Hebrews 1

Hebrews 1:1

Augustine of Hippo: You see, those old sacrifices of the people of God also represented in a variety of ways this single one that was to come. Christ himself, I mean, was both a sheep, because of his innocence and simplicity of soul, and a goat because of “the likeness of sinful flesh.” And whatever else was foretold “in many and various ways” in the sacrifices of the old covenant refers to this single one which has been revealed in the new covenant. — SERMON 228B.2

Clement of Alexandria: Now all men, having the same judgment, some, following the Word speaking, frame for themselves proofs; while others, giving themselves up to pleasures, wrest Scripture, in accordance with their lusts. And the lover of truth, as I think, needs force of soul. For those who make the greatest attempts must fail in things of the highest importance; unless, receiving from the truth itself the rule of the truth, they cleave to the truth. But such people, in consequence of falling away from the right path, err in most individual points; as you might expect from not having the faculty for judging of what is true and false, strictly trained to select what is essential. For if they had, they would have obeyed the Scriptures.… For we have, as the source of teaching, the Lord, both by the prophets, the Gospel, and the blessed apostles, “in divers manners and at sundry times,” leading from the beginning of knowledge to the end. But if one should suppose that another origin was required, then no longer truly could an origin be preserved.… For we may not give our adhesion to men on a bare statement by them, who might equally state the opposite. But if it is not enough merely to state the opinion, but if what is stated must be confirmed, we do not wait for the testimony of men, but we establish the matter that is in question by the voice of the Lord, which is the surest of all demonstrations, or rather is the only demonstration; in which knowledge those who have merely tasted the Scriptures are believers; while those who, having advanced further, and become correct expounders of the truth, are Gnostics. Since also, in what pertains to life, craftsmen are superior to ordinary people, and model what is beyond common notions; so, consequently, we also, giving a complete exhibition of the Scriptures from the Scriptures themselves, from faith persuade by demonstration. And if those also who follow heresies venture to avail themselves of the prophetic Scriptures; in the first place they will not make use of all the Scriptures, and then they will not quote them entire, nor as the body and texture of prophecy prescribe. But, selecting ambiguous expressions, they wrest them to their own opinions, gathering a few expressions here and there; not looking to the sense, but making use of the mere words. For in almost all the quotations they make, you will find that they attend to the names alone, while they alter the meanings; neither knowing, as they affirm, nor using the quotations they adduce, according to their true nature. But the truth is not found by changing the meanings (for so people subvert all true teaching), but in the consideration of what perfectly belongs to and becomes the Sovereign God, and in establishing each one of the points demonstrated in the Scriptures again from similar Scriptures. — The Stromata Book 7

Clement of Alexandria: It remains, then, for us, ascending to seek their teacher. And since the unoriginated Being is one, the Omnipotent God; one, too, is the First-begotten, “by whom all things were made, and without whom not one thing ever was made.” “For one, in truth, is God, who formed the beginning of all things;” pointing out “the first-begotten Son,” Peter writes, accurately comprehending the statement, “In the beginning God made the heaven and the earth.” And He is called Wisdom by all the prophets. This is He who is the Teacher of all created beings, the Fellow-counsellor of God, who foreknew all things; and He from above, from the first foundation of the world, “in many ways and many times,” trains and perfects; whence it is rightly said, “Call no man your teacher on earth.” — The Stromata Book 6

Clement of Alexandria: And that Scripture calls every secular science or art by the one name wisdom (there are other arts and sciences invented over and above by human reason), and that artistic and skilful invention is from God, will be clear if we adduce the following statement: “And the Lord spake to Moses, See, I have called Bezaleel, the son of Uri, the son of Or, of the tribe of Judah; and I have filled him with the divine spirit of wisdom, and understanding, and knowledge, to devise and to execute in all manner of work, to work gold, and silver, and brass, and blue, and purple, and scarlet, and in working stone work, and in the art of working wood,” and even to “all works.” And then He adds the general reason, “And to every understanding heart I have given understanding;” that is, to every one capable of acquiring it by pains and exercise. And again, it is written expressly in the name of the Lord “And speak thou to all that are wise in mind, whom I have filled with the spirit of perception.” Those who are wise in mind have a certain attribute of nature peculiar to themselves; and they who have shown themselves capable, receive from the Supreme Wisdom a spirit of perception in double measure. For those who practise the common arts, are in what pertains to the senses highly gifted: in hearing, he who is commonly called a musician; in touch, he who moulds clay; in voice the singer, in smell the perfumer, in sight the engraver of devices on seals. Those also that are occupied in instruction, train the sensibility according to which the poets are susceptible to the influence of measure; the sophists apprehend expression; the dialecticians, syllogisms; and the philosophers are capable of the contemplation of which themselves are the objects. For sensibility finds and invents; since it persuasively exhorts to application. And practice will increase the application which has knowledge for its end. With reason, therefore, the apostle has called the wisdom of God “manifold,” and which has manifested its power “in many departments and in many modes”-by art, by knowledge, by faith, by prophecy-for our benefit. “For all wisdom is from the Lord, and is with Him for ever,” as says the wisdom of Jesus. — The Stromata Book 1

Clement of Alexandria: “Who shall give account,” he says, “to Him who is ready to judge the quick and the dead.”

These are trained through previous judgments. Therefore he adds, “For this cause was the Gospel preached also to the dead”-to us, namely, who were at one time unbelievers. “That they might be judged according to men,” he says, “in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit. Because, that is, they have fallen away from faith; whilst they are still in the flesh they are judged according to preceding judgments, that they might repent. Accordingly, he also adds, saying, “That they might live according to God in the spirit.” So Paul also; for he, too, states something of this nature when he says, “Whom I have delivered to Satan, that he might live in the spirit;” that is, “as good stewards of the manifold grace of God.” Similarly also Paul says, “Variously, and in many ways, God of old spake to our fathers.” — From the Latin Translation of Cassiodorus

Cosmas Indicopleustes: God, having of old time spoken unto the fathers in the prophets by divers portions and in divers manners, hath at the end of these days spoken unto us in His Son, thus distributing the word into portions and manners, into the prophets and His Son. By portions, he means the difference of the places in which God appeared and spake to the men of old through the prophets, and by manners, the diversity of the visions themselves, which He, when seen at one time and another in cases of immediate necessity, exhibited either in person or through the Prophets, having a desire to signify this, that God in every way, both by real things and by visions, did not neglect to instruct rational beings in the knowledge of Himself, placing it before them at one time through the prophets, and now through His own Son. — The Christian Topography, Book 7

Ephrem the Syrian: “In many and various ways God spoke,” in the first place, “to our fathers by the prophets.” In fact, he evidently spoke in various and mutable manners to Noah, Abraham and Moses and to the people in the desert, appearing to them under the diverse guises of an old man, a giant and other characters. — COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS

Eusebius of Caesarea: Holy Scripture teaches that God was seen by Israel dimly, meaning the Word of God. In the book of Numbers Moses prays, saying, “Since you are the Lord of this people who is seen by them face to face.” … And it is said in Exodus, “Then Moses and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu and seventy of the elders of Israel went up, and they saw the God of Israel.” …From the text, “No one has ever seen God,” perhaps it might be thought that the above quotations contradict the Savior’s words, implying that the invisible is visible. But if they are understood … as the Word of God, who was seen by the fathers “in many ways and various ways,” no contradiction is involved. The God of Israel here seen is shown to be the same being who was seen by Israel, when he wrestled with the one who first changed his name from Jacob to Israel, saying, “You have striven with God.” And when also Jacob, appreciating God’s divine power, called the place of the struggle the Sight of God, saying, “I have seen God face to face, and yet my life is preserved” … this was no other than the Word of God. — PROOF OF THE GOSPEL 5.18

Jerome: The epistle which is called the Epistle to the Hebrews is not considered his [Paul’s], on account of its difference from the others in style and language, but it is reckoned, either according to Tertullian to be the work of Barnabas, or according to others, to be by Luke the Evangelist or Clement afterwards bishop of the church at Rome, who, they say, arranged and adorned the ideas of Paul in his own language, though to be sure, since Paul was writing to Hebrews and was in disrepute among them he may have omitted his name from the salutation on this account. He being a Hebrew wrote Hebrew, that is his own tongue and most fluently while the things which were eloquently written in Hebrew were more eloquently turned into Greek and this is the reason why it seems to differ from other epistles of Paul. — De Viris Illustribus (On Illustrious Men), Section 5

John Chrysostom: Truly, “where sin abounded, grace did much more abound.” This at least the blessed Paul intimates here also, in the very beginning of his Epistle to the Hebrews. For since as it was likely that afflicted, worn out by evils, and judging of things thereby, they would think themselves worse off than all other men, he shows that herein they had rather been made partakers of greater, even very exceeding, grace; arousing the hearer at the very opening of his discourse. Wherefore he says, “God who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in times past unto the fathers by the Prophets, hath at the end of the days spoken unto us by His Son.”

Why did he [Paul] not oppose “himself” to “the prophets”? Certainly, he was much greater than they, inasmuch as a greater trust was committed to him. Yet he doth not so. Why? First, to avoid speaking great things concerning himself. Secondly, because his hearers were not yet perfect. And thirdly, because he rather wished to exalt them, and to show that their superiority was great. As if he had said, What so great matter is it that He sent prophets to our fathers? For to us [He has sent] His own only-begotten Son Himself.

And well did he begin thus, “At sundry times and in divers manners,” for he points out that not even the prophets themselves saw God; nevertheless, the Son saw Him. For the expressions, “at sundry times and in divers manners” are the same as “in different ways.” “For I” (saith He) “have multiplied visions, and used similitudes by the ministry of the Prophets.” Wherefore the excellency consists not in this alone, that to them indeed prophets were sent, but to us the Son; but that none of them saw God, but the Only-begotten Son saw Him. He doth not indeed at once assert this, but by what he says afterwards he establishes it, when he speaks concerning His human nature; “For to which of the Angels said He, Thou art My Son,” and, “Sit thou on My right hand”?

And look on his great wisdom. First he shows the superiority from the prophets. Then having established this as acknowledged, he declares that to them indeed He spake by the prophets, but to us by the Only-begotten. Then [He spake] to them by Angels, and this again he establishes, with good reason (for angels also held converse with the Jews): yet even herein we have the superiority, inasmuch as the Master [spake] to us, but to them servants, and prophets, fellow-servants. — Homily on Hebrews 1

John Chrysostom: Well also said he, “at the end of the days,” for by this he both stirs them up and encourages them desponding of the future. For as he says also in another place, “The Lord is at hand, be careful for nothing,” and again, “For now is our salvation nearer than when we believed”: so also here. What then is it which he says? That whoever is spent in the conflict, when he hears of the end thereof, recovers his breath a little, knowing that it is the end indeed of his labors, but the beginning of his rest.

“Hath in the end of the days spoken unto us in [His] Son.” Behold again he uses the saying, “in [His] Son,” for “through the Son,” against those who assert that this phrase is proper to the Spirit. Dost thou see that the [word] “in” is “through”?

And the expression, “In times past,” and this, “In the end of the days,” shadows forth some other meaning: that when a long time had intervened, when we were on the edge of punishment, when the Gifts had failed, when there was no expectation of deliverance, when we were expecting to have less than all, then we have had more.

And see how considerately he hath spoken it. For he said not, “Christ spake” (albeit it was He who did speak), but inasmuch as their souls were weak, and they were not yet able to hear the things concerning Christ, he says, “God hath spoken by Him.” What meanest thou? did God speak through the Son? Yes. What then? Is it thus thou showest the superiority? for here thou hast but pointed out that both the New and the Old [Covenants] are of One and the same: and that this superiority is not great. Wherefore he henceforth follows on upon this argument, saying, “He spake unto us by [His] Son.”

(Note, how Paul makes common cause, and puts himself on a level with the disciples, saying, He spake “to us”: and yet He did not speak to him, but to the Apostles, and through them to the many. But he lifts them [the Hebrews] up, and declares that He spake also to them. And as yet he doth not at all reflect on the Jews. For almost all to whom the prophets spake, were a kind of evil and polluted persons. But as yet the discourse is not of these: but, hitherto of the gifts derived from God.) — Homily on Hebrews 1

John Damascene: The God proclaimed by the Old Testament and the New is the one who is celebrated and glorified in Trinity, for the Lord said, “I have come not to abolish the law, but to fulfill.” For he worked our salvation, for the sake of which all Scripture and every mystery has been revealed. Again, “Search the Scriptures, for it is they that bear witness to me.” And the apostle too says, “In many and various ways God spoke of old to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by a Son.” Through the Holy Spirit, then, both the law and the prophets, evangelists, apostles, pastors and teachers spoke. Therefore, “all Scripture is inspired by God and profitable,” so that to search the sacred Scripture is very good and most profitable for the soul. — ORTHODOX FAITH 4.17

Methodius of Olympus: But since there are of arguments myriads of currents and ways, God inspiring us “at sundry times and in divers manners” — Methodius Discourse III. Thaleia

Oecumenius: Paul writes this from Italy. The occasion of the letter was this. Since the Jews were insisting on the law and shadowy figures, the apostle Paul, having become the teacher of the Gentiles and sent to preach the Gospel to the nations, wrote this letter after he had written to all the Gentiles, also to the Hebrews who had believed from the circumcision, to teach them through this Epistle, in which he declares that Christ has come and that the shadow of the law has ceased. And indeed, it first demonstrates that prophets and announcers [μηνυτὰς] of his coming were sent for this reason, and that Christ himself is the Son of God, through whom all things were made. And that this Son had to become a man, so that by the sacrifice of his body he might destroy death. For salvation was to come to all not through the blood of calves or goats, but through the blood of Christ. Moreover, it shows that the law made no one perfect but had only a shadow of the good things to come. The Jewish people did not find rest, but a day of rest was left to all of us in common. Furthermore, it also demonstrates that the priestly ministry was transferred from Aaron to Christ: whose figure was Melchizedek, who was not descended from Levi. It signifies that the fathers were justified by faith, and not by the works of the law. Then, after Paul also urged them to have good morals and praised their tolerance for Christ, and advised them to honor the elders, he concludes the Epistle. — The Pseudo-Oecumenian Catena on Hebrews

Oecumenius: The Epistle to the Hebrews indeed seems not to be from Paul, both because of the style of writing and because it does not attach his name, as in all the other Epistles; also because it says: “How shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation, which at first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed to us by those who heard Him, God also bearing witness with signs and wonders?” (Heb. 2:3-4) And indeed the reason why the style was changed is evident. For it is said to have been written to the Hebrews in their own language, later translated, as some think, by Luke, but as it seems to most, by Clement; for he also preserves its character.However, the reason why he did not attach his name to the Epistle is the order of the matter. For Paul was the apostle of the Gentiles, and not of the Jews. For he had given the right hand of fellowship to Peter and the other apostles, so that he himself would minister among the Gentiles with Barnabas, while those around Peter would go to the circumcision. Since there was a partnership in preaching, and the Jews had heard that Paul was teaching a departure from the law, it is fitting that he writes a letter to the Hebrews to show the agreement of the preaching. However, when he was writing to them, it was not appropriate for him to declare himself an Apostle at the beginning. The letter itself also testifies that it is Paul’s, as it says: You have also shared in the afflictions that have come upon me in my chains. (Heb. 10:34) And when he says: “Pray more earnestly that I may be restored to you more quickly” (Heb. 13:19); furthermore, when he says: “You know our brother Timothy has been released, with whom, if he comes soon, I will see you.” (Heb. 13:23) For no one except Paul, as I believe, had sent Timothy into ministry: and while waiting for him more quickly, he promises them his own and Timothy’s arrival, as he often does. Many other things also show us that this is his Epistle, as the reading itself teaches in the course of it. — The Pseudo-Oecumenian Catena on Hebrews

Oecumenius: For what reason does Paul, being the Apostle to the Gentiles, write to the Hebrews? And this while they were hostile towards him because he was paralyzing [παραλύειν] the law? For Peter and the others who were with him, lowering themselves to the weak understanding of the Jews, were somewhat following the law. We say that just as it was not committed to Paul to baptize, yet out of an abundance of ministry he was also baptizing: so he writes to the Hebrews, although he was sent to the Gentiles. Indeed, he had anxious care for them, so much so that he even said: “I could wish to be accursed from Christ for their sake” (Rom. 9:3); and again: “I am going to Jerusalem to minister to the saints.” (Rom. 15:25) Therefore, Paul writes to those who had already believed in Jerusalem and in Palestine: he writes, however, to comfort them because they had suffered many afflictions from their own fellow countrymen who did not believe, as he himself indicates, saying, “Strengthen your limp hands and your weak knees.” (Heb. 12:12) However, two points in this in the Epistle: Paul comforts them that they have bravely endured temptations, and that a good reward will be given for these things. Moreover, he discusses many things about faith, showing that the Jewish practices are no longer necessary, as it was a figure of the truth,while our own practices are necessary as they are the truth. Therefore, why Paul did not add a proper name when writing to the Hebrews, Clement writes in his “The Hypotyposes” as follows: Now indeed, as the blessed elder says: When the Lord was sent as the apostle of the Almighty God to the Hebrews, it was done out of modesty that Paul, who was sent to the Gentiles, did not write himself as the apostle of the Hebrews, out of honor bestowed upon the Lord. Furthermore, out of abundant love, it was done that the preacher and apostle of the Gentiles also wrote to the Hebrews. — The Pseudo-Oecumenian Catena on Hebrews

Oecumenius: “In many times and in various ways.” God spoke in various and diverse manners through the prophets of old; but to us, he has spoken through the Son. Therefore, we have a great difference compared to our forefathers. For since they suffered evils, they did not think that they were so cared for by God as their forefathers; therefore, it shows that they are more cared for than those. For to those he sent prophets; but to us, he sent his Son. — The Pseudo-Oecumenian Catena on Hebrews

Severian of Gabala: “In many ways,” that is, according to the differences of the times in which the promises concerning us were imparted, such as at the creation of Adam, at the time of Cain, in the days of Noah, at the time of Abraham, at the time before the law, at the time after the law. For many are the manners of God’s administration on our behalf. And “in a variety of ways,” because one commandment was given to Adam, another to Noah, yet another to Abraham, and another through Moses, and yet different ones through the prophets. — FRAGMENTS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE Hebrews 1.1-2

Theodoret of Cyrus: The divine apostle immediately in the prologue demonstrates that Christ is better than all the prophets. Beginning with the divine nature, he shows him to be eternal—coeternal with the Father and the Creator of all. Next, contrasting him with the angels, he turns to sacred Scripture, which openly teaches that Christ is Son and God, while angels are ministers and creatures. He proceeds to show that the dispensation of our Lord Christ is greater than that of Moses, for Moses gave the Old Testament but Christ gave the New, which was promised through the prophets of old. The former promised that Palestine would be given; the latter, the kingdom of heaven. He compares the priesthood after the order of Melchizedek with the Levitical priesthood and demonstrates its superiority and excellence. In addition, he shows that even those who lived before the law or under the law and were nourished by piety were distinguished because of their faith. He speaks of them and their sufferings and courage, encouraging his hearers, who were in grave danger. Then, reminding his hearers of their own struggles and exhorting them to stand steadfast to the end and weaving together moral exhortation with doctrine, he closes the epistle. — INTERPRETATION OF Hebrews 1

Theodoret of Cyrus: The phrase “in many ways,” of course, indicates the manifold dispensations, “various ways,” the different kinds of divine visions. He appeared to Abraham in one way, to Moses in another, to Elijah in another, to Micaiah in another. Isaiah, Daniel and Ezekiel saw him under different guises. To bring this out the God of all said, “It was I who multiplied visions, and took visible form at the hands of the inspired authors.” After all, the divine nature is not pluriform, but without either shape or appearance, simple and uncomplicated. It was, therefore, not the incomprehensible nature that they saw but guises of some kind, which the unseen God revealed as need required. The phrase “in many ways,” of course, implies something else as well, that each of the inspired authors was entrusted with some particular dispensation, whereas their God—I mean Christ the Lord—did not provide for some single need, but by becoming man he set all to rights and secured the salvation of human beings. It became obvious, of course, that there is one lawgiver of the old and new. — INTERPRETATION OF Hebrews 1

Hebrews 1:2

Athanasius of Alexandria: The fame of Anthony came even unto kings, for Constantine Augustus and his sons … wrote letters to him as to a father and begged an answer from him. He made nothing very much of the letters, nor did he rejoice at the messages; rather, he was the same as he had been before the emperors wrote to him. But when they brought him the letters, he called the monks and said, “Do not be astonished if an emperor writes to us, for he is a man. Wonder rather that God wrote the law for men and has spoken to us through his own Son.” And so he was unwilling to receive the letters, saying that he did not know how to write an answer to such things. But at the urgings of the monks because the emperors were Christians and lest the emperors take offense on the ground that they had been spurned, he consented that the letters be read. And he wrote an answer approving of them because they worshiped Christ, and he gave them counsel on things pertaining to salvation: “not to think much of the present, but rather to remember the judgment that is coming, and to know that Christ alone was the true and eternal king.” He begged them to be merciful and to give heed to justice and the poor. Having received the answer, they rejoiced. Thus he was dear to all, and all desired to consider him as a father. LIFE OF ST. — Life of St. Anthony 81

Cyril of Alexandria: For at the end of the ages the Son himself spoke to us through himself. No longer through the mediation of a prophet or the voice of saints but through himself, the only begotten, by being born into our condition, spoke with us. And we say that the Father spoke in the Son, not as through a human being somehow established as a special kind of mediator or as one declaring a message to us which was not his own but another’s. Rather, the Son spoke to us in his own voice through his own body. For the flesh belonged to the only begotten and not to anyone else. Though God by nature, he became human while remaining God. — COMMENTARY ON HEBREWS

Ephrem the Syrian: Paul says, “through whom he made the worlds,” that is, both the spiritual and material worlds. — COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS

Jerome: He, who first spoke through patriarchs and prophets, afterwards spoke in his own person. As the Song of Songs says, “that he would kiss me with the kisses of his mouth.” He is saying, therefore, “Now, in my own person, I speak of him of whom I spoke through the prophets.” The world could not hear him in his thundering, but may it hear him, at least, in his crying. — HOMILIES ON THE PSALMS, ALTERNATE SERIES 66 (Psalms 88)

John Chrysostom: “Whom He appointed,” saith he, “heir of all.” What is “whom He appointed heir of all”? He speaks here of the flesh [the human nature]. As He also says in the second Psalm, “Ask of Me, and I will give Thee the heathen for Thine inheritance.” For no longer is “Jacob the portion of the Lord” nor “Israel His inheritance,” but all men: that is to say, He hath made Him Lord of all: which Peter also said in the Acts, “God hath made Him both Lord and Christ.” But he has used the name “Heir,” declaring two things: His proper sonship and His indefeasible sovereignty. “Heir of all,” that is, of all the world.

Then again he brings back his discourse to its former point. “By whom also He made the worlds [the ages].” Where are those who say, There was [a time] when He was not? — Homily on Hebrews 1

John Damascene: He made the ages who exists before the ages, of whom the divine David says, “From everlasting to everlasting you are” and the divine apostle, “By whom he made the ages.“38Now one should note that the term age has several meanings, because it signifies a great many things. The span of life of every person is called an age, and a period of one thousand years is called an age. Moreover, this whole present life is called an age, and so is the age without end to come after the resurrection. Again, that is called an age which is neither time nor any division of time measured by the course and motion of the sun, that is, made up of days and nights; but it is coextensive with eternal things after the fashion of some sort of temporal period and interval. This kind of age is to eternal things exactly what time is to temporal things. — ORTHODOX FAITH 2.1

Lucius Caecilius Firmianus Lactantius: For God had determined, as the last time drew near, to send from heaven a great leader, who should reveal to foreign nations that which was taken away from a perfidious and ungrateful people. And I will endeavour to discuss the subject in this book, if I shall first have shown that wisdom is so closely united with religion, that the one cannot be separated from the other. — The Divine Institutes Book 4, Chapter II

Oecumenius: “but in these last days.” He comforts those worn out by adverse circumstances, saying: in the last. For, he says, the end is near; and for some, rest from pains, and for others, the beginning of rewards. “He has spoken to us by His Son.” He did not say, “He spoke to us in Christ,” that is, through Christ; (for they were still weaker concerning Christ.) But, “by His Son,” that is, through the Son. “whom He made heir of all things.” He says, “He made him heir and Lord of the whole world.” The term “he made” is appropriate for the incarnation. — The Pseudo-Oecumenian Catena on Hebrews

Oecumenius: Who made him heir? Over whom? Over all things. Of all who approach the immortal and divine nature. Indeed, the Son is the heir and participant of the Father’s substance [οὐσίας], wealth, and power. Then, when he said that the Son is the heir of the Father’s possessions, he also explains how. Through him, he says, the ages were created: that is, the ages are the common works of him and the Father. But if the ages are the mutual work of the Father and the Son, then those things which are in the ages are certainly mutual to the Father and the Son. And if those things which are in the ages, much more those things which are after the ages, namely the world and those things which are in it. — The Pseudo-Oecumenian Catena on Hebrews

Oecumenius: “through whom also He made the ages.” Where are those who say, “when the Son was not”? For the Creator of the ages is not subject to time. But since the Father is the cause of the Son, it is fitting that He is also the cause of those things that came into being through Him. Therefore he says: through whom. For the Father seems to act when He begets the Son who has done these things. — The Pseudo-Oecumenian Catena on Hebrews

Photios I of Constantinople: “Whom he appointed the heir of all.” Of what? Of all those who approach the undefiled divine nature. Indeed, the Son is the heir and partaker of the Father’s nature, dominion and power. If the Son is the heir of the Father’s attributes, it is necessary to explain, in what way. Through him, it says, he also created the ages [the world]. If the creation is a mutual deed of the Father and of the Son, then all that is in the world is also a shared property of the Father and the Son. If all in the spiritual universe belongs to both of them, then that is also true of what was created after the spiritual universe, that is, our world (cosmos) and everything in it. Yet in order that you would not dare to interpret “heir” as according to grace or favor rather than according to birth and nature, he adds, “who is the reflection of [God’s] glory.” The author had in mind to prevent you from a simpleminded yet ungodly conclusion after he stated that the Father appointed him an heir. I believe that “appointed” does not signify production or creation of the heir yet indicates relationship between the Son and the Father, who is the cause according to nature of their unity and convergence. [The writer does this] so that it would not appear as if the Son is deprived of the fatherly bond by his origin and hence the Father and the Son are two separate and unrelated entities.… He speaks in very clear terms, “the very stamp of his nature,” that is he [the Son] shares the same nature and mode of existence, that is he is God, all-powerful, omnipotent, creator, and shares in all other attributes of the Father, except that the Father is always the Father and the Son is always the Son. Therefore, everything is created, sustained and directed by his almighty word. See, he is truly the heir, as the Father handed everything to him. — FRAGMENTS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE Hebrews 1.2-3

Severian of Gabala: “He spoke to us in his Son,” instead of “by the Son.” For he did not speak in him as an instrument but rather through him as one indwelling the flesh.… For when he had said, “He has spoken to us in his Son whom he appointed as an heir”—not “created as an heir”—he applied the word to his existence before the ages. And he does this intelligently, now leading us up into theology, now bringing us down into the incarnation. — FRAGMENTS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE Hebrews 1.1-2

Theodore of Mopsuestia: “Through whom also he made the ages.” An age is not a nature that is able to exist in substance but is understood to be a certain interval. This interval can be perceived from its having a beginning of existence until its end or until some other age has likewise taken its beginning.… The “creator of the ages” means nothing different than “everlasting, existing beyond every age, having his own limitless existence.” For the maker exists before the things which are made, but an interval of time must be perceived by its having a beginning.… When blessed David says, “Who exists before the ages,” he does not wish this to say that God exists before the latter ages, but that God has eternal existence, being earlier than every interval of time. When Paul says, “through whom God also made the ages,” Paul does not wish God to be the creator of the later ages but to be eternal and the cause of all ages that have a beginning. — FRAGMENTS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE Hebrews 1.2-3

Theodore of Mopsuestia: He does not say, “God spoke to us in the Son” but simply “in a Son.” By saying this and making no separation, he was able to signify both in a single expression. First of all, he signifies the true Son, and by true Son I mean the one who possesses sonship by his natural birth. In the second place, he also includes in this designation the one who shares truly in the dignity of sonship because of his union with God. — FRAGMENTS ON THE TREATISE ON THE INCARNATION 12.1

Theodoret of Cyrus: He spoke of the Son as “creator of the ages” to bring out that he is eternal and to teach us that he was always beyond any temporal interval whatsoever. In these terms the Old Testament speaks of the God and Father as the one existing before the ages, that is, the one who always is. — INTERPRETATION OF Hebrews 1

Theodoret of Cyrus: “Whom he appointed heir of all things.” The divine apostle began with human beings, and after speaking first of the lowlier things he thus lays hold of the greater. In other words, Christ the Lord is heir of all things, not as God, but as man: as God he is maker of all things, and the creator of all things is Lord of all by nature, whereas the heir is made master of what he was previously not lord. In like manner the believers are heirs of God and coheirs with Christ: by grace they receive what they did not have before. — INTERPRETATION OF Hebrews 1

Theodoret of Cyrus: He clearly brought out the difference between Christ the Lord and the prophets, calling him alone “Son.” The opening resembles the parable of the Lord: in telling the parable about the vineyard to the Jews, the Lord showed that slaves were first sent to the wicked farmers, then after their murder a son arrived. — INTERPRETATION OF Hebrews 1

Hebrews 1:3

Alexander of Alexandria: For he who denies that the brightness of the glory existed, takes away also the primitive light of which it is the brightness. And if the image of God was not always, it is clear also that He was not always, of which it is the image. Moreover, in saying that the character of the subsistence of God was not, He also is done away with who is perfectly expressed by it. — Epistles on the Arian Heresy - To Alexander, Bishop of the City of Constantinople

Alexander of Alexandria: That He is equally with the Father unchangeable and immutable, wanting in nothing, and the perfect Son, and like to the Father, we have learnt; in this alone is He inferior to the Father, that He is not unbegotten. For He is the very exact image of the Father, and in nothing differing from Him. For it is clear that He is the image fully containing all things by which the greatest similitude is declared, as the Lord Himself hath taught us, when He says, “My Father is greater than I.” And according to this we believe that the Son is of the Father, always existing. “For He is the brightness of His glory, the express image of His Father’s person.” But let no one take that word always so as to raise suspicion that He is unbegotten, as they imagine who have their senses blinded. — Epistles on the Arian Heresy - To Alexander, Bishop of the City of Constantinople

Athanasius of Alexandria: As the apostle, writing to the Hebrews, says, “who being the brightness of his glory and the stamp of his nature,” and David too in the eighty-ninth Psalm, “And the brightness of the Lord be upon us,” and “in your light shall we see light.” Who has so little sense as to doubt the eternity of the Son? For when did anyone see light without the brightness of its radiance, that one may say of the Son, “There was once when he was not,” or “Before his generation he was not.” And the words addressed to the Son in the hundred and forty-fourth Psalm, “Your kingdom is an everlasting kingdom,” forbid anyone to imagine any interval at all in which the Word did not exist. — Discourses Against the Arians 1.4.12

Athanasius of Alexandria: Who that has heard the words of John, “In the beginning was the Word,” will not denounce the saying of [Arius and his followers] that “there was a time when he was not”? Or who that has heard in the Gospel, “the only begotten Son” and “all things came into being through him,” will not detest their declaration that he is “one of the things that were made”? For how can he be one of those things that were made by himself? Or how can he be the only begotten, when, according to them, he is counted as one among the rest, since he is himself a creature and a work? And how can he be “made of things that were not,” when the Father says, “My heart has uttered a good Word,” and “Out of the womb I have begotten you before the morning star”? Or again, how is he “unlike in substance to the Father,” seeing he is the perfect “image” and “brightness” of the Father, and that he says, “He who has seen me has seen the Father”? And if the Son is the “Word” and “Wisdom” of God, how was there “a time when he was not”? It is the same as if they should say that God was once without Word and without Wisdom. And how is he “subject to change and variation” who says by himself, “I am in the Father, and the Father in me,” and “I and the Father are one”; and who by the prophet says, “I the Lord do not change”? For although one may refer this expression to the Father, yet it may now be more aptly spoken of the Word, that, though he has been made man, he has not changed. But as the apostle has said, “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and for ever.” And who can have persuaded them to say that he was made for us, for Paul writes, “for whom and by whom all things exist”? — The Deposition of Arius 3

Athanasius of Alexandria: Therefore, he is true God, existing consubstantially (homoousios) with the true Father, while other beings to whom he said, “I say, ‘you are gods,’ " have this grace from the Father only by participation in the Word through the Spirit. For he is the “very stamp” of the Father’s “being,” and “light” from “light,” and the “power” and true “image” of the Father’s substance. — Discourses Against the Arians 1.3.9

Cassiodorus: The Spirit in the essence of divinity is Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and is properly called one God. But according to the distinction of the persons, the Father’s unique characteristic is that he is by nature without a beginning, and he begot the Son before the ages. It is the unique characteristic of the Son that he is, as an essential part of his nature, begotten by the Father. It is the unique characteristic of the Spirit that he proceeds from the Father and the Son. Their eternity and power, equally part of the essence of each person, performs everything that the Godhead desires in heaven and earth by inexpressible love and cooperation. Although these things are presently understood as incomprehensible and unexplainable to us in their essential nature, still many of the Fathers propose a certain comparison with physical and existent objects. We find these three properties in the sun: first, there is a bodily substance, which is the sun. Then there is the brightness of the sun that remains in it. Third, is the heat that comes forth even to us from its brightness. If there is even any comparison for such a great matter that can be devised, I think that this comparison should be construed in this way: the bodily substance in the sun could be understood as the person of the Father. The brightness that is in the sun could stand for the person of the Son in the Trinity, as the Apostle says: “the brightness of his glory.” The heat in the sun could be understood as the person of the Holy Spirit in the Trinity, as one reads in Scripture: “Who is able to hide himself from its heat?” — Exposition of the Psalms 50.14

Clement of Rome: This is the way, dear friends, in which we found our salvation, Jesus Christ, the high priest of our offerings, the protector and helper of our weakness. Through him we fix our gaze on the heights of heaven. In him we see mirrored God’s pure and transcendent face. Through him the eyes of our hearts have been opened. Through him our foolish and darkened understanding springs up to the light. Through him the Master has willed that we should taste immortal knowledge. For, since “he reflects the glory of God,” “he is as much superior to the angels as the name he has obtained is more excellent than theirs.” For thus it is written: “He makes his angels winds, and his servants flames of fire.” But of his Son this is what the Master said: “You are my son, today I have begotten you. Ask of me, and I will make the nations your heritage, and the ends of the earth your possession.” And again he says to him, “Sit at my right hand till I make your enemies your footstool.” Who are meant by “enemies”? Those who are wicked and resist his will. — 1 CLEMENT 36.1-6

Cyril of Alexandria: Does not the divine Word [Scripture] indicate to us that the Son exists in the form of God, and does it not say that he is the image and stamp of the one who begot him? — ON THE INCARNATION 686

Cyril of Alexandria: He continues with the following words: “When he had made purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, having become as much superior to angels as the name he has obtained is more excellent than theirs.” Having demonstrated that he is the stamp of the Father’s hypostasis and, indeed, the brightness of his glory, he necessarily passes over to the economy of the incarnation, through which we have been saved and enriched by the forgiveness of sins and sanctified through his blood. — COMMENTARY ON HEBREWS

Cyril of Jerusalem: Every grace is given by the Father through the Son, who also acts together with the Holy Spirit. There are not some graces that come from the Father and different graces from the Son and others again from the Holy Spirit. There is but one salvation, one giving of power, one faith; and yet there is one God the Father, our Lord, his only begotten Son, and one Holy Spirit, the Paraclete. Let us be content with this knowledge and not busy ourselves with questions about the divine nature or hypostasis. I would have spoken of that had it been contained in Scripture. Let us not venture where Scripture does not lead, for it suffices for our salvation to know that there is Father and Son and Holy Spirit. — Catechetical Lecture 16:24

Cyril of Jerusalem: Recall also what I have often said regarding the sitting of the Son at the right hand of the Father, according to the sequence of the creed: “and he ascended into heaven, and sits at the right hand of the Father.” Let us not too curiously inquire into the precise nature of this sitting, for it surpasses our understanding. Let us not endure those who perversely assert that it was only after his cross and resurrection and ascension into heaven that the Son began to sit at the right hand of the Father. For he did not gain his throne by way of advancement, but from the time he is—and he is eternally begotten—he sits with the Father. The prophet Isaiah, having beheld this throne before the coming of the Savior in the flesh, says, “I saw the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up.” For “no one has ever seen” the Father, and he who then appeared to the prophet was the Son. The psalmist also says, “Your throne is established from of old; you are from everlasting.” There are many testimonies on this point, but we will content ourselves with these only, because of the lateness of the hour. — Catechetical Lecture 14:27

Ephrem the Syrian: “He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high” because of the flesh he put on. — COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS

Gaius Marius Victorinus: The Greeks call “to be” ousian (substance) or hypostasin; we call it in Latin by one term, substance; and a few Greeks use ousian (substance) and rarely; all use hypostasin (hypostasis). Certainly one differs from the other, but for the moment let us omit this.The divine Scripture has often used hypostasin in Greek, substance in Latin. And it has said of the substance of God in the prophet Jeremiah “that if they had stood in the substance of the Lord they would have seen my word.” But what is it “to stand in the substance”? To know the substance of God, which is “true light,” which is infinite Spirit. If they had known that, they would have known the Logos of the Lord; that is, “they would have seen the word” of the Lord. And shortly after, the same Jeremiah uses the same words. David says, “And my substance is in the lower regions of the earth.” He speaks also of God and says “substance.” And it is clear what this is. The apostle says to the Hebrews, “He who is the character of his substance.” He said that Christ is the character of the substance of God. There are many other examples. But what is the point of all this? To show that the word substance is in Scripture and is used of the substance of God. — ON THE NECESSITY OF ACCEPTING HOMOOUSIOS 2.1B

Gregory of Nyssa: For as the body of the sun is expressly imaged by the whole disc that surrounds it, and he who looks on the sun argues, by means of what he sees, the existence of the whole solid substratum, so, he says, the majesty of the Father is expressly imaged in the greatness of the power of the Son, that the one may be believed to be as great as the other is known to be: and again, as the radiance of light sheds its brilliancy from the whole of the sun’s disc (for in the disc one part is not radiant, and the rest dim), so all that glory which the Father is, sheds its brilliancy from its whole extent by means of the brightness that comes from it, that is, by the true Light; and as the ray is of the sun (for there would be no ray if the sun were not), yet the sun is never conceived as existing by itself without the ray of brightness that is shed from it, so the Apostle delivering to us the continuity and eternity of that existence which the Only-begotten has of the Father, calls the Son “the brightness of His glory.” — AGAINST EUNOMIUS 8.1

Gregory of Nyssa: So that, since we recognize two things in Christ, one Divine, the other human (the Divine by nature, but the human in the Incarnation), we accordingly claim for the Godhead that which is eternal, and that which is created we ascribe to His human nature. For as, according to the prophet, He was formed in the womb as a servant, so also, according to Solomon, He was manifested in the flesh by means of this servile creation. But when they say, “if He was, He was not begotten, and if He was begotten He was not,” let them learn that it is not fitting to ascribe to His Divine nature the attributes which belong to His fleshly origin. For bodies which do not exist, are generated, and God makes those things to be which are not, but does not Himself come into being from that which is not. And for this reason also Paul calls Him “the brightness of glory,” that we may learn that as the light from the lamp is of the nature of that which sheds the brightness, and is united with it (for as soon as the lamp appears the light that comes from it shines out simultaneously), so in this place the Apostle would have us consider both that the Son is of the Father, and that the Father is never without the Son; for it is impossible that glory should be without radiance, as it is impossible that the lamp should be without brightness. But it is clear that as His being brightness is a testimony to His being in relation with the glory (for if the glory did not exist, the brightness shed from it would not exist), so, to say that the brightness “once was not” is a declaration that the glory also was not, when the brightness was not; for it is impossible that the glory should be without the brightness. As therefore it is not possible to say in the case of the brightness, “If it was, it did not come into being, and if it came into being it was not,” so it is in vain to say this of the Son, seeing that the Son is the brightness. Let those also who speak of “less” and “greater,” in the case of the Father and the Son, learn from Paul not to measure things immeasurable. For the Apostle says that the Son is the express image of the Person of the Father. It is clear then that however great the Person of the Father is, so great also is the express image of that Person; for it is not possible that the express image should be less than the Person contemplated in it. And this the great John also teaches when he says, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God.” For in saying that he was “in the beginning” and not “after the beginning,” he showed that the beginning was never without the Word; and in declaring that “the Word was with God,” he signified the absence of defect in the Son in relation to the Father; for the Word is contemplated as a whole together with the whole being of God. For if the Word were deficient in His own greatness so as not to be capable of relation with the whole being of God, we are compelled to suppose that that part of God which extends beyond the Word is without the Word. But in fact the whole magnitude of the Word is contemplated together with the whole magnitude of God: and consequently in statements concerning the Divine nature, it is not admissible to speak of “greater” and “less.” — ON THE FAITH

Gregory of Nyssa: When he was asking how to give a name to what cannot be grasped in thought and did not discover a word expressing an interpretation of the incomprehensible, he called “glory” and “substance” whatever underlies all good and is not sufficiently known or spoken of. The underlying essence of being he dismissed as unnamable. However, interpreting the unity and inseparability of the Son and the Father, and the Son’s being contemplated indefinably and invisibly with the indefinable and unseen Father, he addressed him as “radiance of glory” and “image of substance,” indicating the unity of their nature by the word radiance and their equality by the word image. For, in connection with a radiant nature, there is no middle point in a beam of light, nor is there an inferior part of an image in connection with a substance determined by it. The observer of the radiant nature will know the radiance in its entirety, and the person comprehending the size of the substance measures it in its entirety with its accompanying image. — ON PERFECTION

Gregory of Nyssa: The Logos “upholds the universe by his word of power” from nonexistence to existence. For all things, as many as exist in connection with matter and as many as have received an immaterial nature, have one cause of their substance: the Word of unspeakable power. — ON PERFECTION

Hippolytus of Rome: The beloved generates love, and the light immaterial the light inaccessible. “This is my beloved Son,” He who, being manifested on earth and yet unseparated from the Father’s bosom, was manifested, and yet did not appear. For the appearing is a different thing, since in appearance the baptizer here is superior to the baptized. For this reason did the Father send down the Holy Spirit from heaven upon Him who was baptized. For as in the ark of Noah the love of God toward man is signified by the dove, so also now the Spirit, descending in the form of a dove, bearing as it were the fruit of the olive, rested on Him to whom the witness was borne. For what reason? That the faithfulness of the Father’s voice might be made known, and that the prophetic utterance of a long time past might be ratified. And what utterance is this? “The voice of the Lord (is) on the waters, the God of glory thundered; the Lord (is) upon many waters.” And what voice? “This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” This is He who is named the son of Joseph, and (who is) according to the divine essence my Only-begotten. “This is my beloved Son”-He who is hungry, and yet maintains myriads; who is weary, and yet gives rest to the weary; who has not where to lay His head, and yet bears up all things in His hand; who suffers, and yet heals sufferings; who is smitten, and yet confers liberty on the world; who is pierced in the side, and yet repairs the side of Adam. — Fragments - Dogmatic and Historical

Ignatius of Antioch: Seeing, then, all things have an end, these two things are simultaneously set before us-death and life; and every one shall go unto his own place. For as there are two kinds of coins, the one of God, the other of the world, and each of these has its special character stamped upon it, [so is it also here.] The unbelieving are of this world; but the believing have, in love, the character of God the Father by Jesus Christ, by whom, if we are not in readiness to die into His passion, His life is not in us. — Epistle of Ignatius to the Magnesians

Irenaeus: If He made all things freely, and by His own power, and arranged and finished them, and His will is the substance of all things, then He is discovered to be the one only God who created all things, who alone is Omnipotent, and who is the only Father rounding and forming all things, visible and invisible, such as may be perceived by our senses and such as cannot, heavenly and earthly, “by the word of His power;” and He has fitted and arranged all things by His wisdom, while He contains all things, but He Himself can be contained by no one: He is the Former, He the Builder, He the Discoverer, He the Creator, He the Lord of all; and there is no one besides Him, or above Him, neither has He any mother, as they falsely ascribe to Him; nor is there a second God, as Marcion has imagined; nor is there a Pleroma of thirty Aeons, which has been shown a vain supposition; nor is there any such being as Bythus or Proarche; nor are there a series of heavens; nor is there a virginal light, nor an unnameable Aeon, nor, in fact, any one of those things which are madly dreamt of by these, and by all the heretics. But there is one only God, the Creator-He who is above every Principality, and Power, and Dominion, and Virtue: He is Father, He is God, He the Founder, He the Maker, He the Creator, who made those things by Himself, that is, through His Word and His Wisdom-heaven and earth, and the seas, and all things that are in them: He is just; He is good; He it is who formed man, who planted paradise, who made the world, who gave rise to the flood, who saved Noah; He is the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, the God of the living: He it is whom the law proclaims, whom the prophets preach, whom Christ reveals, whom the apostles make known to us, and in whom the Church believes. He is the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ: through His Word, who is His Son, through Him He is revealed and manifested to all to whom He is revealed; for those [only] know Him to whom the Son has revealed Him. But the Son, eternally co-existing with the Father, from of old, yea, from the beginning, always reveals the Father to Angels, Archangels, Powers, Virtues, and all to whom He wills that God should be revealed. — Irenaeus Against Heresies Book 2

John Chrysostom: Then, using degrees of ascent, he uttered that which is far greater than all this, saying, “Who, being the brightness of His glory, and the express image of His person, and upholding all things by the word of His power, when He had by Himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high.”

O! the wisdom of the Apostle! or rather, not the wisdom of Paul, but the grace of the Spirit is the thing to wonder at. For surely he uttered not these things of his own mind, nor in that way did he find his wisdom. (For whence could it be? From the knife, and the skins, or the workshop?) But it was from the working of God. For his own understanding did not give birth to these thoughts, which was then so mean and slender as in nowise to surpass the baser sort; (for how could it, seeing it spent itself wholly on bargains and skins?) but the grace of the Spirit shows forth its strength by whomsoever it will.

For just as one, wishing to lead up a little child to some lofty place, reaching up even to the top of Heaven, does this gently and by degrees, leading him upwards by the steps from below, then when he has set him on high, and bidden him to gaze downwards, and sees him turning giddy and confused, and dizzy, taking hold of him, he leads him down to the lower stand, allowing him to take breath; then when he hath recovered it, leads him up again, and again brings him down; just so did the blessed Paul likewise, both with the Hebrews and everywhere, having learnt it from his Master. For even He also did so; sometimes He led His hearers up on high, and sometimes He brought them down, not allowing them to remain very long.

See him, then, even here, by how many steps he led them up, and placed them near the very summit of religion, and then or ever they grow giddy, and are seized with dizziness, how he leads them again lower down, and allowing them to take breath, says, “He spake unto us by [His] Son,” “whom He appointed Heir of all things.” For the name of Son is so far common. For where a true [Son] it is understood of, He is above all: but however that may be, for the present he proves that He is from above.

And see how he says it: “Whom He appointed,” saith he, “heir of all things.” The phrase, “He appointed Heir,” is humble. Then he placed them on the higher step, adding, “by whom also He made the worlds.” Then on a higher still, and after which there is no other, “who being the brightness of His glory, and the express image of His person.” Truly he has led them to unapproachable light, to the very brightness itself. And before they are blinded see how he gently leads them down again, saying, “and upholding all things by the word of His power, when He had by Himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty.” He does not simply say, “He sat down,” but “after the purifying, He sat down,” for he hath touched on the Incarnation, and his utterance is again lowly. — Homily on Hebrews 1

John Chrysostom: Since then “He hath purged our sins,” let us continue pure; and let us receive no stain, but preserve the beauty which He hath implanted in us, and His comeliness undefiled and pure, “not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing.” (Eph. v. 27.) Even little sins are “a spot and a wrinkle,” such a thing, I mean, as Reproach, Insult, Falsehood.

Nay, rather not even are these small, but on the contrary very great: yea so great as to deprive a man even of the kingdom of Heaven. How? “He that calleth his brother fool, is in danger” (He saith) “of hellfire.” (Matt. v. 22.) But if it be so with him who calls a man “fool,” which seems to be the slightest of all things, and rather mere children’s talk; what sentence of punishment will not he incur, who calleth him malignant and crafty and envious, and casteth at him ten thousand other reproaches? What more fearful than this? — Homily on Hebrews 1

John Chrysostom: Everywhere indeed a reverential mind is requisite, but especially when we say or hear anything of God: Since neither can tongue speak nor thought hear anything suitable to our God. And why speak I of tongue or thought? For not even the understanding which far excels these, will be able to comprehend anything accurately, when we desire to utter aught concerning God. For if “the peace of God surpasseth all understanding” (Phil. iv. 7), and “the things which are prepared for them that love Him have not entered into the heart of man” (1 Cor. ii. 9); much more He Himself, the God of peace, the Creator of all things, doth by a wide measure exceed our reasoning. We ought therefore to receive all things with faith and reverence, and when our discourse fails through weakness, and is not able to set forth accurately the things which are spoken, then especially to glorify God, for that we have such a God, surpassing both our thought and our conception. For many of our conceptions about God, we are unable to express, as also many things we express, but have not strength to conceive of them. As for instance: That God is everywhere, we know; but how, we no longer understand. That there is a certain incorporeal power the cause of all our good things, we know: but how it is, or what it is, we know not. Lo! we speak, and do not understand. I said, That He is everywhere, but I do not understand it. I said, That He is without beginning, but I do not understand it. I said, That He begat from Himself, and again I know not how I shall understand it. And some things there are which we may not even speak, as for instance, thought conceives but cannot utter. — Homily on Hebrews 2

John Chrysostom: And to show thee that even Paul is weak and doth not put out his illustrations with exactness; and to make thee tremble and refrain from searching too far, hear what he says, having called Him Son and named Him Creator, “Who being the brightness of His Glory, and the express image of His person.”

This we must receive with reverence and clear of all incongruities. “The brightness of His glory,” saith he. But observe in what reference he understands this, and so do thou receive it: that He is of Him: without passion: that He is neither greater, nor less; since there are some, who derive certain strange things from the illustration. For, say they, “the brightness” is not substantial, but hath its being in another. Now do not thou, O man, so receive it, neither be thou sick of the disease of Marcellus and Photinus. For he hath a remedy for thee close at hand, that thou fall not into that imagination, nor doth he leave thee to be hurried down into that fatal malady. And what saith he? “And the express image of His person” [or “subsistence”]: that is, just as He [the Father] is personally subsisting, being in need of nothing, so also the Son. For he saith this here, showing the undeviating similitude and the peculiar image of the Prototype, that He [the Son] is in subsistence by Himself. — Homily on Hebrews 2

John Chrysostom: For he who said above, that “by Him He made all things” here assigns to Him absolute authority. For what doth he add? “And upholding all things by the word of His power”; that we might hence infer not merely His being the express image of His Person, but also His governing all things with absolute authority.

See then, how he applies to the Son that which is proper to the Father. For on this account he did not say simply, “and upholding all things,” nor did he say, “by His power,” but, “by the word of His power.” For much as just now we saw him gradually ascend and descend; so also now, as by steps, he goes up on high, then again descends, and saith, “by whom also He made the worlds.” — Homily on Hebrews 2

John Chrysostom: But the very thing which he said, “the brightness of the glory,” hear also Christ Himself saying, “I am the Light of the world.” (John viii. 12.) Therefore he [the Apostle] uses the word “brightness,” showing that this was said in the sense of “Light of Light.” Nor is it this alone which he shows, but also that He hath enlightened our souls; and He hath Himself manifested the Father, and by “the brightness” he has indicated the nearness of the Being [of the Father and the Son]. Observe the subtlety of his expressions. He hath taken one essence and subsistence to indicate two subsistences. Which he also doth in regard to the knowledge of the Spirit; for as he saith that the knowledge of the Father is one with that of the Spirit, as being indeed one, and in nought varying from itself (1 Cor. ii. 10-12): so also here he hath taken hold of one certain [thing] whereby to express the subsistence of the Two. — Homily on Hebrews 2

John Chrysostom: And he adds that He is “the express Image.” For the “express Image” is something other than its Prototype: yet not Another in all respects, but as to having real subsistence. Since here also the term, “express image,” indicates there is no variation from that whereof it is the “express image”: its similarity in all respects. When therefore he calls Him both Form, and express Image, what can they say? “Yea,” saith he, “man is also called an Image of God.” What then! is he so [an image of Him] as the Son is? No (saith he) but because the term, image, doth not show resemblance. And yet, in that man is called an Image, it showeth resemblance, as in man. For what God is in Heaven, that man is on earth, I mean as to dominion. And as he hath power over all things on earth, so also hath God power over all things which are in heaven and which are on earth. But otherwise, man is not called “Express image,” he is not called Form: which phrase declares the substance, or rather both substance and similarity in substance. Therefore just as “the form of a slave” (Phil. ii. 6, 7) expresses no other thing than a man without variation [from human nature], so also “the form of God” expresses no other thing than God. — Homily on Hebrews 2

John Chrysostom: “Who being” (saith he) “the brightness of His glory.” See what Paul is doing. Having said, “Who being the brightness of His glory,” he added again, “He sat down on the right hand of the Majesty”: what names he hath used, nowhere finding a name for the Substance. For neither “the Majesty,” nor “the Glory” setteth forth the Name, which he wishes to say, but is not able to find a name. For this is what I said at the beginning, that oftentimes we think something, and are not able to express [it]: since not even the word God is a name of substance, nor is it at all possible to find a name of that Substance.

And what marvel, if it be so in respect of God, since not even in respect of an Angel, could one find a name expressive of his substance? Perhaps too, neither in respect of the soul. For this name [soul] doth not seem to me to be significative of the substance thereof, but of breathing. For one may see that the same [thing] is called both Soul and Heart and Mind: for, saith he, “Create in me a clean heart, O God” (Ps. li. 10), and one may often see that it [the soul] is called spirit. — Homily on Hebrews 2

John Chrysostom: “And upholding all things by the word of His power.” Tell me, “God said” (it is written), “Let there be light” (Gen. i. 3): “the Father, saith one, commanded, and the Son obeyed”? But behold here He also [the Son] acts by word. For (saith he), “And upholding all things” - that is, governing; He holds together what would fall to pieces; For, to hold the world together, is no less than to make it, but even greater (if one must say a strange thing). For the one is to bring forward something out of things which are not: but the other, when things which have been made are about to fall back into non-existence, to hold and fasten them together, utterly at variance as they are with each other: this is indeed great and wonderful, and a certain proof of exceeding power.

Then showing the easiness, he said, “upholding”: (he did not say, governing, from the figure of those who simply with their finger move anything, and cause it to go round.) Here he shows both the mass of the creation to be great, and that this greatness is nothing to Him. Then again he shows the freedom from the labor, saying, “By the word of His power.” Well said he, “By the word.” For since, with us, a word is accounted to be a bare thing, he shows that it is not bare with God. But, how “He upholdeth by the word,” he hath not further added: for neither is it possible to know. — Homily on Hebrews 2

John Chrysostom: Then he added concerning His majesty: for thus John also did: having said that “He is God” (John i. 1), he brought in the handiwork of the Creation. For the same thing which the one indirectly expressed, saying, “In the beginning was the Word,” and “All things were made by Him” (John i. 3), this did the other also openly declare by “the Word,” and by saying “by whom also He made the worlds.” For thus he shows Him to be both a Creator, and before all ages. What then? when the prophet saith, concerning the Father, “Thou art from everlasting and to everlasting” (Ps. xc. 2), and concerning the Son, that He is before all ages, and the maker of all things - what can they say? Nay rather, when the very thing which was spoken of the Father, - “He which was before the worlds,” - this one may see spoken of the Son also? And that which one saith, “He was life” (John i. 4), pointing out the preservation of the creation, that Himself is the Life of all things, - so also saith this other, “and upholding all things by the word of His power”: not as the Greeks who defraud Him, as much as in them lies, both of Creation itself, and of Providence, shutting up His power, to reach only as far as to the Moon. — Homily on Hebrews 2

John Chrysostom: “By Himself” (saith he) “having purged our sins.” Having spoken concerning those marvelous and great matters, which are most above us, he proceeds to speak also afterwards concerning His care for men. For indeed the former expression, “and upholding all things,” also was universal: nevertheless this is far greater, for it also is universal: for, for His part, “all” men believed. As John also, having said, “He was life,” and so pointed out His providence, saith again, and “He was light.”

“By Himself,” saith he, “having purged our sins, He sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high.” He here setteth down two very great proofs of His care: first the “purifying us from our sins,” then the doing it “by Himself.” And in many places, thou seest him making very much of this, - not only of our reconciliation with God, but also of this being accomplished through the Son. For the gift being truly great, was made even greater by the fact that it was through the Son.

For in saying, “He sat on the right hand,” and, “having by Himself purged our sins,” - though he had put us in mind of the Cross, he quickly added the mention of the resurrection and ascension. And see his unspeakable wisdom: he said not, “He was commanded to sit down,” but “He sat down.” Then again, lest thou shouldest think that He standeth, he subjoins, “For to which of the angels said He at any time, Sit thou on My right hand.” — Homily on Hebrews 2

John Chrysostom: “He sat” (saith he) “on the right hand of the Majesty on high.” What is this “on high”? Doth he enclose God in place? Away with such a thought! but just as, when he saith, “on the right hand,” he did not describe Him as having figure, but showed His equal dignity with the Father; so, in saying “on high,” he did not enclose Him there, but expressed the being higher than all things, and having ascended up above all things. That is, He attained even unto the very throne of the Father: as therefore the Father is on high, so also is He. For the “sitting together” implies nothing else than equal dignity. But if they say, that He said, “Sit Thou,” we may ask them, What then? did He speak to Him standing? Moreover, he said not that He commanded, not that He enjoined, but that “He said”: for no other reason, than that thou mightest not think Him without origin and without cause. For that this is why he said it, is evident from the place of His sitting. For had he intended to signify inferiority, he would not have said, “on the right hand,” but on the left hand. — Homily on Hebrews 2

Lucius Caecilius Firmianus Lactantius: When we speak of God the Father and God the Son, we do not speak of them as different, nor do we separate each: because the Father cannot exist without the Son, nor can the Son be separated from the Father, since the name of Father cannot be given without the Son, nor can the Son be begotten without the Father. Since, therefore, the Father makes the Son, and the Son the Father, they both have one mind, one spirit, one substance; but the former is as it were an overflowing fountain, the latter as a stream flowing forth from it: the former as the sun, the latter as it were a ray extended from the sun. And since He is both faithful to the Most High Father, and beloved by Him, He is not separated from Him; just as the stream is not separated from the fountain, nor the ray from the sun: for the water of the fountain is in the stream, and the light of the sun is in the ray: just as the voice cannot be separated from the mouth, nor the strength or hand from the body. — The Divine Institutes Book 4, Chapter XXIX

Methodius of Olympus: Thou art the circumscription, so to speak, of Him who cannot be circumscribed; the root of the most beautiful flower; the mother of the Creator; the nurse of the Nourisher; the circumference of Him who embraces all things; the upholder of Him who upholds all things by His word; the gate through which God appears in the flesh; the tongs of that cleansing coal; the bosom in small of that bosom which is all-containing; the fleece of wool, the mystery of which cannot be solved; the well of Bethlehem, that reservoir of life which David longed for, out of which the draught of immortality gushed forth; the mercy-seat from which God in human form was made known unto men; the spotless robe of Him who clothes Himself with light as with a garment. — Methodius Oration Concerning Simeon and Anna

Oecumenius: Speaking of the bare Word [λόγου] of God, He came into humanity, lest they be overwhelmed by the sublimity of what has been said. By Himself, Paul says, that is, He did not send another minister, but worked the purification by Himself, through His cross and death, when He had freed us from sins in baptism. “of majesty”, that is, of the Father. For after the remission of sins was first made, He sat down at the right hand of God with His flesh. “on high.” Above all, he says, he ascends to the paternal throne. However, these signify consubstantiality [ὁμοούσιον]. “having become so much superior to the angels.” The discourse is about the privilege itself. For His flesh was made: for the Word of God is not made, but begotten. Therefore, His flesh is so much more excellent than the angels, as can be known from the excellence of the names. — The Pseudo-Oecumenian Catena on Hebrews

Oecumenius: Or what is said to be Generated [Γενόμενος], do not take it concerning the flesh, lest you think it to be divided from this: but concerning Christ, who is worshiped in one essence [ὑποστάσει] even with His flesh. For where it has once touched what pertains to the privilege, it speaks of humble things without fear. — The Pseudo-Oecumenian Catena on Hebrews

Oecumenius: “he has inherited a more excellent name.” For the Son, having a name from the beginning, the Word, and after the flesh, He possessed it. Therefore, it is rightly said, “he has inherited,” as through the incarnation. He has been called Christ. To say of Christ that he has acquired it by hereditary right means that he has obtained that which he had already possessed long ago. — The Pseudo-Oecumenian Catena on Hebrews

Oecumenius: The inheritance primarily belongs to those who are entitled, but not to those who are alienated. Thus, what was fitting for the heavenly Word was received below through the flesh that was also assumed. But what is that? The Son, of the God of all, who is also the Father of that flesh, is to say, “I have begotten you.” (Ps. 2:7) What he says: “today” is not a sign of time, but that the Father has never been separated from the legitimate paternal relationship that He has with the Son. But if he were to say: I have always been affected towards you in this way: not as if a generation has come, but that it may always persist and continuously derive a beginning, with no end. Indeed, consider whether it may be adapted in such a way that both are indeed said of Christ, namely, “You are my Son,” and “Today I have begotten you” (Ps. 2:7): but that, “You are my Son,” insofar as He is the Word: for it signifies His eternal birth; whereas “Today I have begotten you” refers to the flesh: for it designates a recent birth. For He was born by the good pleasure of the Father.“The Holy Spirit,” said the angel, “will come upon you”; and then also: “The power of the Most High will overshadow you.” (Luke 1:35) — The Pseudo-Oecumenian Catena on Hebrews

Oecumenius: Then, lest you think that the heir is not called an heir by nature, but by a certain grace and adoption, Paul adds: “He is the radiance of His glory,” saying practically: Although I have said that the Father appointed him as heir, understand that nothing humble or unworthy of God is implied. For it is not said that the heir is to be made by the act of adoption and that he is to be considered as such, but rather it is a declaration of the relationship of the Son to the Father as a cause according to nature of reference and consent: and lest you think the Son exists without a principle, alienating him from the paternal kinship, and imply two principles separated from each other. Indeed, for this very reason he was also called by me heir, so that you may immediately understand from whom the inheritance descends, nor may you suspect him to be unbegotten like the Father: for this reason it was said by me, Heir, and, He appointed. Therefore, I immediately added: Who, being the radiance. But if it is not established that there was or would be radiance (for Paul says: when there was radiance), nor is the heir truly appointed, but only in the way I mentioned above. But see how significantly and precisely he has spoken, when he says Radiance, having said a representation, and being, and of the glory. For by radiance, he reveals the natural progression [πρόοδον] of the Son from the Father. Indeed, the radiance of anyone never proceeds entirely through grace or adoption, neither from the sun, nor from fire, nor from any other source from which radiance is usually derived. However, by saying “he is,” he shows that this is not something newly made for him to be radiance, but that it has always been from eternity. For who is [ὤν], since He does not have a recent existence but is from eternity and always is. Then also the divine attribute is presented through who is. For thus also the Father says, “I am the the One who is [Ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ὢν],” speaking to Moses (Ex. 3:14). Therefore, there are testimonies to demonstrate both the natural progression of the Son from the Father and the consubstantiality [ὁμοούσιον], and coeternal [συναΐδιον], as well as what he says: “The Radiance,” and what he states: “who is.” Indeed, he also adds “of his Glory,” so that you may say: “His radiance is the Son,” which is most honorable, and it comes from nature, and there is nothing greater in the Father. You see how and whose heir the Son is? Then, explaining more clearly what has been said, Paul adds: “and the exact representation of His being.” That is, having embraced the essence and substance in Himself, God is of infinite authority, omnipotent, Creator, and whatever else expresses the being of the Father, besides being the Father, all these things are the Son: therefore, He encompasses and sustains all things by His powerful word, and governs them. Do you know how he is truly the heir and sustains all that belongs to the Father? Afterwards, when Paul spoke of the divine and supernatural about the Son, he also transitions to the rest: which are most admirable and no less supernatural, yet by hearing they seem humble and lowly, for example, death and killing! But……………………………………………………. — The Pseudo-Oecumenian Catena on Hebrews

Oecumenius: “He is.” It is called a radiance, indicating the manner in which it originates from the Father, as if in some way it is an outward procession, neither entirely freed from the source of its existence, nor entirely constituted, but rather emerging, as if to stand by itself, and to have its own existence. Thus, the holy Cyril in the fifth book On the Trinity. The manifestation of the consubstantial and coeternal, as light from light. The character, as the likeness of the glory, is the Son of the Father. For the Son of the Father is similar and unchangeable, and as if into a character in different being [ὑποστάσεσι]. “sustaining all things.” As if carrying the invisible and the visible in the word, bearing and governing. And he said word [Ῥῆμα], showing that he easily leads and carries all things. — The Pseudo-Oecumenian Catena on Hebrews

Origen of Alexandria: In my opinion, the Son is the reflection of the total glory of God, according to Paul who said, “He reflects the glory of God,” anticipating, however, a partial reflection on the rest of the rational creation from this reflection of the total glory. For I do not think that anyone except the Son can contain the whole reflection of the full glory of God. — COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF John 32.353

Origen of Alexandria: Now this Son was begotten of the Father’s will, for he is the “image of the invisible God” and the “effulgence of God’s glory and the impress of God’s substance.” … Let those who dare to say, “There was a time when the Son was not” understand that this is what they are saying: “Once wisdom did not exist, and word did not exist, and life did not exist.” But it is not right, nor is it safe for us, in our weakness to rob God … of God’s only begotten Word, who ever dwells with God, who is God’s wisdom, in whom God rejoiced. For if we do this, we shall think of God as not always rejoicing. — ON FIRST PRINCIPLES 4.1

Origen of Alexandria: The apostle Paul says, that the only begotten Son is … “the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person.” Now, we find in the treatise called the Wisdom of Solomon the following description of the wisdom of God: “For she is the breath of the power of God, and the purest emanation of the glory of the Almighty.” Nothing that is polluted can therefore come upon her, for she is the splendor of the eternal light, the stainless mirror of God’s working and the image of his goodness. Now we say, as before, that Wisdom has her existence nowhere else but in him who is the beginning of all things, from whom also is derived everything that is wise, because he himself is the only one who is by nature a Son, and is therefore called the Only Begotten. — ON FIRST PRINCIPLES 1.2.5

Origen of Alexandria: In order … to more completely understand how the Savior is the figure of the person or subsistence of God, let us use an illustration. While it does not describe the subject of which we are treating either fully or appropriately, it may nevertheless be employed for this purpose only: to show that when the Son of God, who was in the form of God, emptied himself, his object was to display to us by this very emptying the fullness of his deity. For instance, suppose that there were a statue of so enormous a size as to fill the whole world, and because of this could be seen by no one. If another statue were formed altogether resembling it in the shape of the limbs, and in the outline of features, and in form and material, but without the same immensity of size, then those who were unable to behold the one of enormous proportions, should, on seeing the latter, acknowledge that they had seen the former, because it preserved all the features of its limbs and appearance, and even the very form and material, so closely as to be altogether undistinguishable from it. — ON FIRST PRINCIPLES 1.2.8

Severian of Gabala: Seeking to present more clearly that the Word was begotten of the essence of the Father, he makes mention of the “radiance.” For the radiance is from the essence of that of which it is an efflux of light, and it is continuously conceived both from it and never apart from that of which it is the radiance. But since “radiance” implies a lesser nature than that of which it is the radiance and existence not in the same nature, he uses a different word and states that Christ is “the exact image of his nature.” The first phrase (“radiance of his glory”) demonstrates that Christ cannot be separated from the essence as God; the second phrase (“exact image of his nature”) proves that he is not without God’s nature. For just as John, calling Christ “the Word,” adds, “he was with God and was God,” so also Paul, having said “radiance,” added, “and the exact image of his nature.” — FRAGMENTS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE Hebrews 1.3

Severian of Gabala: This is what Jeremiah calls “his strong works of words.” — FRAGMENTS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE Hebrews 1.3

Severian of Gabala: Even if the Word became flesh, he nonetheless was in the glory and nature of divinity and was not kept far from the highest thrones of God the Father. And although “he was made a little lower than the angels” because of the measure of his humanity—for human nature is subordinate to the glory of the angels—he was still “above every name that is named.” — FRAGMENTS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE Hebrews 1.3

Shepherd of Hermas: “Because,” he answered, “God planted the vineyard, that is to say, He created the people, and gave them to His Son; and the Son appointed His angels over them to keep them; and He Himself purged away their sins, having suffered many trials and undergone many labours, for no one is able to dig without labour and toil. He Himself, then, having purged away the sins of the people, showed them the paths of life by giving them the law which He received from His Father. [You see,” he said, “that He is the Lord of the people, having received all authority from His Father.]” — Shepherd of Hermas, Similitude 5

Shepherd of Hermas: “Listen,” he said: “the name of the Son of God is great, and cannot be contained, and supports the whole world. If, then, the whole creation is supported by the Son of God, what think ye of those who are called by Him, and bear the name of the Son of God, and walk in His commandments? do you see what kind of persons He supports? Those who bear His name with their whole heart. He Himself, accordingly, became a foundation to them, and supports them with joy, because they are not ashamed to bear His name.” — Shepherd of Hermas, Similitude 9

Tertullian: For God the Father none ever saw, and lived. And accordingly it is agreed that the Son of God Himself spake to Moses, and said to the people, “Behold, I send mine angel before thy”-that is, the people’s-“face, to guard thee on the march, and to introduce thee into the land which I have prepared thee: attend to him, and be not disobedient to him; for he hath not escaped thy notice, since my name is upon him. — An Answer to the Jews

Theodore of Mopsuestia: “Who, being the radiance of glory and the exact representation of his substance.” Quite appropriately he does not say “God” but “glory.” In this way he does not allow us to meddle in the things of that nature when we are thunderstruck by his name, since of course the only “glory” worth mentioning is God’s nature. Paul uses the analogy of “radiance” for that which he deemed most essential, and by the next phrase he explicates the point of the analogy. For he says that Christ preserves an accurate representation of God’s nature, so that whatever you would think God’s nature to be, so you must also think Christ’s nature to be, inasmuch as Christ’s nature bears the accurate representation of God’s nature since Christ’s nature does not differ from God’s in the least. — FRAGMENTS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE Hebrews 1.2-3

Theodore of Mopsuestia: Indeed, there is a great deal of similarity [between the opening of John’s Gospel and] the apostle’s statement. After Paul calls him “the brightness of his glory,” he adds, “the very stamp of his nature.” With great care he turns from a statement of their distinction to an indication of their perfect likeness. — COMMENTARY ON John 1.1.1

Theodore of Mopsuestia: He is the “Father of glory” in that Paul is accustomed to use the word glory to refer to the divine nature, because it is glorious and marvelous. So in Hebrews he says the Son is the “brightness of his glory.” Instead of this he might have said “God” or “divine nature.” — COMMENTARY ON Ephesians 1.16

Theodore of Mopsuestia: He not only says that he is the maker of all things, but that he certainly also makes them by the great abundance of his power, for all things hang upon his voice, as it were. For this expression “who calls into existence the things that do not exist” does not differ from the account of blessed Moses, who says, “And God said, ‘Let there be light’ and there was light … ‘Let there be a firmament’ and there was a firmament.” — FRAGMENTS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE Hebrews 1.3

Theodoret of Cyrus: The “glory” is eternal. Therefore, the “brightness” is also eternal. Brightness is of the same nature as fire. Therefore, the Son is of the same nature as the Father. And since the metaphor of brightness so manifestly demonstrates their coeternity and consubstantiality, he allows an opportunity for those sick with the blasphemy of Sabellius and Photinus, according to which the brightness does not subsist by itself. By another metaphor he excludes this blasphemy, for he goes on to say “and the very stamp of his nature.” — INTERPRETATION OF Hebrews 1

Theodoret of Cyrus: I wish and I pray that I may follow the footprints of the holy fathers, and I earnestly desire to keep undefiled the evangelic teaching that was in sum delivered to us by the holy fathers assembled in council at the Bithynian Nicaea. I believe that there is one God the Father and one Holy Spirit proceeding from the Father. Also that there is one Lord Jesus Christ, only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all ages, brightness of his glory and express image of the Father’s person, on account of humanity’s salvation incarnate and made human and born of Mary the virgin in the flesh. For so are we taught by the wise Paul …, “Concerning his Son who was descended from David according to the flesh and designated Son of God in power according to the Spirit of holiness.” On this account we also call the holy virgin “Theotokos” and deem those who object to this appellation to be alienated from true religion. — LETTER 83

Theodoret of Cyrus: In this way the divine apostle in several terms brought out the reality of the begetting, the oneness in being and the shared eternity of the Father and the Son. Since the divinity transcends all understanding, and it is impossible to bring out in one single image the mystery of the true doctrine of God, the preachers of the truth are obliged to do so by means of many.… Blessed Paul called him “Son” to show him to be different from the Father in regard to personhood; he spoke of him “as creator of the ages” to bring out in these ways his eternity and called him also “effulgence of glory” to indicate by this his shared eternity and the sameness of being, the effulgence being of the nature of the fire. He added that he is “stamp of his nature” to bring out both things at the same time, that he subsists of himself and that he reveals in himself the paternal characteristics. He adds also something else: “upholding all things by the word of his power.” He not only made everything but also directs and guides it. — INTERPRETATION OF Hebrews 1

Hebrews 1:4

Athanasius of Alexandria: Both in the verse before us then and throughout he ascribes the word “better” to the Lord, who is better and other than originated things. For better is the sacrifice through him, better the hope in him, and also the promises through him, not merely great as compared with small, but the one differing from the other in nature, because he who conducts this economy is “better” than things originated. — Discourses Against the Arians 1.13.59(8)

Athanasius of Alexandria: Whereas the prophets ministered and the law was spoken by angels, the Son too came on earth in order to minister. The apostle was forced to add “become as much superior to angels,” wishing to show that just as much as the Son excels a servant is the ministry of the Son better than the ministry of servants. Contrasting the old ministry and the new, the apostle then speaks freely to the Jews, writing and saying, “become as much superior to angels.” This is why throughout he uses no comparison such as “become greater” or “more honorable,” lest we should think of the Son and angels as one in kind, but “better” is his word, by way of marking the difference of the Son’s nature from things originated. And we have proof of this from divine Scripture: David, for instance, saying in the psalm, “A day in your courts is better than a thousand,” and Solomon crying out, “Take my instruction instead of silver, and knowledge rather than choice gold; for wisdom is better than jewels, and all that you may desire cannot compare with her.” Are not wisdom and stones of the earth different in essence and separate in nature? Are heavenly courts at all akin to earthly houses? Or is there any similarity between things eternal and spiritual and things temporal and mortal?… In like manner there is no relationship between the Son and the angels; thus the word better is not used to compare but to contrast, because of the difference of his nature from theirs. And so also the apostle himself, when he interprets the word better, places its force in nothing less than the Son’s preeminence over things originated, calling the one Son and the other servants. The one, as a Son with the Father, sits on God’s right; and the others, as servants, stand before God and are sent and serve. — Discourses Against the Arians 1.13.55(3)

John Chrysostom: Then again having said a little by the way (for he says, “on the right hand of the Majesty on high”), [he turns] again to what is lowly; “being made so much better than the angels, as He hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.” Henceforward then he treats here of that which is according to the flesh, since the phrase “being made better” doth not express His essence according to the Spirit, (for that was not “made” but “begotten,”) but according to the flesh: for this was “made.” Nevertheless the discourse here is not about being called into existence. But just as John says, “He that cometh after me, is preferred before me,” that is, higher in honor and esteem; so also here, “being made so much better than the angels,” that is, higher in esteem and better and more glorious, “by how much He hath obtained by inheritance a more excellent name than they.” Seest thou that he is speaking of that which is according to the flesh? For this Name, God the Word ever had; He did not afterwards “obtain it by inheritance”; nor did He afterwards become “better than the Angels, when He had purged our sins”; but He was always “better,” and better without all comparison. For this is spoken of Him according to the flesh.

So truly it is our way also, when we talk of man, to speak things both high and low. Thus, when we say, “Man is nothing,” “Man is earth,” “Man is ashes,” we call the whole by the worse part. But when we say, “Man is an immortal animal,” and “Man is rational, and of kin to those on high,” we call again the whole by the better part. So also, in the case of Christ, sometimes Paul discourseth from the less and sometimes from the better; wishing both to establish the economy, and also to teach about the incorruptible nature. — Homily on Hebrews 1

John Chrysostom: “Being made,” saith he, “so much better than the angels, as He hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.” The “being made,” here, is instead of “being shown forth,” as one may say. Then also from whence does he reason confidently? From the Name. Seest thou that the name Son is wont to declare true relationship? And indeed if He were not a true Son (and “true” is nothing else than “of Him”), how does he reason confidently from this? For if He be Son only by grace, He not only is not “more excellent than the angels,” but is even less than they. How? Because righteous men too were called sons; and the name son, if it be not a genuine son, doth not avail to show the “excellency.” When too he would point out that there is a certain difference between creatures and their maker, hear what he saith: — Homily on Hebrews 2

Theodoret of Cyrus: This is spoken with reference to the humanity. As God he is maker of angels and Lord of angels, while as man he became superior to angels after the resurrection and ascension into heaven since he was also less than angels on account of experiencing death.… So just as he was less than angels as man, since they have an immortal nature whereas he endured the passion, so after the ascension into heaven he became superior to the angels. — INTERPRETATION OF Hebrews 1

Hebrews 1:5

John Chrysostom: “For to which of the Angels said He at any time, Thou art My Son, this day have I begotten Thee. And again, I will be to Him a Father, and He shall be to Me a Son”? For these things indeed are spoken with reference also to the flesh: “I will be to Him a Father, and He shall be to Me a Son” - while this, “Thou art My Son, this day have I begotten Thee,” expresses nothing else than “from [the time] that God is.” For as He is said to be, from the time present (for this befits Him more than any other), so also the [word] “To-day” seems to me to be spoken here with reference to the flesh. For when He hath taken hold of it, thenceforth he speaks out all boldly. For indeed the flesh partakes of the high things, just as the Godhead of the lowly. For He who disdained not to become man, and did not decline the reality, how should He have declined the expressions? — Homily on Hebrews 2

Oecumenius: We heard, and we who are men, are true sons through grace. The angels, however, did not hear this, lest their sublimity be thought to be from nature rather than from grace. Christ, however, is not from grace, but from nature. “I have begotten You.” The Father relates the birth of the Son according to the flesh, therefore he said: “today”; Thus says the holy Athanasius. — The Pseudo-Oecumenian Catena on Hebrews

Oecumenius: “I will be to Him a Father.” Again, accept this as the Son’s birth according to the flesh, belonging to the Father; for it is clearly said, “I will be to Him a Father, and He shall be to Me a Son according to the flesh.” — The Pseudo-Oecumenian Catena on Hebrews

Origen of Alexandria: Let us see, then, what the devil speaks to the Lord from the Scriptures: “For it is written, that he has commanded his angels concerning you, and in their hands they will lift you up, lest perhaps you dash your foot against a stone.” See how, even in the testimonies themselves, he is shifty. For he wishes to diminish the glory of the Savior, as though he needed the help of the angels, being about to dash his foot unless he were lifted up by their hands. He takes up a testimony and interprets of Christ that which was written not of Christ, but of the saints generally. For freely and with all confidence I contradict the devil, that this cannot be understood of the person of Christ. For he does not need the help of the angels, who is greater than the angels and has obtained by inheritance a name better than they. To none of the angels did God ever say: “You are my Son, this day have I begotten you.” To none of them did he speak as to a son, “he who makes his angels spirits, and his ministers a burning fire,” but to his own proper Son, of whom he speaks innumerable things in the prophets. He does not need, I say, the help of the angels, the Son of God. Nay rather, learn, O devil, that, unless Jesus should help the angels, they dash their own foot. And if any of the angels has seemed to dash his foot—of whom it was read a little while ago: “that we shall judge angels”—he dashes it for this reason, that he did not stretch out his hand to Jesus, so that, being grasped by him, he might not dash it. For when anyone, trusting in his own strength, does not call upon the protection of Jesus, he dashes his foot and falls. — HOMILIES ON THE GOSPEL OF Luke 31

Tertullian: " This voice the Father was going Himself to recommend. For, says he, He establishes the words of His Son, when He says, “This is my beloved Son, hear ye Him. — Against Marcion Book IV

Hebrews 1:6

Didymus the Blind: If all creation worships Christ—for by the name “angels” he denotes the higher rational beings, just as also in the passage “to what angel has he ever said, ‘Sit at my right hand’?” he himself is also above them—and the word of the Scriptures forbid us to worship creation in as much as it says, “Beware lest you lift up your eyes to heaven, and when you see the sun and the moon and the stars, all the host of heaven, you be drawn away and worship them.” Just as one is kept from worshiping the fixtures of the heavens, so also one is kept from worshiping other created beings, even if one happens upon a certain individual surpassing others. One must maintain firmly that Christ was the Creator, not a creation, even if for our sake he united himself to created flesh endowed with a reasonable and intellectual soul, and thus is worshiped as God by all creation. — FRAGMENTS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE Hebrews 1.6

Ephrem the Syrian: And it was never announced to any man, “Let all God’s angels worship him.” In fact, even though men are able to subject their fellow creatures, they will never force the angels to obey them. The angels are not materially formed. “He made,” Paul says, “his angels spirits and his ministers flames of fire.” — COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS

John Chrysostom: Our Lord Jesus Christ calls His coming in the flesh an exodus [or going out]: as when He saith, “The sower went out to sow.” And again, “I went out from the Father, and am come.” And in many places one may see this. But Paul calls it an [eisodus or] coming in, saying, “And when again He bringeth in the First-Begotten into the world,” meaning by this Bringing in, His taking on Him flesh.

Now why has he so used the expression? The things signified [thereby] are manifest, and in what respect it is [thus] said. For Christ indeed calls it a Going out, justly; for we were out from God. For as in royal palaces, prisoners and those who have offended the king, stand without, and he who desires to reconcile them, does not bring them in, but himself going out discourses with them, until having made them meet for the king’s presence, he may bring them in, so also Christ hath done. Having gone out to us, that is, having taken flesh, and having discoursed to us of the King’s matters, so He brought us in, having purged the sins, and made reconciliation. Therefore he calls it a Going out.

But Paul names it a Coming in, from the metaphor of those who come to an inheritance and receive any portion or possession. For the saying, “and when again He bringeth in the First-Begotten into the world,” means this, “when he putteth the world into His hand.” For when He was made known, then also He obtained possession of the whole thereof, He saith not these things concerning God The Word, but concerning that which is according to the flesh. For if according to John, “He was in the world, and the world was made by Him”: how is He “brought in,” otherwise than in the flesh?

“And,” saith he, “Let all the angels of God worship Him.” Whereas he is about to say something great and lofty, he prepares it beforehand, and makes it acceptable, in that he represents the Father as “bringing in” the Son. He had said above, that “He spake to us not by prophets but by His Son”; that the Son is superior to angels; yea and he establishes this from the name [Son]. And here, in what follows, from another fact also. What then may this be? From worship. And he shows how much greater He is, as much as a Master is than a slave; just as any one introducing another into a house straightway commands those having the care thereof to do him reverence; [so] saying in regard to the Flesh, “And let all the Angels of God worship Him.” — Homily on Hebrews 3

Oecumenius: “But when He again brings.” Indeed, he brings, is as if “hands over.” For then He obtained the world which was voluntarily governed by Him, when He tasted death for the whole world, and when He was believed to be God. However, in order that the speech may be easily received, he said that the Father introduces the Son. By introducing, he understands not that He was previously located outside the created world: (for how could he fill all things?), But that He had nothing in common with the created world since He was God. Furthermore, when He assumed flesh, then He communicated with the created world; when He united to Himself that which was created. Thus, the holy Cyril, in his work, “Christ is God.” And blessed Gregory of Nyssa in his books against Eunomius. What he says: The Firstborn, does not refer to the second, but of the one and only begotten from the Father. — The Pseudo-Oecumenian Catena on Hebrews

Oecumenius: “But when He again brings the firstborn into the world.” That is, when it was His good pleasure for His Firstborn to appear in flesh to those who populated the world. For He says: “And the angels came and ministered to Him (Matt. 4:11);” and: “From now on you will see angels descending upon the Son of Man.” (Jn. 1:51) — The Pseudo-Oecumenian Catena on Hebrews

Oecumenius: “Let all the angels of God worship Him,” That is, in the flesh. It shows here that he is so much greater than them, as a master is greater than servants; just as if someone were to bring someone into a house, he would immediately command those in charge of them to worship [προσκυνεῖν] him. Thus appearing in the flesh: that is, the angels worship the Son in the flesh. — The Pseudo-Oecumenian Catena on Hebrews

Photios I of Constantinople: When he introduces his only begotten, that is, when it was pleasing for him to reveal in the flesh his only begotten son to the inhabitants of the universe, he says, “Let all the angels who serve him, worship him,” and “you will see the angels ascending and descending upon the Son of man.” — FRAGMENTS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE Hebrews 1.6

Theodoret of Cyrus: Both phrases, “brings the firstborn” and “let them worship,” suggest the incarnation. Whence does he, the one who supports all things by the word of his power and is maker and creator of the ages, come into the world? How is he “firstborn” if he is only begotten? If even after the incarnation the angels adored him, did they not offer him this honor before the incarnation? He was everywhere as God, yet as man he came into the world. — INTERPRETATION OF Hebrews 1

Hebrews 1:7

Gregory of Nazianzus: Since the Word knows the tabernacle of Moses to be a figure of the whole creation—I mean the entire system of things visible and invisible—shall we pass the first veil and, stepping beyond the realm of sense, look into the holy place, the intellectual and celestial creation? But not even this can we see in an incorporeal way, though it is incorporeal, since it is called—or is—fire and spirit. For he is said to make his angels spirits and his ministers flames of fire … though perhaps this “making” means preserving by that Word by which they came into existence. The angel then is called spirit and fire: spirit, as being a creature of the intellectual sphere; fire, as being of a purifying nature; for I know that the same names belong to the first nature. But, relative to us at least, we must reckon the angelic nature incorporeal or, at any rate, as nearly so as possible. Do you see how we get dizzy over this subject and cannot advance to any point unless it be as far as this: that we know there are angels and archangels, thrones, dominions, princedoms, powers, splendors, ascents, intelligent powers or intelligences, pure natures and unalloyed, immovable to evil or scarcely movable; ever circling in chorus around the first cause, or how should we sing their praises? Illuminated thence with the purest illumination or one in one degree and one in another, proportionally to their nature and rank … so conformed to beauty and molded that they become secondary lights and can enlighten others by the overflowing and largess of the first light? They are ministers of God’s will, strong with both inborn and imparted strength, traversing all space, readily present to all at any place through their zeal for ministry and agility of nature … different individuals of them embracing different parts of the world, or appointed over different districts of the universe, as knows the one who ordered and distributed it all. They combine all things in one, solely with a view to the consent of the Creator of all things. [They are] choristers of the majesty of the Godhead, eternally contemplating the eternal glory, not that God may thereby gain an increase of glory, for nothing can be added to that which is full—to God, who supplies good to all outside God’s self—but that there may never be a cessation of blessings to these first natures after God. If we have told these things as they deserve, it is by the grace of the Trinity and of the one Godhead in three persons, but if less perfectly than we have desired, yet even so our discourse has gained its purpose. For this is what we were laboring to show—that, if even the secondary natures surpass the power of our intellect, much more then does the first and—for I fear to say merely—that which is above all the only nature. — ON THEOLOGY, THEOLOGICAL ORATION 2(28).31

John Chrysostom: Is it then Angels only? No; for hear what follows: “And of His Angels He saith, Which maketh His Angels spirits, and His ministers a flame of fire: but unto the Son, Thy Throne, O God, is for ever and ever.” Behold, the greatest difference! that they are created, but He uncreated. While of His angels He saith, who “maketh”; wherefore of the Son did He not say “Who maketh”? Although he might have expressed the difference as follows: “Of His Angels He saith, Who maketh His Angels spirits, but of the Son, ‘The Lord created Me’: ‘God hath made Him Lord and Christ.’” But neither was the one spoken concerning the Son, nor the other concerning God The Word, but concerning the flesh. For when he desired to express the true difference, he no longer included angels only, but the whole ministering power above. Seest thou how he distinguishes, and with how great clearness, between creatures and Creator, ministers and Lord, the Heir and true Son, and slaves? — Homily on Hebrews 3

Lucius Caecilius Firmianus Lactantius: In what manner, then, did He beget Him? First of all, divine operations cannot be known or declared by any one; but nevertheless the sacred writings teach us, in which it is laid down that this Son of God is the speech, or even the reason of God, and also that the other angels are spirits of God. For speech is breath sent forth with a voice signifying something. But, however, since breath and speech are sent forth from different parts, inasmuch as breath proceeds from the nostrils, speech from the mouth, the difference between the Son of God and the other angels is great. For they proceeded from God as silent spirits, because they were not created to teach the knowledge of God, but for His service. But though He is Himself also a spirit, yet He proceeded from the mouth of God with voice and sound, as the Word, on this account indeed, because He was about to make use of His voice to the people; that is, because He was about to be a teacher of the knowledge of God, and of the heavenly mystery to be revealed to man. — The Divine Institutes Book 4, Chapter VIII

Oecumenius: “Who makes His angels spirits.” For they are created beings, therefore he says, “Who makes.” Behold the greatest difference: that some are created, while the One is uncreated; for the act of creating denotes the production from non-being into being. It is not only to angels that the exceptional pertains, but also to every functional power. He did not say, “Having created,” but “Creating,” that is, sustaining by the Word, according to which they came into being. — The Pseudo-Oecumenian Catena on Hebrews

Severian of Gabala: For just as in the matter of “radiance” and “exact image of his nature” he imitated John, calling him “the Word” and saying that he was God, so also here he imitated John. Just as John said, “This one was in the beginning, all things were created through him,” so also does Paul, although he says, “these things were not” instead of saying, “This one was.” “To the angels is said, ‘who makes them’; but to the Son, ‘your throne.’ " This proves the point: That which was made was not in existence previously, but he who has an eternal throne always was with his Father. — FRAGMENTS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE Hebrews 1.7-8

Theodore of Mopsuestia: The mention of the angels’ “service” (wind) shows their quickness, while the mention of “ministry” (flames) shows their power. When he says that the angels have been made these things, he presents how they also have the ability to be these things. And he distinguishes them from the “Creator” and “God” and “throne” and “scepter of the kingdom,” all of which are symbols of his highest honor and worthiness. For also the phrase God reveals his highest nature, and throne and scepter set forth the certainty of this apart from human honors and worthiness. Then also the phrase “forever and ever” proves this, for the word Creator shows those things that have come into existence have their beginning in time, but this passage demonstrates the eternity of his kingdom. — FRAGMENTS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE Hebrews 1.7-8

Hebrews 1:8

Eusebius of Caesarea: It was not only those that were honored with the high priesthood and anointed for the sake of the symbol with prepared oil who were given tribute among the Hebrews with the name Christ. The kings too, at the bidding of God, were made Christs in a certain symbolism by the prophets who anointed them, inasmuch as they also bore in themselves the types of the royal and sovereign power of the only true Christ, the divine Logos who reigns over all. We have also received the tradition that some of the prophets themselves had by anointing already become Christs in type, seeing that they all refer to the true Christ—the divine and heavenly Logos, of the world the only high priest, of all creation the only king, of the prophets the only archprophet of the Father. The proof of this is that no one of those symbolically anointed of old, whether priests or kings or prophets, obtained such power of the divine virtue as our Savior and Lord, Jesus, the only real Christ, has exhibited. None indeed of them, though renowned in rank and honor for so many generations among their own people, ever gave the name of Christian to their subjects from the symbolic application to themselves of the name of Christ. The honor of worship was not paid to any of them by their subjects, nor did they hold them in such affection after their death as to be ready to die for him whom they honored.For none of the men of those days was there such disturbance of all the nations throughout all the world, since the power of the symbol was incapable of producing such an effect among them as the presence of the reality manifested by our Savior; for he received from none the symbol and types of the high priesthood. Nor did he trace his physical descent from the race of priests; nor was he promoted to a kingdom by the armed force of men; nor did he become a prophet in the same way as those of old; nor did he hold any rank at all or precedence among the Jews. Yet with all these he had been adorned, not in symbols, but in actual reality by the Father. Though he did not obtain the honors of which we have spoken before, he is called Christ more than any of them, and inasmuch as he is himself the only true Christ of God, he filled the whole world with Christians—his truly revered and sacred name. He no longer gave to his initiates types or images but the uncovered virtues themselves and the heavenly life in the actual doctrines of truth, and he has received the chrism—not that which is prepared materially, but the divine anointing itself with the spirit of God, by sharing in the unbegotten divinity of the Father. Again, Isaiah teaches this very point, for in one place he exclaims as if from Christ himself, “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor, to proclaim release to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind.” And not only Isaiah but also David speaks with reference to him and says, “Your divine throne endures for ever and ever. Your royal scepter is a scepter of equity; you love righteousness and hate wickedness. Therefore God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness above your fellows.” In this the text calls him God in the first verse, and in the second honors him with the royal scepter, and then goes on, after royal and divine power, to present him in the third place as having become Christ, anointed not with oil made of material substances but with the divine “oil of gladness.” And in addition to this he indicates his peculiar distinction and superiority to those who in the past had been more materially anointed as types. And in another place too the same David explains his position as follows: “The Lord says to my Lord, ‘Sit at my right hand, till I make your enemies your footstool.’ " And “before the day-star I begot you from the womb. The Lord swore and will not repent, You are a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek.” Now this Melchizedek is introduced in the sacred books as priest of the most high God, without having been so marked out by any material unction, or even as belonging by racial descent to the priesthood of the Hebrews. For this reason our Savior has been called Christ and priest, on the authority of an oath, according to this order and not according to that of the others who received symbols and types. For this reason too the narrative does not relate that he was anointed physically by the Jews or even that he was of the tribe of those who hold the priesthood, but that he received his being from God himself before the day-star, that is to say, before the construction of the world, and holds his priesthood to boundless eternity, ageless and immortal. A weighty and clear proof of the immaterial and divine anointing effected on him is that he alone, out of all who have ever yet been until now, is called Christ among all men throughout the whole world. Under this title he is confessed and borne witness to by all and is mentioned thus by Jews, Greeks, and barbarians. Until this present day he is honored by his worshipers throughout the world as king, wondered at more than a prophet, and glorified as the true and only high priest of God, and above all, as the Logos of God, preexistent, having his being before all ages and having received the right of reverence from the Father, and he is worshiped as God. Strangest of all, we, who have been consecrated to him, honor him not only with our voices and with the sound of words but with the whole disposition of our soul, so as to value testimony to him more than our very life itself. — ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY 1.3

John Chrysostom: “But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever.” Behold a symbol of Kingly Office. “A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Thy kingdom.” Behold again another symbol of Royalty. — Homily on Hebrews 3

John Chrysostom: Didst thou see how what is created and what is begotten are not the same? For otherwise he would not have made the distinction, nor in contrast to the word, “He made” [etc.], have added, “But unto the Son He said, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever.” Nor would he have called the name, “Son, a more excellent Name,” if it is a sign of the same thing. For what is the excellence? For if that which is created, and that which is begotten be the same, and they [the Angels] were made, what is there [in Him] “more excellent”? Lo! again “God,” with the Article. — Homily on Hebrews 3

Oecumenius: Since the Son is not a creature, but a true offspring, He is no longer referred to as “who makes,” (Heb. 1:13) as is said of the angels, but rather, “Your throne, O God, is forever.” The throne, however, is a sign of royalty, but the scepter is of righteousness. “The scepter of righteousness.” Behold, there is another symbol of royalty, the royal scepter, and the staff. — The Pseudo-Oecumenian Catena on Hebrews

Theodoret of Cyrus: “Your throne, O God, is forever.” Through this he teaches us that the phrase “he sat down at the right hand of the majesty on high” was meant in human fashion. As God he has a throne that is eternal and a kingdom that is without beginning or end, but here human things are associated with it. — INTERPRETATION OF Hebrews 1

Hebrews 1:9

Bede: Jesus is the name of the son who was born of a virgin, and, as the angel explained, this name signified that he would save his people from their sins. He who saves from sins is doubtlessly the same one who will save from the corruption of mind and body that happens as a result of sins. “Christ” is a term of priestly and royal dignity, for from “chrism”—that is, an anointing with holy oil—priests and kings were in the law called “christs,” and they signified him who appeared in the world as true king and high priest and was anointed with the oil of gladness above those who shared with him. From this anointing, that is, the chrism, he himself is called “Christ,” and those who share this anointing, that is, spiritual grace, are called “Christians.” In that he is Savior, may he deign to save us from sin. In that he is high priest, may he deign to reconcile us to God the Father. In that he is king, may he deign to give us the eternal kingdom of his Father. He is Jesus Christ our Lord, who with the Father and the Holy Spirit lives and reigns, God for all ages. Amen. — Homilies on the Gospels 1.5

John Chrysostom: Then again with respect to the flesh “Thou hast loved righteousness and hated iniquity, therefore God, even Thy God, hath anointed Thee.”

What is, “Thy God”? Why, after that he hath uttered a great word, he again qualifieth it. Here he hits both Jews, and the followers of Paul of Samosata, and the Arians, and Marcellus, and Sabellius, and Marcion. How? The Jews, by his indicating two Persons, both God and Man; the other Jews, I mean the followers of Paul of Samosata, by thus discoursing concerning His eternal existence, and uncreated essence: for by way of distinction, against the word, “He made,” he put, “Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever.” Against the Arians there is both this same again, and also that He is not a slave; but if a creature, He is a slave. And against Marcellus and the others, that these are two Persons, distinguished in reference to their subsistence. And against the Marcionites, that the Godhead is not anointed, but the Manhood.

Next he saith, “Above Thy fellows.” But who are these His “fellows” other than men? that is Christ received “not the Spirit by measure.” Seest thou how with the doctrine concerning His uncreated nature he always joins also that of the “Economy”? what can be clearer than this? — Homily on Hebrews 3

John Damascene: It is when the Word was made flesh that we say he received the name of Christ Jesus. Since he was anointed with the oil of gladness—that is to say, anointed with the Spirit by God the Father—he is called Christ, or Anointed. That the anointing was of the humanity no right-minded person would doubt. And the renowned Athanasius says to this effect, somewhere in his discourse, on the saving coming of Christ, “God (the Word), as existing before coming to dwell in the flesh, was not man but God with God, being invisible and impassible. But when he became man, he took the name Christ, because the passion and death are consequent upon this name.“38Now, even though sacred Scripture does say, “Therefore God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness,” one must know that sacred Scripture frequently uses the past tense for the future. [It says,] for example, “Afterwards, he appeared upon earth and lived among men,” for God had not yet been seen by humanity nor had conversed with them when this was said. And again, “By the waters of Babylon, there we sat down and wept,” for these things had not yet taken place. — ORTHODOX FAITH 4.6

Oecumenius: “You have loved righteousness.” These humble things are appropriate after the incarnation, as they are able to receive the lowly nature of the flesh. “therefore God, your God, has anointed you.” O God, your God has anointed you. The “you” is through the flesh. For humanity is anointed with the Holy Spirit. It does not operate as it does with mere men, such as prophets and patriarchs. Anointing is, as it were, the entire presence of the anointer. Thus, holy Cyril observed. But see how Eusebius said that Symmachus refers to and rejects this anointing. “Therefore,” he says, “God,your God, has anointed you with the oil of joy [χαρᾶς] over your companions.” “With the oil of gladness [ἀγαλλιάσεως].” Indeed, the oil of gladness is the Holy Spirit; the people are partakers of Christ. What he means by this is: Not as ordinary men are anointed, so Christ was anointed with the Holy Spirit to a measure, but all was anointed with the Spirit. — The Pseudo-Oecumenian Catena on Hebrews

Hebrews 1:10

John Chrysostom: And again he saith: “Thou Lord in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the works of Thine hands. They shall perish, but Thou remainest, and they shall all wax old as a garment, and as a vesture shalt Thou fold them up, and they shall be changed: but Thou art the same and Thy years shall not fail.”

Lest hearing the words, “and when He bringeth in the First-Begotten into the world”; thou shouldest think it as it were a Gift afterwards super-added to Him; above, he both corrected this beforehand, and again further corrects, saying, “in the beginning”: not now, but from the first. See again he strikes both Paul of Samosata and also Arius a mortal blow, applying to the Son the things which relate to the Father. And withal he has also intimated another thing by the way, greater even than this. For surely he hath incidentally pointed out also the transfiguration of the world, saying, “they shall wax old as a garment, and as a vesture Thou shall fold them up, and they shall be changed.” Which also he saith in the Epistle to the Romans, that he shall transfigure the world. And showing the facility thereof, he adds, as if a man should fold up a garment so shall He both fold up and change it. But if He with so much ease works the transfiguration and the creation to what is better and more perfect, needed He another for the inferior creation? How far doth your shamelessness go? At the same time too this is a very great consolation, to know that things will not be as they are, but they all shall receive change, and all shall be altered, but He Himself remaineth ever existing, and living without end: “and Thy years,” he saith, “shall not fail.” — Homily on Hebrews 3

Oecumenius: “And you, O Lord, laid the foundation of the earth in the beginning.” For when he again brings in the Firstborn; that is, when the Father was pleased to reveal His Firstborn Son in the flesh to those who dwell in the world. For it says: And the angels came and ministered to him (Matt. 4:11); and you will see the angels descending upon the Son of Man (Jn. 1:51) from now on. — The Pseudo-Oecumenian Catena on Hebrews

Hebrews 1:11

Ephrem the Syrian: Paul also said, “They will perish,” and all the other things, and again the apostle took up the same words of David. But if all the works of creation perish completely, then paradise, which is not perishable, will also perish. In truth, because of paradise, which does not cease, it is evident that all the works of creation will be renewed for us, as some assert, and they will not perish, as others have said. — COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS

Oecumenius: “they will perish.” Something greater than creation has been revealed, the transformation of the world. For all that is seen will be transformed, and they will come to incorruption. Therefore, it is said, “they will perish” from the present sight. — The Pseudo-Oecumenian Catena on Hebrews

Severian of Gabala: He does not say that a change of nature took place, but by way of comparison, that he permits these things to be destroyed and they do perish in contrast to the eternity of the Son. For also the Lord, when predicting his second coming, says “the stars will fall” and there will no longer be sun or moon or heavens. And one must demonstrate in addition that he revealed through the statement “but you are the same” Christ’s eternal existence and the immutability of his nature. — FRAGMENTS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE Hebrews 1.12-14

Theodoret of Cyrus: He indicated creation’s change for the better that was due to him, and his own lack of beginning or extinction. “You are the same, and your years will never end,” he says, note, meaning, “You were not made, but you are, and you admit of no change, being always the same.” This suggests also the impassibility of the divinity. If it suffered, how is it the same? After all, it would be changed, and if it passed three days in death, its years would fail. Both the prophet and the apostle, however, the one writing the testimony and the other using it, emphasize that he is always the same and his years will not fail. — INTERPRETATION OF Hebrews 1

Hebrews 1:12

Oecumenius: “like a robe you will roll them up.” He indicated the ease of their change. For everything will change from decay to incorruption; and thus easily, as if one were to wrap a cloak. But if he works so easily towards the better transformation and creation, would he need to focus on the lesser creation of another? “but you are the same.” He says that you will change and renew all things, and make the corruptible into incorruptible. You will truly live forever and will always remain. And there is no small comfort for those suffering here, to know that things will not always be this way, but will undergo a change; and that the one who is being cared for by them remains for eternity and lives forever. — The Pseudo-Oecumenian Catena on Hebrews

Theodore of Mopsuestia: It is possible to see in a glance that whenever the Old Testament speaks about the divine nature, it does not speak distinctly about the Father alone, as the heretics suppose when they attempt to apply “I am God and there is no other besides me” and similar passages to the Father alone. On the contrary, whatever it says concerning God as it expounds upon the divine nature, it says in such a way that those attributes may be joined together with the Son and the Holy Spirit, owing to the fellowship of their nature. Otherwise how has the apostle dragged in this second scriptural witness from it?… Has not Paul done the same in his epistle to the Romans, where he says, “For it is written, ‘As I live,’ says the Lord, ’every knee shall bow to me’ “? For no one would find here something that would clearly distinguish between them. — FRAGMENTS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE Hebrews 1.12

Hebrews 1:13

Cassiodorus: “In a pillar of cloud he used to speak to them, because they were keeping his testimonies and the commandments which he gave them.” The words “in a pillar of cloud” are not empty words, for a pillar is always placed in a house to strengthen and beautify it. So the Lord was communicating to them by this image, announcing the imminent building that is the church. Though at that time he imparted these words to them through the cloud, he has deigned to speak to us and to appear to us more visibly through the sacred footstool, that is, through the incarnation. O footstool more exalted than every temple and more excellent than all spiritual creatures! As the Apostle says: “To which of the angels did he say, ‘Sit at my right hand’?” But why is it surprising if he is called a footstool since he also compares himself to a worm, to a beetle, to the fullers’ herb, and to a cornerstone, not with respect to his ordinariness, but because of his humble disposition. — EXPOSITION OF THE Psalms 98.7

Cassiodorus: We have heard a psalm which is amazing in its heavenly arrangement. In this text, it is clear that the humility in his humanity is as great as the power in his divinity. The holy Word took upon himself the nature of our weakness, as the heading of the psalm says, “for those who will be changed,” so that through his undeserving death he might free us from a death that was well deserved. He entered the gates of hell so that the regions of hell might be thrown open. Destruction was conquered by the arrival of the Savior, and it rightly gave up perpetual darkness after it received eternal light. He vanquished the devil through the very human nature that Satan held subject, and the strong man was overcome through the weakness of the flesh when God exalted above all rational creatures what was even weaker than all spiritual creatures. As the Apostle says: “For to which of the angels did he say, ‘Sit at my right hand’?” For no other nature was united with Christ, but only the nature of our flesh, which was taken up and glorified. He is truly omnipotent and merciful who blessed what was damned, restored what was lost, freed what was subject, rendered our miseries strangers to us, and through his death made it possible for humanity to live, an immortal creature, which the devil had caused to die. Grant, almighty God, that, since you deigned to suffer in the flesh for us, you may grant us the crown which for which you considered us worthy. — EXPOSITION OF THE Psalms 68.37

Didymus the Blind: If all created nature worships Christ, for through the friendly speech of the angels He gives signs to nature, so it is said, “For which of the angels has He said anytime; sit at my right hand (Heb. 1:13); and He is over them- and the word of the Scripture forbade the worshipping of the created things, “And do not, when you look up to the sky and see the sun and the moon and the stars, even any ornament of the sky, be led astray and worship them and serve them.(Deut. 4:19)” But they should stop worshiping these things, because they are created things, which is certainly disrespectful. And just as it has been said before, and positively assert that Christ is not created but is the Creator, and even so He is being worshipped as God above all the creation. To all time, and season to all the matters above Heaven.

John Chrysostom: “But to which of the Angels said He at any time, Sit thou on My right hand until I make thine enemies thy footstool?” Behold, again he encourages them, inasmuch as their enemies were to be worsted, and their enemies are the same also with Christ’s.

This again belongs to Sovereignty, to Equal Dignity, to Honor and not weakness, that the Father should be angry for the things done to the Son. This belongs to His great Love and honor towards the Son, as of a father towards a son. For He that is angry in His behalf how is He a stranger to Him? Which also he saith in the second Psalm, “He that dwelleth in heaven shall laugh them to scorn, and the Lord shall have them in derision. Then shall He speak unto them in His wrath, and vex them in His sore displeasure.” And again He Himself saith, “Those that would not that I should reign over them, bring hither before Me, and slay them.” For that they are His own words, hear also what He saith in another place, “How often would I have gathered thy children together, and ye would not! Behold, your house is left desolate.” And again, “The kingdom shall be taken from you, and shall be given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.” And again, “He that falleth upon that stone shall be broken, but on whomsoever It shall fall, It will grind him to powder.” And besides, He who is to be their Judge in that world, much more did He Himself repay them in this. So that the words “Till I make thine enemies thy footstool” are expressive of honor only towards the Son. — Homily on Hebrews 3

Justin Martyr: And that God the Father of all would bring Christ to heaven after He had raised Him from the dead, and would keep Him there until He has subdued His enemies the devils, and until the number of those who are foreknown by Him as good and virtuous is complete, on whose account He has still delayed the consummation-hear what was said by the prophet David. These are his words: “The Lord said unto My Lord, Sit Thou at My right hand, until I make Thine enemies Thy footstool. The Lord shall send to Thee the rod of power out of Jerusalem; and rule Thou in the midst of Thine enemies. With Thee is the government in the day of Thy power, in the beauties of Thy saints: from the womb of morning have I begotten Thee.” That which he says, “He shall send to Thee the rod of power out of Jerusalem,” is predictive of the mighty, word, which His apostles, going forth from Jerusalem, preached everywhere; and though death is decreed against those who teach or at all confess the name of Christ, we everywhere both embrace and teach it. And if you also read these words in a hostile spirit, ye can do no more, as I said before, than kill us; which indeed does no harm to us, but to you and all who unjustly hate us, and do not repent, brings eternal punishment by fire. — The First Apology, Chapter XLV

Oecumenius: Therefore, he offered the first fruits of our nature to the Father. And the Father marveled at the gift, both for the worthiness of the one who presented it and for the purity of what was offered, as if to receive it with His own hands and place the gift beside Him, and said, “Sit at My right hand.” — The Pseudo-Oecumenian Catena on Hebrews

Oecumenius: He said that he did not want to show that he would not have dared to sit otherwise unless commanded: certainly not; but do not think that he lacks a beginning. For that this is so is indicated by the place of the chair, designating a similar honor, and by what was said above: He sat, when it is not previously read that he was told: Sit. Or because the Prophet could not signify the harmony and will of the Father in any other way than to sit, he used the word, Sit. Therefore, this is also great, not only over human nature but also over every creature. Nevertheless, this is also proclaimed on account of human nature. For as far as He is God, the Son has an eternal throne: “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever.” (Heb. 1:8) For he was not honored with this distinction after the cross and passion as God: but as a man he received what he already had as God. Nor was he exalted when he was humble, but when he was sublime and in the form of God, he humbled himself by taking the form of a servant. (Phil. 2:6-7) The evangelist also cries out: “The only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has declared.” (Jn. 1:18) And the Lord: “I am in the Father, and the Father is in me.” (Jn. 14:11) And elsewhere: “Glorify me, O Father, with the glory I had with you before the world was made.” (Jn. 17:5) Therefore, as a man hears: “Sit at my right hand.” (Ps. 101:1) For God has eternal dominion. “until I make Your enemies Your footstool.” Notice the demonstration that the Son is legitimate. The Father is angry against the enemies of the Son. And He did not say that the Son is powerless to put them under His feet, but to reveal the identity of will. What He says “until” is not indicative of time, as if when the enemies are placed as a footstool, it would again be that He would rise: far from it; but He wants to show that He will not be powerless to put all as a footstool. Indeed, until [ἕως] or as long as something exists, it brings forth what is up to that point, but does not remove what comes after it. Thus Gregory says in the second book “On the Son”: “Are they not all ministering spirits?” He comforts them, saying: Christ is indeed the natural Son of God, but the angels are our servants: having been assigned this ministry, that they may do and administer all things so that we humans may be saved.For indeed, angels have frequently become ministers to men, as to Mary (Luke 1:26) and at the Lord’s tomb (Matt. 28:2-7) and to Cornelius. (Acts 10:3) — The Pseudo-Oecumenian Catena on Hebrews

Photios I of Constantinople: He lifted up the first offering of our nature to the Father, and the Father marveled at this offering. And because of the high esteem of the one who offered it and because of the purity of the offering, he, as the father of the household shows him with his hand the place close to himself and also places the offering nearby and says, “sit at my right hand.” — FRAGMENTS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE Hebrews 1.13

Severian of Gabala: “But to what angel has he ever said?” Leaving aside all the rest of creation he speaks about that which is higher than the rest of creation, namely, the angels. For if the Son differed from the angels in that they were created but he was not, how much more does he differ from all invisible things? — FRAGMENTS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE Hebrews 1.12-14

Theodoret of Cyrus: Having thus dealt with divine things, he shifts once more to the human. It is not to him as God that he says, “Sit at my right hand”: how could it be, when “his throne is for ever and ever”? So as human he shared in this honor, having as God the eternal throne. — INTERPRETATION OF Hebrews 1

Hebrews 1:14

Augustine of Hippo: Now, certainly, it is written most clearly in the Epistle to the Hebrews, when the dispensation of the New Testament was to be distinguished from the dispensation of the Old, according to the fitness of ages and of times, that not only those visible things, but also the word itself, was wrought by angels. For it is said thus: “But to which of the angels said He at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool? Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?” Whence it appears that all those things were not only wrought by angels, but wrought also on our account, that is, on account of the people of God, to whom is promised the inheritance of eternal life. — ON THE TRINITY 11.22

Bede: It is no secret that angels are frequently present, invisibly, at the side of the elect, in order to defend them from the snares of the cunning enemy and uphold them by the great gift of heavenly desire. The apostle attests to this when he says, “Are they not all ministering spirits sent forth to serve for the sake of those who are to obtain salvation?” Nevertheless, we should believe that the angelic spirits are especially present to us when we give ourselves in a special way to divine services, that is, when we enter a church and open our ears to sacred reading, or give our attention to psalm singing, or apply ourselves to prayer, or celebrate the solemnity of the mass. Hence the apostle advises women to have a veil over their heads in church on account of the angels. And a prophet says, “I will sing psalms to you in the sight of the angels.” We are not permitted to doubt that where the mysteries of the Lord’s body and blood are being enacted, a gathering of the citizens from on high is present—those who were keeping such careful watch at the tomb where Christ’s venerable body had been placed and from which he had departed by rising. Hence we must strive meticulously, my brothers, when we come into the church to pay the due service of divine praise or to perform the solemnity of the mass, to be always mindful of the angelic presence, and to fulfill our heavenly duty with fear and fitting veneration, following the example of the women devoted to God who were afraid when the angels appeared to them at the tomb, and who, we are told, bowed their faces to the earth. — Homilies on the Gospels 2.10

Cosmas Indicopleustes: For some of the angels were commissioned to move the air, some the sun, some the moon, some the stars, while others prepared the clouds and the rains, and rendered many other services— for this is the work, the appointed duty, of the angelic orders and powers—to minister to the well-being and honour of the image of God, that is, of man, and to move all things like soldiers obeying the commands of the king. This work they were commanded to do on the fourth day, when God adorned the heaven with its stars. The work of the adverse demons, as rebels against God, is to do what will mar his image, for on the fourth day they transgressed the command and were cast out of heaven, as elsewhere he says: Are they not all ministering spirits sent forth to minister to those who shall be the heirs of Salvation? thus expressly declaring that they were ordained for the service of man — The Christian Topography, Book 2

Cosmas Indicopleustes: Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to do service for the sake of them that shall inherit salvation? — The Christian Topography, Book 5

Cosmas Indicopleustes: The language of the Apostle also: Are they not all ministering spirits sent forth to minister for the sake of them that shall inherit salvation? very clearly shows that they all for the sake of man are occupied night and day in their ministrations and services, and in doing everything else towards giving men relaxation from their toils and towards supplying their wants. For, when we shall no longer need them, they shall be set free from this bondage and service, and shall cast down the stars upon the earth. — The Christian Topography, Book 9

Cosmas Indicopleustes: Are they not all ministering spirits sent forth to do service for the sake of them that shall inherit salvation? saying here, that all of them together have been ordained for service to men, as living with them in this place. — The Christian Topography, Book 7

Desert Fathers: A hermit was asked how it was that some people said they had seen angels. He answered, ‘Blessed is he who always sees his own sins.’ — The Desert Fathers, Sayings of the Early Christian Monks

Isaac of Nineveh: Whenever the perception of the revelation of a mystery descends into the intellects of the saints, this is also from the angels. When it is permitted by God, a mystery is revealed from a higher angelic order to a lower one [even unto the lowest]; and in the same manner, when it is permitted by the Divine nod that a mystery should come even to human nature, it is transmitted by those [angels] who are wholly worthy of it. For by their intermediary the saints receive the light of divine vision, [leading] even to the glorious Eternal Being, the mystery which cannot be taught; and the angels receive from one another, “for they are ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation” [through the awareness of true intuitions that are proper to them]. In the future age, however, this order of things will be abolished. For then one will not receive from another the revelation of God’s glory unto the gladness and joy of his soul; but to each by himself the Master will give according to the measure of his excellence and his worthiness, and he will not receive the gift from his comrade as he does here. Then there will be no teacher and no pupil, nor one whose deficiency must be filled up by another. For one is the Giver there, Who gives without mediation to those who receive; and those who win joy, procure it from Him. [[For they do not perceive Him through diverse intellections, but by [direct] revelation of Him, without departing from Him through thoughts.]] There the order of those who teach and those who learn ceases, and on One alone hangs the ardent love of all. — ASCETICAL HOMILIES 28

John Chrysostom: “Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?” What marvel (saith he) if they minister to the Son, when they minister even to our salvation? See how he lifts up their minds, and shows the great honor which God has for us, since He has assigned to Angels who are above us this ministration on our behalf. As if one should say, for this purpose (saith he) He employs them; this is the office of Angels, to minister to God for our salvation. So that it is an angelical work, to do all for the salvation of the brethren: or rather it is the work of Christ Himself, for He indeed saves as Lord, but they as servants. And we, though servants are yet Angels’ fellow-servants. Why gaze ye so earnestly on the Angels (saith he)? They are servants of the Son of God, and are sent many ways for our sakes, and minister to our salvation. And so they are partners in service with us.

Consider ye how he ascribes no great difference to the kinds of creatures. And yet the space between angels and men is great; nevertheless he brings them down near to us, all but saying, For us they labor, for our sake they run to and fro: on us, as one might say, they wait. This is their ministry, for our sake to be sent every way.

And of these examples both the Old [Testament] is full, and the New. For when Angels bring glad tidings to the shepherds, or to Mary, or to Joseph; when they sit at the sepulcher, when they are sent to say to the disciples, “Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven?”, when they release Peter out of the prison, when they discourse with Philip, consider how great the honor is; when God sends His Angels for ministers as to friends; when to Cornelius [an Angel] appears, when [an Angel] brings forth all the apostles from the prison, and says, “Go, stand and speak in the temple to the people the words of this life”; and to Paul himself also an Angel appears. Dost thou see that they minister to us on God’s behalf, and that they minister to us in the greatest matters? wherefore Paul saith, “All things are yours, whether life or death, or the world, or things present, or things to come.”

Well then the ‘Son’ also was sent, but not as a servant, nor as a minister, but as a Son, and Only-Begotten, and desiring the same things with the Father. Rather indeed, He was not “sent”: for He did not pass from place to place, but took on Him flesh: whereas these change their places, and leaving those in which they were before, so come to others in which they were not.

And by this again he incidentally encourages them, saying, What fear ye? Angels are ministering to us. — Homily on Hebrews 3

Origen of Alexandria: On this account our heart must be kept with all carefulness both by day and night, and no place be given to the devil. But every effort must be used that the ministers of God—those spirits who were sent to minister to those who are called to be heirs of salvation—may find a place within us, and be delighted to enter into the guest-chamber of our soul. And, dwelling within us [they] may guide us by their counsel; if, so, they shall find the habitation of our heart adorned by the practice of virtue and holiness. — ON FIRST PRINCIPLES 3.3.6

Origen of Alexandria: That both good angels are present to men and adverse ones; that it was surely not by chance and without judgment that that angel was allotted to be the guardian of that soul, for example of Peter, and another of Paul, or another of one infant of the Church, concerning whose angels the Lord says that they “always behold the face of their Father who is in heaven.” Concerning whom there is surely no room to doubt that, by the judgment of God—who clearly perceives both their worthiness and the quality of our soul—they are allotted the guardianship of each one of us by a certain mystical lot directed by the dispensation of Christ. — HOMILIES ON Joshua 23.3

Philoxenus of Mabbug: And spiritual beings stand in this service, and the hosts and ranks of heaven are obedient unto the word of Jesus, even as Paul said, “They are ministering spirits, who are sent to minister unto those who are about to inherit life.” And concerning the Apostles it is written, “They shall sit upon thrones,” and this indicateth to us the greatness of their honour, and their equality with Him in inheritance, even as Paul saith, “If we suffer with Him, we shall also be glorified with Him.” — 13 Ascetic Discourses, Discourse 9 – Second Discourse on Poverty

Severian of Gabala: Through the phrase “Are they not all ministering spirits sent forth to serve” he shows that the Son is not a servant, but a fellow worker with God. — FRAGMENTS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE Hebrews 1.12-14

Tertullian: But when the comparison is challenged with an angel, I am compelled to maintain that the head over all things is the stronger of the two, to whom the angels are ministers, who is destined to be the judge of angels, if he shall stand fast in the law of God-an obedience which he refused at first. — Against Marcion Book II

Theodore of Mopsuestia: That the angels were “ministering spirits” he has established from previous testimony, but now he finally renews the image of their service, saying that they do everything in service for the things needful for our salvation. For it is not a small thing to know the need for the assistance of their service. — FRAGMENTS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE Hebrews 1.14-2.1

Theodoret of Cyrus: Whereas he sits at the right hand [he is saying], they are sent as ministers of salvation for the sake of human beings. — INTERPRETATION OF Hebrews 1