Hilary of Poitiers on divine impassibility and Christ’s sufferings

Status
Not open for further replies.

Reformed Covenanter

Cancelled Commissioner
It is clearly shewn why the Word, though He was made Flesh, was nevertheless not transformed into Flesh. Though these kinds of suffering affect the infirmity of the flesh, yet God the Word when made Flesh could not change under suffering.

Suffering and change are not identical. Suffering of every kind causes all flesh to change through sensitiveness and endurance of pain. But the Word that was made Flesh, although He made Himself subject to suffering, was nevertheless unchanged by the liability to suffer. For He was able to suffer, and yet the Word was not possible.

Passibility denotes a nature that is weak; but suffering in itself is the endurance of pains inflicted, and since the Godhead is immutable and yet the Word was made Flesh, such pains found in Him a material which they could affect though the Person of the Word had no infirmity or passibility. And so when He suffered His Nature remained immutable because like His Father, His Person is of an impassible essence, though it is born.

For the reference, see Hilary of Poitiers on divine impassibility and Christ’s sufferings.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top