mind knows is wrong.

I have written often about the idea that many of these early Church Fathers recognized that the unexplainable (e.g., the Trinity, precisely how Jesus is both God and man) is best left unexplained – best left to mystery.  I have lamented that it wasn’t left this way in the Church, as the further the attempts to dive into detail, the more division raised in the Church. 

But I guess the heresies couldn’t be left this way.  As we know even in our time, we don’t have to know the truth of something in order to recognize a lie.  Yet when that lie gains purchase, it must be confronted.  I guess it isn’t enough to demonstrate that it is a lie.  People seem to want certainty, something to believe as opposed to something which is not to be believed.

Heresy

Heresy does not come from Scripture, but from the way it is understood; the fault is in the mind, not in the words.

Scripture offers many seeming contradictions – and I emphasize the word “seeming.”  These had to be reconciled for the faith to remain whole.  I think the most important was what to do with statements that seemed to indicate Jesus was only human with others that seemed to indicate He was also God.  After all, if we are to love God, we must know something of what we mean by the word “God.”

For this reason, I have been willing to accept the first three councils, as clarification on this matter was given without diving further into mysteries.  The fourth council only raised confusion, on a point that I think is unexplainable: the precise way in which Jesus is both God and man.

Shortcoming of Human Understanding

I would rather think of these things about the Father than speak of them, for I am aware that all language is powerless to express what must be said.

No matter what kind of language is used, it will be unable to speak of God as He is and what He is. … Human language and comparisons cannot offer a satisfactory explanation for the things of God.

We have touched upon these facts concerning the nature of the Divinity not so as to assemble in one place the sum total of our knowledge, but in order to make us realize that what we are discussing cannot be comprehended.

Human language can never describe the mysteries, and the human mind cannot even begin to comprehend these.

We must realize that God did not speak to Himself but to us, and adapted the words of His discourse to our power of comprehension, so as to enable the weakness of out nature to grasp His meaning.

If God decided to spell out for us precisely how He created everything from nothing, could we even understand it?  I think it is not possible.  If He told us explicitly how Jesus could be both God and man, would we be satisfied, given that we could not understand it and given that it defies everything we think we know about the material and spiritual realms?  No.  Even if He explained it to us in detail, and even if we could comprehend what we were told, our reason wouldn’t allow us to believe or accept it.

The Son

He is perfect in His own nature and true in ours.

He received the flesh of sin, so that by assuming our flesh He might forgive our sin; but while He takes our flesh, He does not share in our sin.

He received flesh; flesh did not receive Him.

In solving these difficult questions that I have just mentioned I am aided by the poor fisherman who stands by my side. … He said, “In the beginning was the Word.”  What is the meaning of the phrase, “in the beginning was”?  … Think of any beginning that you please, you cannot contain Him in time, for at the beginning of the period of which you are thinking, He already was.

There is no beginning before the beginning.  How can this be for any being other than God?

How shall we make a fitting recompense for so great a condescension?  The Only Begotten God, born of God in an unutterable manner, is enclosed in the form of a tiny human body in the womb of the virgin and grows in size.

I read the words; I recognize Christ’s humility.  Yet in no way can I comprehend it.  How can I comprehend what it means for the author of creation to enter the womb?

Faith

God does not call us to the blessed life via difficult questions, nor does He lure us on by the various categories of oratorical eloquence.  Eternal happiness is obtained completely and solely by believing that God raised Jesus from the dead, by confessing that He is Lord.

Which, I guess, brings me full circle.  We have divided Christendom due to difficult questions, the answers of which humans can have no true understanding.

Biographies / Sources

Hilary (315 – 368) became bishop of Poitiers in 353 or 354.  At a time when the Arian heresy was pronounced, Hilary was exiled for his opposition to it.