Christ not only speaks about the endurance of evil but puts himself forward as an example. After his admonition that in the world you will have tribulation, he himself turns to prayer in order to teach us that in our testing we are to leave everything behind and flee to God. He had shaken their souls in his admonition but raised them up again by this prayer.

When an occasion calls us to prayer, it is fitting for us to pray for that which increases God’s glory before we pray for that which concerns ourselves. . . . The Savior indeed spoke these words to show how very necessary his own glory was to the Father so that he might be known to be consubstantial with him . . . for the Father is glorified in the glory of his offspring.

Our Lord, the only begotten who is co-eternal with the Father but who also took the form of a servant, could have prayed in silence if need be. But by praying out loud he wanted to show himself as one who prayed to the Father; he remembered that he not only had to pray but to teach. And so, the prayer that he offered for us, he also made known to us. For it was not only his discourse but also his prayers that were a source of edification for his disciples—and for us who read it today.

In saying, Father, the hour is come; glorify your Son, he showed that all time, and every occasion when he did anything or suffered anything to be done, was arranged by him who was subject to no time . . . Let no one think that this hour came through any urgency of fate but rather by divine appointment. It was no necessary law of the heavenly bodies that tied the passion of Christ to its timetable. How could anyone think that the stars compelled their own maker to die? It was not the time, therefore, that drove Christ to his death, but Christ who selected the time to die. He also fixed the time when he was born of the Virgin, with the Father, of whom he was born independently of time. . . . He then may say, Father, the hour is come, who has arranged every hour with the Father saying, as it were, Father, the hour, which we fixed together for the sake of humanity and of my glorification among them, is come; glorify your Son, that your Son also may glorify you.

Again he shows us that he willingly comes to the cross. For how could someone who prayed that this might happen be unwilling, calling what would happen glory not only for himself the crucified but also for the Father? This was indeed the case, since not only the Son but also the Father too was glorified. For before the crucifixion, not even the Jews knew him. Israel, it says, has not known me.^[1] But after the crucifixion, the whole world flocked to him. Then he also speaks of how the glory would take place and how [the Father] will glorify him.

He does not say that the day or the time but that the hour has come. An hour contains a portion of a day. What was this hour? . . . He was now to be spit on, scourged, crucified. But the Father glorifies the Son. The sun, instead of setting, fled, and all the other elements felt that same shock of the death of Christ. The stars in their courses, to avoid complicity in the crime, escaped by self-extinction from beholding the scene. The earth trembled under the weight of our Lord hanging on the cross and testified that it did not have the power to hold within it him who was dying. . . . The centurion proclaimed, Truly this was the Son of God. Creation is set free by the mediation of this sin offering. The very rocks lose their solidity and strength. Those who had nailed him to the cross confess that truly this is the Son of God. The outcome justifies the assertion. Our Lord had said, Glorify your Son, testifying that he was not the Son in name only but properly the Son. Your Son, he said. Many of us are sons [children] of God. But he is Son in another sense. He is the proper, true Son by nature, not by adoption; in truth, not in name; by birth, not by creation. After he was glorified, that centurion’s confession touched on the truth. And so, when the centurion confesses him to be the true Son of God, none of his believers might doubt what one of his persecutors could not deny.

But if he was glorified by his passion, how much more was he glorified by his resurrection? For his passion showed his humility more than his glory. . . . Humility is the earning of glory. Glory is the reward of humility.^[1] . . . So we must understand Father, the hour is come, glorify your Son to mean, the hour is come for sowing the seed—humility. Do not defer the fruit—glory.

But perhaps this proves weakness in the Son. He waited to be glorified by one superior to himself. And who does not confess that the Father is superior, seeing that he himself said, The Father is greater than I? But beware that you do not let the honor of the Father impair the glory of the Son. . . . But the prayer, Father glorify your Son, is completed by that your Son also may glorify you. So then the Son is not weak, inasmuch as he gives back in his turn glory for the glory that he receives. . . . This petition for glory to be given and paid back is neither a robbery of the Father nor a depreciation of the Son. Rather, it shows the same power of divinity to be in both.

It is worthy of inquiry how the Son can glorify the Father when the eternal glory of the Father neither suffered diminution in any human form nor could be increased in respect of its own divine perfection. In itself, indeed, the glory of the Father could neither be diminished nor enlarged. But without any doubt it was less among people when God was known only in Judea.^[1]. . . Therefore the Son glorified the Father when the gospel of Christ spread the knowledge of the Father among the Gentiles. Had the Son, however, only died, and not risen again, he would without doubt have neither been glorified by the Father nor have glorified the Father. But now, having been glorified through his resurrection by the Father, he glorifies the Father by the preaching of his resurrection. Glorify your Son so that your Son also may glorify you. In other words, raise me from the dead, that by me you may be known to the whole world.

Jesus says, in effect, You gave the Son the kind of honor that accorded him universal dominion—although he would have received such honor later. And what a great honor it was already being the one chosen by God! Nonetheless, he says, you gave me this [honor], so glorify me, that is, in a way fitting to the honor of which you made me worthy. Reveal me before everyone at the time of my passion so that through the events that will happen on the cross everyone may know the greatness of my honor. They will recognize that I did not deserve to suffer, nor did I do so unwillingly, but I did it for the greater benefit of all people. So the words glorify me do not mean give me glory. Rather, they mean reveal my glory that was given to me by you. With the same meaning he added, So that the Son may glorify you, that is, from those things that were done to me [i.e., the Son], you also will be seen to be great and glorious through me. The more my works appear to be admirable, the more your dignity becomes known.

The Father glorified his own Son, having put everything under the sun under his rule. The Father in turn was glorified through the Son. The Son was glorified by the Father, for he was entrusted with all things, because he is the Son and offspring of the one who can do everything. The Father in turn was glorified, just as a father is glorified by his own son [child]. When the Son was known to have accomplished willingly every mighty deed, the favor of his reputation passes on to the one who begat him. . . . This glory, then, passes on to us. That which is altogether subordinate, which has been put under the hand of the Word of God (who is mightier than all things) and which has been saved once and for all must remain for the good, since it is no longer ruled by death or governed by corruption or made subject to sins and ancient evils.

The fact that power over all flesh was given to Christ by the Father is to be understood in respect of his humanity. For in respect of his Godhead all things were made by himself, and in him all things were created in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible.^[1]

The glory [that the Son would give to the Father] was that the Son, being made flesh, received power over all flesh from the Father, along with the charge of restoring eternal life to ephemeral beings like us who are burdened with the body.

Perhaps the Son is weak in that he receives power over all flesh. And indeed the receiving of power might be a sign of weakness if he were not able to give eternal life to those whom he receives. Yet the very fact of receiving is used to prove inferiority of nature. It might prove such is the case if Christ were not true God by birth as truly as is the Unbegotten. But if the receiving of power signifies neither more nor less than the birth by which he received all that he has, that gift does not degrade the Begotten, because it makes him perfectly and entirely what God is. God Unbegotten brought God only-begotten to a perfect birth of divine blessedness. It is, then, the mystery of the Father to be the author of the birth, but it is no degradation to the Son to be made the perfect image of his author by a real birth. The giving of power over all flesh—and this giving is done in order that eternal life might be given to all flesh—postulates the fatherhood of the giver and the divinity of the receiver. For giving signifies that the One is the Father and, in receiving the power to give eternal life, the other remains God the Son. All power is therefore natural and congenital to the Son of God. And though it is given, that does not separate him from his author. For that which is given is the property of his author, that is, power to bestow eternal life and to change the corruptible into the incorruptible. The Father gave all; the Son received all.

But what is the meaning of you have given him power over all flesh? I will ask the heretics, When did he receive this power? Was it before he formed them, or after? He himself says that it was after he had been crucified and had risen again. At least it was then that he said, All power is given unto me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations.^[1] What then? Didn’t he have authority over his own works? Did he make them and yet not have authority over them after having made them? Yet he is seen doing everything in times of old, punishing some as sinners^[2] . . . and honoring others as righteous. Is it that he had the power at that time but now had lost it, but was going to receive it again? What devil could assert this? But if his power was the same both then and now—for he says, as the Father raises up the dead and gives them life, even so the Son gives life to whom he will^[3]—what is the meaning of the words? The answer lies in the fact that he was about to send them to the Gentiles. In order therefore that they might not think that this was an innovation, because he had said, I am not sent, except unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel,^[4] he shows that this seemed good to the Father also. . . .

But what does he mean by of all flesh? For certainly not all believed. Yet, as far as his mission was concerned, all could have believed. And if some did not listen to his words, the fault was not in the teacher but in those who did not receive his words.

One who does not have the knowledge of good is wicked: for there is one good, the Father. And to be ignorant of the Father is death, just as to know him is eternal life, through participation in the power of the incorrupt One. And to be incorruptible is to participate in divinity. But revolt from the knowledge of God brings corruption.

Are we saying that knowledge is eternal life? Are we saying that to know the one true and living God will suffice to give us complete security for the future without need of anything else? Then how is faith apart from works dead?^[1] When we speak of faith, we mean the true knowledge of God and nothing else, since knowledge comes by faith. The prophet Isaiah tells us this: If you do not believe, neither shall you understand.^[2] But he is not talking about a knowledge that consists in barren speculations, which is entirely worthless. For one of the holy disciples said, You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe—and shudder.^[3] What then shall we say to this? How is it that Christ speaks the truth when he says that eternal life is the knowledge of God the Father, the one true God, and with him of the Son? I think, indeed, we must answer that the saying of the Savior is completely true. For this knowledge is life, laboring as it were in birth of the whole meaning of the mystery and granting to us participation in the mystery of the Eucharist, whereby we are joined to the living and life-giving Word. And for this reason, I think, Paul says that the Gentiles are made fellow members of the body and fellow partakers of Christ,^[4] inasmuch as they partake in his blessed body and blood. And our members may in this sense be conceived of as being members of Christ.^[5] This knowledge, then, which also brings to us the Eucharist by the Spirit, is life. For it dwells in our hearts, reshaping those who receive it into sonship with him and molding them into incorruption and piety toward God through life, according to the Gospel. Our Lord Jesus Christ, then, knowing that the knowledge of the one true God brings to us and promotes our union with the blessings of which we have spoken, says that it is eternal life. It is the mother and nurse of eternal life, being in its power and nature pregnant with those things that cause life and lead to life.

The cause of eternal life is steadfast faith, and to believe in one God, and to not attribute to others the title of God but to believe not only in the Father but also in the Son who was incarnated for us and was sent for the salvation of humankind. This doctrine expels the lie of the polytheistic error. It admits only one God while also surpassing the Jewish belief—inasmuch as the Jews worship only the Father. They surely do not understand that from the Father, by means of an unspoken word, his Son was born. It also teaches Christians to worship both the God begotten from the Father and the Spirit that is provided from the Father through the Son^[1] and is in its own existence consubstantial with the Father and the Son—the very one who is perfect life and the cause of eternal life.

What he said to his servant Moses, I am that I am, . . . this is what we shall contemplate when we live in eternity.

We are distanced from eternity to the extent that we are changeable. But eternal life is promised to us through the truth. Our faith, however, stands as far apart from the clear knowledge of the truth as mortality does from eternity. At the present we put faith in things done in time on our account, and by that faith itself we are cleansed. In this way, when we have come to sight, as truth follows faith, so eternity may follow on mortality. Our faith will become truth, then, when we have attained to that which is promised to us who believe. And that which is promised to us is eternal life. And the Truth—not that which shall come to be according to how our faith shall be, but that truth that always exists because eternity is in it—the Truth then has said, And this is life eternal, that they might know you the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent. When our faith sees and comes to be truth, then eternity shall possess our now changed mortality.

God,^[1] accompanied by the article [in Greek], is very God.^[2] Therefore also the Savior says in his prayer to the Father, That they may know you the only true God. But everything made divine^[3] because of the very God by partaking of his divinity would be most properly called not God^[4] but god.^[5]

He says the only true God in order to distinguish [the true God] from those which are not gods, since he was about to send them to the Gentiles. But if they^[1] will not allow this, but on account of this word only reject the Son as being true God, then they are denying that he is God at all. For he also says, You do not seek the glory that is from the only God. Well then, shall not the Son be God? But if the Son is God and the Son of the Father who is called the only God, it is clear that he also is true, and the Son of him who is called the only true God. Why, when Paul says, or I only and Barnabas,^[2] surely he was not excluding Barnabas? Not at all. For the only is to distinguish him from others. And if he is not true God, how is he Truth? For truth far surpasses what is true. What shall we call the condition of not being a true one, tell me? Shall we not call it the not being a person at all? So if the Son is not true God, how is he God? And how does he make us gods and sons [children], if he is not true God?

The one who believes in the Son believes also in the Father, for he believes in what is proper to the Father’s essence. And thus the faith is one in one God. And the one who worships and honors the Son, in the Son worships and honors the Father. For the Godhead is one. And therefore the honor is one^[1] and the worship is one that is paid to the Father in and through the Son. And the one who worships in this way worships one God. For there is one God and none other. . . . Therefore, these passages^[2] are not written in order to deny the Son or with reference to him at all, but to overthrow falsehood. Notice how God did not speak these kinds of words to Adam at the beginning, although his Word was with him by whom all things came to be. For there was no need before idols came in. But when human beings made insurrection against the truth and named for themselves gods such as they did, then the need arose for such words in order to deny the gods that were not.^[3] . . . If then the Father is called the only true God, this is said not to the denial of him who said, I am the Truth^[4] but of those . . . who by nature are not true, as the Father and his Word are. And so the Lord himself added at once, And Jesus Christ whom you have sent. Now had he been a creature, he would not have added this and ranked himself with his creator. For what fellowship is there between the True and the not true? But as it is, by including himself with the Father, he has shown that he is of the Father’s nature. And he has given us to know that of the true Father he is true offspring.

For when the [Arians] say that [the Father] alone is true, alone is righteous, alone is wise, alone is invisible, alone is good, alone is mighty, alone is immortal, they are raising up this word alone as a barrier to cut off the Son from his share in these attributes. He who is alone, they say, has no partner in his properties. But if we suppose that these attributes reside in the Father only, and not in the Son also, then we must believe that God the Son has neither truth nor wisdom. We must believe that he is a bodily being composed of visible and material elements, ill-disposed and feeble and void of immortality. For we exclude him from all these attributes of which we make the Father the solitary possessor.

But it must be clear to everyone that the truth or genuineness of something is evidenced in its nature and powers. For instance, true wheat is what grows to maturity with the beard bristling around it which is then purged from the chaff and ground into flour, baked into a loaf and taken for food. [Wheat] demonstrates the nature and uses that bread is known for. . . . What element of the Godhead, then, is lacking in the Son who possesses both the nature and power of God? For he had at his disposal the powers of the divine nature to bring into being the nonexistent and to create whenever he wanted.^[1]

If Christ is only a man, why did he lay down for us such a rule of faith as to say, But this is life eternal, that they may know you the one and true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent? If he had not wanted himself to be understood also as God, why did he add, And Jesus Christ whom you have sent unless it is because he wanted to be accepted as also God? Because, if he had not wanted himself to be understood as God, he would have added and the man Jesus Christ whom you have sent. But as it is, neither Christ added this nor did he hand down to us that he is only man. Rather, he joined [himself] to God so that he might also by this union be understood as God, as indeed he is.

But in what does eternal life consist? His own words tell us: That they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent. Is there any doubt or difficulty here, or any inconsistency? It is life to know the true God. But the bare knowledge of him does not give life. What, then, does he add? And Jesus Christ whom you have sent. In you, the only true God, the Son pays the honor due to his Father. By the addition and Jesus Christ whom you have sent, he associates himself with the true Godhead. The believer in his confession draws no line between the two, for his hope of life rests in both. And indeed, the true God is inseparable from him whose name follows in the creed. Therefore when we read, That they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent, these terms of sender and of sent are not intended, under any semblance of distinction either in name or interval^[1] [of time], to convey a difference between the true Godhead of Father and of Son. Rather, they are meant to be a guide to the devout confession of them as begetter and begotten.

But perhaps by saying you the only, Christ severs himself from communion and unity with God. Yes, but after the words you the only true God, does he not immediately continue, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent? I appeal to the sense of the reader: what must we believe Christ to be when we are commanded to believe in him also, as well as the Father the only true God? Or, perhaps, if the Father is the only true God, there is no room for Christ to be God. It might be so, if, because there is one God the Father, Christ were not the one Lord.^[1] The fact that God the Father is one leaves Christ nonetheless the one Lord. And similarly the Father’s one true Godhead makes Christ nonetheless true God. For we can obtain eternal life only if we believe in Christ, as well as in the only true God. . . . But the faith of the church, while confessing the only true God the Father, confesses Christ also. It does not confess Christ true God without the Father the only true God. Nor does it confess the Father as the only true God without Christ. It confesses Christ true God, because it confesses the Father the only true God. Thus the fact that God the Father is the only true God constitutes Christ also as true God. The only-begotten God suffered no change of nature by his natural birth. And he who, according to the nature of his divine origin was born God from the living God, is, by the truth of that nature, inalienable from the only true God.

Passing by [the Arians], however, we must see whether, when it is said to the Father, that they may know you the one true God, we are forced to understand it as if he wished to intimate that the Father alone is the true God—in case we should not understand any to be God except the three together, the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Are we therefore, from the testimony of the Lord, both to call the Father the one true God, and the Son the one true God, and the Holy Spirit the one true God, and the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit together, that is, the Trinity itself together, not three true Gods but one true God? Or because he added, And Jesus Christ whom you have sent, are we to supply the one true God, so that the order of the words is this, That they may know you, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent, the one true God? Why then did he omit to mention the Holy Spirit? Is it because it follows that whenever we name One who cleaves to One by a harmony so great that through this harmony both are one, this harmony itself must be understood, although it is not mentioned?^[1]

If knowledge of God is eternal life, the more we grow in this knowledge, the greater the advances we make toward life. And we shall not die in the eternal life that is to come. For then, when there shall be no death, the knowledge of God shall be perfected. Then God will be most fully glorified because then it will be the completed glory, as expressed in Greek by doxa. . . . But glory was defined among the ancients as fame accompanied with praise. But if one’s praise depends on what is said of him, how will God be praised when he himself shall be seen? And so it is said in Scripture, Blessed are they who dwell in your house. They will be praising you forever and ever.^[1] There, where there shall be full knowledge of God, his praise will continue without end. And because it is full knowledge, the glorification will also be full and complete.

He says on the earth, because in heaven he had been already glorified in respect to his own natural glory and to his being worshiped by the angels. Christ then speaks not of that glory that is bound up with his essence—for he always possesses that glory in its fullness even if no one glorified him—but of that which comes from the worship given him by humankind. And so, Glorify me also has this meaning. And listen to what follows so that you may understand that he speaks of this kind of glory: I have finished the work that you gave me to do.

And yet the action was still in its beginning, or rather had not even yet begun. What did he mean by I have finished then? Either he means that I have done all my part or he speaks of the future, as having already happened. Or, the most likely explanation is that all had already been accomplished by anticipation because the root of blessings to come had been laid and its fruits would inevitably follow. This is so because Jesus would be present at and assisting in those things that would take place after these did.

And so, he had not abdicated his own position. And yet, he had taken ours. He prays, then, that the nature that he had assumed may be promoted to the glory that he had never renounced.^[1] . . . This Son, now incarnate, prayed that flesh might be to the Father what the Son had been. He prayed that flesh, born in time, might receive the splendor of the everlasting glory, that the corruption of the flesh might be swallowed up, transformed into the power of God and the incorruption of the Spirit.

The splendid glory of the Son of God—what else would it be other than the divine Word himself, the true Light itself? He is not glorified by another glory through the agency of another person as if he were someone else other than the glory. No, he is himself the Lord of glory and King of glory, as I said previously. But since he emptied himself, taking the form of a servant—for he says, the Word became flesh and we saw him^[1] and he did not have any comeliness or beauty^[2]—and many did not believe that this descent had taken place, since many did not believe that God became man to reveal his divinity to those who had not recognized him, he said, Father, glorify your Son, that is, reveal me to those who have not recognized me, manifest my glory that I had with you as the divine Word. Therefore, Paul says, God considered it good to reveal his Son to me, so that I might proclaim him among the Gentiles.

The Lord also said, Give me glory in your presence from that which you gave me before the world was made. [This was] when the Father was fashioning creatures through his Son, according to the psalmist’s account, He is clothed with glory and magnificence,^[1] after which he drew them out of nothingness and established them as spotless creatures. Lord God, he said, you are exceedingly great. You are clothed with glory and magnificence, and you have covered yourself with light as with a cloak.. . . Following Adam’s fall, [however], creatures were clothed in [Adam’s] humiliation^[2]. . . and the Son of the Creator came to heal them so as to remove, at the moment of his coming, all uncleannesses through the baptism of his death, as he himself has said, The hour has come and is at hand; glorify your Son that your Son may glorify you. He asked this not as a beggar wishing to receive something, but wishing to restore and accomplish the first order of creation. [He asked] for the glory with which he was clothed at the time when creatures were clothed [with glory].

For just as he formed the first essence [of creatures] through grace so that [they would be] without stain, in the glory and magnificence with which he himself was clothed, [so] too, by the mercy of God, there will be a new creation of all things, without any stain, in the glory with which he is clothed. What he said, Give me, is to be understood of the glory that he possessed before creatures, with the Father and in the Father’s presence. For the Greek text says clearly, Glorify me with that glory that I possessed in your presence, before the world was made. Even more, in saying, Glorify your Son, that your Son may glorify you, he did not reveal a need but a desire. The Father does not receive glory from the Son as though he had need of it, and the Son is not glorified by his Father as if he were lacking this [glory].

For he had said above, Father, the hour is come; glorify your Son, that your Son may glorify you. In this arrangement of the words, he had shown that the Father was first to be glorified by the Son, in order that the Son might glorify the Father. But now he says, I have glorified you on the earth: I have finished the work which you gave me to do. And now glorify me. This seems to be saying that the Son himself had been the first to glorify the Father by whom he then demands to be glorified. We are therefore to understand that he used both words above in accordance with what was future and in the order in which they were future: Glorify your Son, that your Son may glorify you. But now, he uses the word in the past tense of what was still in the future when he said, I have glorified you on the earth: I have finished the work that you gave me to do.. . . For in saying that the Father was glorified by [the Son] on the earth but that he himself was glorified by the Father with the Father’s very self, the Son showed them how both glorifications took place. For the Son himself glorified the Father on earth by preaching him to the nations. But the Father glorified the Son with his own self in setting him at his own right hand. But for that very reason, when the Son says afterward in reference to the glorifying of the Father, I have glorified you, he preferred putting the verb in the past tense, in order to show that it was already done in the act of predestination, and what was with perfect certainty yet to take place was to be accounted as already done—namely, that the Son, having been glorified by the Father with the Father, would also glorify the Father on the earth.

The proper order of the words is [the glory] that I had with you before the world was.. . . Some have imagined that this should be understood of the human nature assumed by the Word in such a way that it would be converted into the Word and the man were changed into God, or as if the humanity were lost in the Godhead. For no one would say that the Word of God would by that change be doubled or increased. . . . But we [avoid this error] if we understand [he is speaking of] the predestination of the glory of his human nature, as previously being mortal, becoming immortal with the Father. And we also understand that this had already been done by predestination before the world was, as also in its own time it was done in the world. . . . Accordingly, when the Son saw that the time of this, his predestined glorification, had now arrived—in order that what had already been done in predestination might also now actually be accomplished—he prayed, And now, O Father, glorify me with your own self with the glory that I had with you before the world was, that is, it is time now for me to have that glory at your right hand that I had with you by your predestination.

For the most divine prophets lived according to Christ Jesus. On this account they were persecuted, being inspired by his grace to fully convince the unbelieving that there is one God, who has manifested himself by Jesus Christ his Son, who is his eternal Word, who does not proceed from silence, and in all things pleased him that sent him.

We must therefore believe, according to the rule prescribed, in the Lord, the one true God, and consequently in him whom he has sent, Jesus Christ, who would not have linked himself to the Father if he did not wish to be understood to be God also, for he would have separated himself from him if he did not wish to be understood to be God.

If Christ was only man, why did he lay down for us this rule of believing, “And this is life eternal, that they should know you, the only and true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent”? If he did not wish to be understood to be God, why did he add, “And Jesus Christ, whom you have sent,” unless he wished to be received as God? Because if he did not wish to be understood to be God, he would have added, “And the man Jesus Christ, whom you have sent”; but, in fact, he did not, nor did Christ deliver himself to us as Christ only, but associated himself with God, as he wished to be understood by this to be God also, as he is. We must therefore believe, according to the rule prescribed, in the Lord, the one true God, and consequently in him whom he has sent, Jesus Christ, who would not have linked himself to the Father if he had not wished to be understood to be God also: for he would have separated himself from him if he did not wish to be understood to be God.

The name God the Father had been published to no one. Even Moses, who had interrogated him on that very point, had heard a different name. To us it has been revealed in the Son, for the Son is now the Father’s new name. . . . That name, therefore, we pray may be hallowed.

When the Savior declares that he has made known the name of God the Father, it is the same as saying that he has shown the whole world his glory. How did he do this? By making himself known through his wonderful works. The Father is glorified in the Son as in an image and type of his own form, for the beauty of the archetype is seen in its image. The only Son then has made himself known, and he is in his essence wisdom and life, the artificer and creator of the universe. He is immortal and incorruptible, pure, blameless, merciful, holy, good. His Father is known to be like him, since he could not be different in nature from his offspring. The Father’s glory is seen, as in an image and type of his own form, in the glory of the Son. . . .

The Son made known the name of God the Father to teach us and make us fully comprehend not that he is the only God—for inspired Scripture had proclaimed that even before the coming of the Son—but that besides being truly God he is also rightly called Father. This is so because in himself and proceeding from himself he has a Son possessed of the same eternal nature as his own: it was not in time that he became the Father of the Creator of the ages!

To call God Father is more exact than to call him God. The word God signifies his dignity, but the word Father points to the distinctive attribute of his person. If we say God, we declare him to be Lord of the universe. If we call him Father, we show the way in which he is distinct as a person, for we make known the fact that he has a Son. The Son himself gave God the name of Father, as being in some sense the more appropriate and truer appellation, when he said not I and God but I and the Father are one,^[1] and also, with reference to himself, On him has God the Father set his seal.^[2] And when he commanded his disciples to baptize all nations, he did not tell them to do this in the name of God but expressly ordained that they were to do it in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.

His desire here is to teach that he is greatly loved by the Father since it is clear that he did not need to receive the [disciples] since he made them and cares for them continually. How then did he receive them? This, as I said before, shows his oneness with the Father. Now one could interpret this to mean, humanly speaking and according to its literal meaning, that the disciples will no longer belong to the Father. For if when the Father had them, the Son did not have them, it is evident that when he gave them to the Son, he relinquished his dominion over them. An even more unseemly conclusion would be that the disciples were found to have been imperfect while they were yet with the Father but then became perfect when they came to the Son. But it is ridiculous even to say such things. What then does he mean by this? He means that it seemed good to the Father also that they should believe on the Son.

If he speaks of the disciples only with whom he had eaten supper, this has nothing to do with that glorifying of which he spoke above and whereby the Son glorified the Father. For what glory is it to be known to twelve or eleven mortal creatures? But if by the men who were given to him out of the world, he means all those who should believe in him afterward and populate his great church, which was to be made up of all nations, this is without doubt the glory whereby the Son glorifies the Father. . . . I have made known your name . . . is similar to what he had said a little earlier, I have glorified you on the earth, where the past is used for the future both there and here. . . . But what follows shows that he is speaking here of those who were already his disciples, not of all who should afterward believe on him. . . . At the beginning of his prayer then . . . our Lord is speaking of all believers, all to whom he should make known the Father, and this is how he would glorify him. For after saying, that your Son also may glorify you, he immediately showed how that was to be done by adding, As you have given him power over all flesh that he should give eternal life to as many as you have given him.

But what are we to make of the words whom you have given me out of the world, for it was said that they were not of the world? But this they were by regeneration, not by generation [i.e., by nature]. And what is meant by they were yours, and you gave them to me? Was there a time when they belonged to the Father and not to his only-begotten Son? Did the Father ever have anything without the Son? God forbid. But there was a time when the Son of God possessed something which that same Son as man did not possess. For he had not yet become man when he possessed all things in common with the Father. And so, by saying they were yours, the Son of God does not separate himself from the Father but only attributes all his power to him from whom he is and has this power. . . . In saying, therefore, and you gave them to me, he intimated that he had received as man the power to have them, seeing that he who was always omnipotent, was not always man. And so, while he seems rather to have attributed his receiving of them to the Father, since [Christ] is whatever he is because his existence is from [the Father], yet Christ also gave them to himself, that is, Christ, God with the Father, [gave them] to Christ as man who is not with the Father. . . . Those whom God the Son chose along with the Father out of the world, the very same Son as man received out of the world from the Father. For the Father would not have given them to the Son if he had not chosen them.

Whatever God the Father gave to God the Son, he gave in the act of begetting. For the Father gave those things to the Son without which he could not be the Son, in the same way that he gave him being itself. ^[1] CHRIST TAKES WHAT IS OURS AND GIVES WHAT HE RECEIVES. (PSEUDO-)ATHANASIUS: He takes our infirmities without himself being infirm and hungers without hungering. He sends up what is ours that it may be abolished. As he does this, in the same way, the gifts that come from God instead of our infirmities he also receives so that we, being united to him, may be able to partake of them. This is how the Lord says, All things whatever you have given me, I have given them, and again, I pray for them. For he prayed for us, taking on himself what is ours and giving what he received. Since then, the Word was united to man himself and the Father purposed for us to be exalted and have power, therefore all things that we receive through him [i.e., the Son] are referred to the Word himself. For as he for our sake became man, so we for his sake are exalted. It is no absurdity then, if, as for our sake he humbled himself, so also for our sake he is said to be highly exalted. So he gave to him means, in essence, [he gave] to us for his sake. And he highly exalted him^[1] means essentially [he exalted] us in him. And the Word himself—when we are exalted and receive and are helped as if he himself were exalted and received and were helped—gives thanks to the Father, referring what is ours to himself and saying, All things, whatever you have given me, I have given unto them. ^[2]

And from where have they learned? They have learned from my words, . . . for I taught them that I came forth from you. For this was what he has been anxious to prove throughout the whole of the Gospel.

He says, They have received them, that is, they have understood and remembered his words. For a word is received when the mind perceives it. Then he adds, And they have known truly that I came out from you, and they have believed that you sent me.. . . What they truly believed was what they truly knew, just as I came out from you is the same as You sent me. And, so that no one might imagine that that knowledge was one of sight and not of faith, he adds, And they have [truly]^[1] believed that you did send me. They truly believed, that is, not as he said they believed when he spoke earlier . . . when they were afraid of being scattered and would desert him,^[2] but truly, that is, how they would soon believe [in the future]—firmly, steadily, unwaveringly, never again to be scattered to their own people while leaving Christ behind. The disciples as yet were not the way he describes them to be here in the past tense, but it was how they would be when they had received the Holy Spirit, who would teach them all things.

The question of how the Father gave those words to the Son is easier to solve if we suppose him to have received them from the Father as Son of man. . . . But if we understand it to be as the Begotten of the Father that he received them, let there be no time supposed previous to his having them, as if he once existed without those words. For whatever God the Father gave God the Son, he gave in the act of begetting.

Christ, who manifested himself in the last times above the types and figures of the Law, at once our high priest and mediator, prays for us as man. And at the same time he is ever ready to cooperate with God the Father, who distributes good gifts to those who are worthy. Paul showed us this most plainly in the words grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.^[1] Christ, then, prays for us as man and also unites in distributing good gifts to us as God. For he, being a holy high priest, blameless and undefiled, offered himself—not for his own weakness, as was the custom of those to whom was allotted the duty of sacrificing according to the Law, but rather for the salvation of our souls.

When the Lord was speaking to the Father of those whom he already had as disciples, he said this also among other things: I pray for them. I pray not for the world but for those whom you have given me. By the world, he now wishes to be understood those who live according to the lust of the world and who do not stand in the gracious lot of those who were to be chosen by him out of the world. And so he says he prays not for the world but for those whom the Father has given him. For by the very fact of their having already been given to him by the Father, they have ceased belonging to that world for which he refrains from praying. And then he adds, For they are yours. The Father did not lose those whom he gave when he gave them to the Son. After all, the Son still goes on to say, And all mine are yours, and yours are mine.

He often repeats you have given me to impress on them that it was all according to the Father’s will. Then . . . to show them that this authority was not recent or that he had just now received them, he adds, All things that are mine are yours, and yours are mine. . . . Do you see the equality of honor? By speaking this way, he removes any suspicion that they are either separated from the Father’s power or that, before this, they had been separate from the power of the Son.

It is sufficiently apparent how it is that all that belongs to the Father belongs also to the Son because the Son himself is also God and, born of the Father, is the Father’s equal. It is not in the sense in which the elder son is told, You are always with me, and all that I have is yours.^[1] For that was said of all those creatures that are inferior to the holy rational creature^[2] and are certainly subordinate to the church. . . . But here it means that even the rational creature itself is included, which is subject only to God, so that all beneath the rational heavenly creature are also subject to him. Since then such a creature belongs to God the Father, it would not at the same time be the Son’s unless he were equal to the Father. . . . For it is impossible that the saints, of whom this is said, should belong to anyone except the one who created and sanctified them. And for the same reason, everything also that is theirs must of necessity be the Son’s also to whom they themselves belong. Since, then, they belong both to the Father and to the Son, they demonstrate the equality of those to whom they equally belong. But when he says, speaking of the Holy Spirit, All things that the Father has are mine; therefore I said that he shall take of mine and shall show it unto you,^[3] he referred to those things that pertain to the divinity of the Father and in which he is equal to him in having all that he has because he adds, he [the Holy Spirit] shall receive of mine. And the Holy Spirit would never receive from a creature what was subject to the Father and the Son.

The Lord says all mine are yours, as if he were submitting his lordship over creation to the Father, but he also adds yours are mine, to show that the creating command came from the Father to him. The Son did not need help to accomplish his work, nor are we to believe that he received a separate commandment for each portion of his work. Such extreme inferiority would be entirely inadequate to his divine glory. Rather, the Word was full of his Father’s grace. He shines forth from the Father and accomplishes everything according to his parent’s plan. He is not different in essence, nor is he different in power from his Father, and if their power is equal, then their works are the same. Christ is the power of God and the wisdom of God.^[1] All things were made through him,^[2] and all things were created through him and for him,^[3] not as if he were discharging the service of a slave, but instead he creatively fulfills the will of his Father.

For if the Son were not of the same nature as the Father, how could he have had in himself that which was different? Or how could he have shown in himself what was dissimilar if the foreign and alien nature did not receive the stamp of what was of a different kind from itself? But [Eunomius]^[1] says, Neither does he have a divider of his glory. Here he speaks truly even though he does not know what he is saying. For the Son does not divide the glory with the Father but has the glory of the Father in its entirety, even as the Father has all the glory of the Son. For this is what he said to the Father, All mine are yours and yours are mine. Notice how Christ also says that he will appear on the judgment day in the glory of the Father,^[2] when he will render to every one according to his works. And by this phrase he shows the unity of nature that subsists between them. For as there is one glory of the sun and another glory of the moon,^[3] because of the difference between the natures of those luminaries (since if both had the same glory we would think there was any difference in their nature), so he who foretold of himself that he would appear in the glory of the Father indicated by the identity of glory their community of nature.

Angels did not create the world, but the only-begotten Son, begotten, as I have said, before all ages, by whom all things were made,^[1] nothing having been excepted from his creation. . . . For all mine are yours and yours are mine, the Lord says in the Gospels. And this we may certainly know from the Old and New Testaments. For he who said, Let us make man in our image and after our likeness^[2] was certainly speaking to someone present. But clearest of all are the psalmist’s words, He spoke, and they were made; he commanded, and they were created,^[3] as if the Father commanded and spoke and the Son made all things at the Father’s bidding.

Now, if all things that are the Father’s are also Christ’s, certainly among those things that exist is the Father’s omnipotence. Of course, the only-begotten Son ought to be omnipotent, that the Son also may have all things that the Father possesses. And I am glorified in them, he declares. For at the name of Jesus every knee shall bow.^[1] . . . Therefore he is the effluence of the glory of God in this respect, that he is Almighty—the pure and vivid Wisdom itself—glorified as the effluence of omnipotence or glory.

So that it may be more clearly understood what the glory of omnipotence is, we shall add the following: God the Father is omnipotent because he has power over all things, namely, over heaven and earth, sun, moon and stars and all things in them. And he exercises his power by means of his Word. . . . Now if every knee is bent to Jesus, then, without doubt, it is Jesus to whom all things are subject, and he it is who exercises power over all things and through whom all things are subject to the Father. For through wisdom, that is, by word and reason, not by force and necessity, all things are subject.

And I am glorified in them, that is, either that I have power over them or that they shall glorify me, believing in you and me. And they shall glorify us alike. But if he is not glorified equally in them, what the Father has is no longer his. For no one is glorified in those over whom he has no authority. Yet how is the Son glorified equally? All die for him equally as they do for the Father. They preach him as they do the Father. And as they say that all things are done in his name, so also are they done in the name of the Son.

And now, he adds, I am no more in the world, and these are in the world. If your thoughts turn to the very hour in which he was speaking, both [he and his disciples] were still in the world. And yet, we must not understand I am no more in the world metaphorically of the heart and life. . . . For there is one word used here that makes any such understanding altogether inadmissible, because he does not say, And I am not in the world but I am no more in the world. In this way he shows that he himself had been in the world but was no more so. And so are we then at liberty to believe that he at one time savored the world, but, delivered from such a mistake, no longer retained such a disposition? Who would venture to shut himself up in so profane a meaning? It remains, therefore, that in the same sense in which he himself also was previously in the world, he declared that he was no longer in the world, that is to say, in his bodily presence. In other words, he was showing that his own absence from the world was now in the immediate future, and his disciples’ absence would be later when he said that he was no longer here but they were—although both he and they were still present. He was using the prevailing custom of human speech. Do we not say every day, he is no longer here, about someone who is on the very point of departure? And we talk this way especially about those who are at the point of death. And besides all else, the Lord himself, as if foreseeing the thoughts that might possibly be excited in those who were afterward to read these words, added, And I come to you, explaining at least in some measure why he said, I am no more in the world.

In a word, what the soul is to the body, Christians are to the world. The soul is dispersed through all the members of the body, and Christians throughout the cities of the world. The soul dwells in the body but is not of the body. Likewise, Christians dwell in the world but are not of the world. The soul, which is invisible, is confined in the body, which is visible. In the same way, Christians are recognized as being in the world, and yet their religion remains invisible. The flesh hates the soul and wages war against it, even though it has suffered no wrong, because it is hindered from indulging in its pleasures. Similarly, the world also hates the Christians, even though it has suffered no wrong, because they set themselves against its pleasures. The soul loves the flesh that hates it and its members, and Christians love those who hate them. The soul is enclosed in the body, but it holds the body together. And though Christians are detained in the world as if in a prison, they in fact hold the world together. The soul, which is immortal, lives in a mortal dwelling. In a similar way, Christians live as strangers amid perishable things, while waiting for the imperishable in heaven. The soul, when poorly treated with respect to food and drink, becomes all the better. And so Christians when punished daily increase more and more. Such is the important position to which God has appointed them, and it is not right for them to decline it.

We give you thanks, Holy Father,

For your holy name which you

have caused to dwell in our hearts,

And for the knowledge and faith and immortality

Which you have made known to us

Through Jesus your servant;

To you be the glory forever. . . .

Remember your church, Lord,

To deliver it from all evil

And to make it perfect in your love;

And gather it, the one that has been sanctified,

From the four winds into your kingdom,

Which you have prepared for it;

For yours is the power and the glory forever. DIDACHE 10.2-5.

John, who especially brings out the working of spiritual causes in the Gospel, preserves this prayer of the Lord for the apostles that all the others passed over. Notice how he prayed, namely, Holy Father, keep them in your name. . . . While I was with them, I kept them in your name: those whom you gave me I have kept. That prayer was not for himself but for his apostles. He was not in sorrow for himself^[1] since he asks them to pray that they won’t be tempted. . . . And when he prays, he prays for those whom he preserved, so long as he was with them, whom he now hands over to the Father to preserve. Now that he is about to accomplish the mystery of death, he begs the Father to guard them. The presence of the angel who was sent to him (if this explanation is true) is no doubt significant. Jesus showed his certainty that the prayer was answered when, at its close, he commands the disciples to sleep.^[2] The effect of this prayer and the security that prompted the command, sleep, is noticed by the Evangelist in the course of the passion, when he says of the apostles just before they escaped from the hands of the pursuers, That the word might be fulfilled which he had spoken, ‘Of those whom you have given me, I lost not one of them .’ He himself fulfills the petition of his prayer, and they are all safe. But he asks that those whom he has preserved the Father will now preserve in his own name. And they are preserved; the faith of Peter does not fail: it cowered, but repentance followed immediately.

One has many meanings, including that of likeness. It is used both of harmony^[1] and likeness.^[2] All the believers were of one heart and mind,^[3] and in the same way, by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body.^[4] According to likeness of nature and having Adam as the natural origin and head of our birth, we are all said to have one body. So also we are inscribed as having Christ as head through our new birth, which has become to us a figure of the death and resurrection of him who rose as the firstborn from the dead. We inscribe him as head according to the prefiguring of his resurrection, of whom we are individually members and a body, through the Spirit, begotten unto incorruption.^[5]

Christ wishes the disciples to be kept in a state of unity by maintaining a like-mindedness and an identity of will, being mingled together as it were in soul and spirit and in the law of peace and love for one another. He wishes them to be bound together tightly with an unbreakable bond of love, that they may advance to such a degree of unity that their freely chosen association might even become an image of the natural unity that is conceived to exist between the Father and the Son. That is to say, he wishes them to enjoy a unity that is inseparable and indestructible, which may not be enticed away into a dissimilarity of wills by anything at all that exists in the world or any pursuit of pleasure, but rather reserves the power of love in the unity of devotion and holiness. And this is what happened. For as we read in the Acts of the Apostles, the company of those who believed were of one heart and soul,^[1] that is, in the unity of the Spirit. This is also what Paul himself meant when he said one body and one Spirit.^[2] We who are many are one body in Christ for we all partake of the one bread,^[3] and we have all been anointed in the one Spirit, the Spirit of Christ.^[4]

For the will of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit is one. This is what he wants us to be as well when he says, That they may be one, as you and I are one. There is nothing that can equal unanimity and concord, for this is how one becomes many. If two or ten are of one mind, the one is no longer one, but each one is multiplied tenfold, and you will find the one in the ten and the ten in the one. And if they have an enemy, he who attacks the one (as having attacked the ten) is defeated, for he is the target of ten opponents instead of one. Is someone in need? No, he is not in need, for he is wealthy in his greater part, that is, in the nine. And the needy part, the lesser, is concealed by the wealthy part, the greater. Each of these has twenty hands, twenty eyes and as many feet. For he does not see with his own eyes alone but with those of the others as well. He does not walk with his own feet alone but with those of the others. He does not work with his own hands alone but with theirs. He has ten souls, for not only does he think about himself, but those souls also think about him. And if they are made into a hundred, it will still be the same, and their power will be extended even more. Don’t you see how the excess of love makes the one both irresistible and multiplied? See how one can even be in many places, the same both in Persia and in Rome? Don’t you see that what nature cannot do, love can? . . . See what a multiplier love is when it can even make one a thousand. Why then do we not acquire this power and place ourselves in safety? This is better than all power or riches. This is more than health, than light itself. It is the groundwork for courage.

The Arians, however, reply . . . the Son and the Father are one as the Father is in the Son and the Son in the Father—just as we too may become one in him. For this is written in the Gospel according to John.^[1] . . . Then, as having found an evasion, these crafty ones add [to John’s Gospel], If, as we become one in the Father, so also the Son and the Father are one, and thus the Son too is in the Father, how do you pretend that ‘I and the Father are One,’ and ‘I in the Father and the Father in Me,’ mean that the Son is proper and like the Father’s essence? For it follows either that we too are proper to the Father’s essence or the Son is foreign to it as we are foreign. This is how they idly babble. But they are, in fact, devilishly reckless. . . . For what is given to humankind by grace is what they would make equal to the Godhead of the giver. And so, hearing that human beings are called sons, they considered themselves equal to the true Son who is by nature [a Son of God]. And now again hearing from the Savior, that they may be one as we are, they deceive themselves and are arrogant enough to think that they may be such as the Son is in the Father and the Father in the Son—not considering the fall of their father the devil who thought the same thing.

For it is as sons [that we become one with God], not as the Son. We become as gods—we do not become God himself. We are not as the Father but merciful as the Father. And, as has been said, by becoming one in this way, that is, as the Father and the Son are one, we shall be one. We shall be so, however, not as the Father is by nature in the Son and the Son in the Father, but according to our own nature. And in this way it is possible for us then to be molded and to learn how we ought to be one, just as we learned also to be merciful. For similar things are naturally one with other similar things. And so, all flesh is ranked together in kind.^[1] But the Word is unlike us, although it is like the Father. And therefore, while the Son is in nature and truth one with his own Father, we—as being of one kind with each other (for from one were all made, and one is the nature of all men and women)—become one in our good disposition toward each other.^[2] We have as our copy the Son’s natural unity with the Father. For he taught us meekness from himself, saying, Learn from me, for I am meek and lowly in heart.^[3] He taught us this not so that we may become equal to him (which is impossible) but so that when we look toward his [example], we may continually remain meek. So also here he desires that our good disposition toward each other should be true and firm and indissoluble, taking himself as the pattern. And so he says, that they may be one as we are, whose oneness is indivisible. And so, when they learn from us of that indivisible nature, they may preserve agreement with each other in a similar way.

The betrayer of Christ was called the son of perdition, as foreordained to perdition, according to the Scripture, where it is specially prophesied of him in Psalm 109.^[1]

But O ungodliest of people, seed of Canaan and not of Judah,^[1] and no longer a vessel of election but a son of perdition and death! You thought the devil’s instigations would profit you better so that, inflamed with the torch of greed, you were ablaze to gain thirty pieces of silver without seeing the riches you would lose. For even if you did not think the Lord’s promises were to be believed, what reason was there for preferring so small a sum of money to what you had already received? You were allowed to command the evil spirits, to heal the sick, to receive honor with the rest of the apostles. And that you might satisfy your thirst for gain, you had the opportunity to steal from the box that was in your charge. But your mind, which lusted after forbidden things, was more strongly stimulated by what was less allowed. It was not the amount of the price that pleased you so much as the enormity of the sin. And so your wicked bargain is not so detestable merely because you valued the Lord so cheaply but because you sold him who was the redeemer, yes, even yours, and yet you asked for no pity for yourself.^[2] And justly was your punishment put into your own hands because none could be found more cruelly bent on your destruction than yourself.

Here, if I am asked why God should not have given them perseverance to whom he gave that love by which they might live in a Christian way, I answer that I do not know. I am not speaking arrogantly but rather with an acknowledgment of my own small capabilities when I hear the apostle saying, O man, who are you that makes a reply against God?^[1] . . . Insofar as he condescends to make his judgments known to us, let us give thanks. However, insofar as he thinks it is fitting to conceal them, let us not murmur against his counsel. Rather, let us believe that this also is the most wholesome for us. But whoever of you are in opposition to his grace and ask [concerning this question of perseverance], what do you yourself say? It is well that you do not deny yourself to be a Christian and boast of being a catholic. If, therefore, you confess that to persevere to the end in good is God’s gift, I think that equally with me you are ignorant why one person should receive this gift and another should not receive it. And in this case we are both unable to penetrate the unsearchable judgments of God.

When, therefore, God’s children say of those who did not have perseverance, They went out from us, but they were not of us, and add, Because if they had been of us, they would assuredly have continued with us,^[1] what else are they saying than that they were not children, even when they were called and professed to be children? It is not because they simulated righteousness but because they did not continue in it. For he does not say, If they had been of us, they would assuredly have maintained a real and not a feigned righteousness with us. Rather, he says, If they had been of us, they would assuredly have continued with us. Beyond a doubt, he wanted them to continue in goodness. Therefore they were in goodness. However, because they did not remain in it—that is, they did not persevere to the end—he says, They were not of us, even when they were with us. In other words, they were not of the number of children even when they were in the faith as children because those who are truly children are foreknown and predestined as conformed to the image of his Son. They are called according to his purpose so as to be elected, as is evident in the fact that the son of promise does not perish, but the son of perdition does.

In another place he says, Of all that you gave me, I will surely lose nothing.^[1] Yet not only was [Judas] lost, but also many afterward were lost too. So how then can he say, I will not lose any? [He means], At least for my part, I will not lose them. So in another place, declaring the matter more clearly, he said, I will not reject anyone who comes to me.^[2] In other words, [Jesus is saying], it is not through any fault on my part. They will not be lost at my instigation or because I abandon them. But if they start going away on their own, I will not force them back.

But he tells what this joy is when he says, That they may have my joy fulfilled in themselves. This has already been elucidated above where he says, That they may be one, even as we are. This joy of his that is bestowed on them by him was to be fulfilled, he says, in them. And for that very end he declared that he had spoken in the world. This is that peace and blessedness in the world to come. If we want to attain it, we must live temperately and righteously and godly in the present.

Showing himself to them simultaneously as God and man, Christ induces his disciples to reflect that he would work to accomplish their salvation in God whether present or absent. And that as he had them in his keeping while he was with them on the earth in the form of man, so also would he keep them while absent from them as God. . . . For that which is divine is not bounded by space and is not far from anything that exists but fills and pervades the universe. And though it is present in all things, it is contained by none. When addressing his own Father, Christ says, Holy Father, keep them, referring . . . to the universal working of the power of the Father. And at the same time showing that he does not stand apart from the nature of the Father but being in it and proceeding from it, Christ is indivisibly united with it, though he is conceived of as independently existing.