XXVI, 38). Si ergo Verbum Deus, et homo caro, quid est aliud, Verbum factum est caro; nisi, Qui Deus erat, factus est homo? Ac per hoc qui erat Dei Filius, factus est hominis filius, assumptione inferioris. non conversione potioris; accipiendo quod non erat, non amittendo quod erat. Nam quomodo in Regula fidei confiteremur, credere nos in Filium Dei qui natus est ex virgine Maria, si non Filius Dei, sed filius hominis natus est ex virgine Maria? Quis enim christianus neget ex illa femina filium hominis natum? sed tamen Deum hominem factum, et ita hominem Deum factum. Deus enim erat Verbum, et Verbum caro factum est. Confitendum est igitur, eum qui Filius Dei erat, ut de virgine Maria nasceretur, assumpta forma servi filium hominis factum, quod erat manentem, quod non erat assumentem. esse incipientem quo minor est Patre, et semper manentem in eo quod unum sunt ipse et Pater.
26:38). If, then, the Word is God, and the flesh is man, what else is "The Word was made flesh" but "He Who was God was made man"? And by this He Who was the Son of God was made the son of man, by the taking up of the lower, not by the conversion of the higher; by receiving what He was not, not by losing what He was. For how should we confess in the Rule of faith that we believe in the Son of God Who was born of the Virgin Mary, if not the Son of God but a son of man was born of the Virgin Mary? For what Christian would deny that a son of man was born of that woman? But nevertheless [he confesses] God made man, and thus man made God. For the Word was God, and the Word was made flesh. It must therefore be confessed that He Who was the Son of God, in order to be born of the Virgin Mary, having taken the form of a servant, was made the son of man, remaining what He was, taking up what He was not, beginning to be that in which He is less than the Father, and ever remaining in that in which He and the Father are one.
CAPUT III. — 3. Dei Filium eumdem esse filium hominis incarnatione. Nam si ille qui semper est Dei Filius, non ipse est factus hominis filius, quomodo de illo dicit Apostolus: Qui cum in forma Dei esset, non rapinam arbitratus est esse aequalis Deo; sed se ipsum exinanivit formam servi accipiens, in similitudinem hominum factus, et habitu inventus ut homo? Neque enim alius, sed ipse in forma Dei aequalis Patri, qui est utique unigenitus Dei Filius, semetipsum exinanivit, in similitudinem hominum factus. Neque alius, sed idem ipse in forma Dei aequalis Patri, humiliavit, non alium, sed semetipsum factus obediens usque ad mortem, mortem autem crucis (Philipp. II, 6, 7). Quod totum non fecit Dei Filius, nisi in ea forma qua est hominis filius. Item si ille qui semper est Dei Filius, non est ipse factus hominis filius, quomodo dicit Apostolus ad Romanos: Segregatus in Evangelium Dei, quod ante promiserat per Prophetas suos in Scripturis sanctis de Filio suo, qui factus est ei ex semine David secundum carnem (Rom. I, 1-3)? Ecce Filius Dei, quod utique semper erat, factus est ex semine David secundum carnem, quod non erat. Item si ille qui est Dei Filius, non est ipse factus filius hominis, quomodo misit Deus Filium suum factum ex muliere (Galat. IV, 4)? Quo nomine secundum hebraeam linguam non virgineum decus negatur, sed femineus sexus ostenditur. Quis enim a Patre est missus, nisi unigenitus Dei Filius? Quomodo ergo ex muliere factus, nisi quia idem ipse qui erat apud Patrem Dei Filius, missus factus est hominis filius? De Patre natus sine temporis die, de matre natus hoc die. Istum enim diem quem creavit, in quo crearetur elegit, sicut factus est de matre quam fecit. Nam et ipse dies a quo deinceps incrementum lucis accipit dies, opus Christi significat, a quo interior homo noster renovatur de die in diem (II Cor. IV, 16). Aeterno quippe Creatori in tempore creato ille dies debuit esse natalis, cui creatura congrueret temporalis.
Chapter III. — 3. That the Son of God is the same as the son of man by the incarnation. For if He Who is ever the Son of God was not Himself made the son of man, how does the Apostle say of Him: "Who, though He was in the form of God, did not think it robbery to be equal to God; but emptied Himself, taking the form of a servant, made in the likeness of men, and found in fashion as a man"? For it was not another, but He Himself, equal to the Father in the form of God, Who is assuredly the only-begotten Son of God, Who "emptied Himself, made in the likeness of men". Nor was it another, but the very same, equal to the Father in the form of God, Who "humbled", not another, but "Himself, made obedient unto death, even the death of the cross" (Phil. 2:6–7). All of which the Son of God did not do except in that form in which He is the son of man. Again, if He Who is ever the Son of God was not Himself made the son of man, how does the Apostle say to the Romans: "Set apart for the Gospel of God, which He had promised beforehand through His Prophets in the holy Scriptures concerning His Son, Who was made to Him of the seed of David according to the flesh" (Rom. 1:1–3)? Behold, the Son of God, which He assuredly always was, was made of the seed of David according to the flesh, which He was not. Again, if He Who is the Son of God was not Himself made the son of man, how did "God send His Son, made of a woman" (Gal. 4:4)? By which name, according to the Hebrew tongue, the glory of virginity is not denied, but the female sex is indicated. For who was sent by the Father but the only-begotten Son of God? How then was He made of a woman, unless because the very same Son of God Who was with the Father, being sent, was made the son of man? Born of the Father without a day of time, born of His mother on this day. For this day which He created He chose as the day on which He Himself would be created, just as He was made of a mother whom He made. For this very day too, from which the day henceforth receives an increase of light, signifies the work of Christ, by Whom our inner man is renewed from day to day (2 Cor. 4:16). For to the eternal Creator, created in time, that day had to be His birthday, with which a temporal creature would accord.