Church Fathers Commentary John 1:14

"And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us (and we beheld his glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father), full of grace and truth." — John 1:14 (ASV)

John 1:14a

St. Augustine of Hippo: After saying, “Born of God,” the evangelist adds, “And the Word was made flesh,” to prevent us from being surprised or fearful at such a great and seemingly incredible grace—that humans could be born of God. He says this to assure us. Why, then, do you marvel that humans are born of God? You should know that God Himself was born of man.

St. John Chrysostom: Alternatively, after saying that those who received Him were “born of God,” the evangelist explains the reason for this honor: because the Word was made flesh. God's own Son was made the Son of Man so that He could make the sons of men sons of God.

Now, when you hear that “the Word was made flesh,” do not be disturbed, for He did not change His substance into flesh—which would indeed be an impious thing to suppose. Instead, remaining what He was, He took upon Himself the form of a servant. Since some claim that the entire incarnation was only an appearance, the evangelist used the expression “was made” to refute such a blasphemy, meaning to represent not a conversion of substance but an assumption of real flesh. And if they say, “God is omnipotent; why then could He not be changed into flesh?” we reply that for an unchangeable nature to change is a contradiction.

St. Augustine of Hippo: Just as our word becomes a physical voice by taking on that voice to express itself externally, so the Word of God was made flesh by taking on flesh as a means of revealing Himself to the world. And just as our word is made voice yet is not turned into voice, so the Word of God was made flesh but was never turned into flesh. It is by assuming another nature, not by being consumed in it, that our word is made voice and the Word is made flesh.

Council of Ephesus: The speech we utter in conversation with each other is incorporeal, imperceptible, and intangible. But when clothed in letters and characters, it becomes material, perceptible, and tangible. So too, the Word of God, who was naturally invisible, becomes visible; and what was by nature incorporeal comes before us in a tangible form.

Alcuin of York: When we consider how an incorporeal soul is joined to a body, so that two become one person, we can more easily accept the idea of the incorporeal divine substance being joined to a soul in a body, in a unity of person. This union is such that the Word is not turned into flesh, nor the flesh into the Word, just as the soul is not turned into the body, nor the body into the soul.

Theophylact of Ohrid: Apollinarius of Laodicea founded a heresy on this text, saying that Christ had only flesh and not a rational soul, and that in place of a soul, His divinity directed and controlled His body.

St. Augustine of Hippo: If people are disturbed, however, that the text says “the Word was made flesh” without mentioning a soul, let them know that “flesh” stands for the whole person—the part for the whole—by a figure of speech. This is seen in the Psalms, Unto you shall all flesh come, and again in Romans, By the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified. In the same way, it is said here that “the Word was made flesh,” meaning that the Word was made man.

Theophylact of Ohrid: By mentioning the flesh, the Evangelist intends to show God's unspeakable condescension and lead us to admire His compassion in assuming for our salvation something so opposite and foreign to His nature—namely, the flesh, since the soul has some affinity with God.

However, if the Word was made flesh but did not at the same time assume a human soul, it would follow that our souls are not yet restored, for what He did not assume, He could not sanctify. What a mockery it would be, then—since the soul sinned first—to assume and sanctify only the flesh, leaving the very part that sinned untouched! This text also overthrows Nestorius, who asserted that it was not the very Word, God Himself, who was made man by being conceived of the sacred blood of the Virgin. Instead, Nestorius claimed that the Virgin brought forth a man endowed with every virtue, and that the Word of God was united to him. This creates two sons: one born of the Virgin (the man), and the other born of God (the Son of God), united to that man by grace, relation, and love. In opposition to this, the Evangelist declares that the very Word was made Man, not that the Word chose a righteous man and united Himself to him.

St. Cyril of Alexandria: The Word, uniting to Himself a body of flesh animated with a rational soul, was substantially, ineffably, and incomprehensibly made Man and called the Son of Man. This union was not according to will or good pleasure alone, nor was it merely the assumption of a person. The natures brought into this true union are indeed different, but He who is of both, Christ the Son, is One. The difference between the natures, however, is not destroyed as a result of this union.

Theophylact of Ohrid: From the text, “The Word was made flesh,” we learn further that the Word Himself is man. Being the Son of God, He was made the Son of a woman, who is rightly called the Mother of God, since she gave birth to God in the flesh.

St. Hilary of Poitiers: However, some people do not believe that God the Only-Begotten, God the Word who was in the beginning with God, is substantially God. Instead, they see Him as a “word” sent forth, with the Son being to God the Father what a spoken word is to the one who utters it. To disprove that the Word—being substantially God and abiding in the form of God—was born as the Man Christ, these men argue subtly.

They claim that since that Man (as they say) derived His life from human origin rather than from the mystery of a spiritual conception, God the Word did not make Himself Man from the womb of the Virgin. Instead, they say the Word of God was in Jesus just as the spirit of prophecy was in the Prophets. They are also accustomed to charging us with holding that Christ was born a Man without a human body and soul.

In contrast, we preach that the Word was made flesh and born Man in our likeness, so that He who is truly the Son of God was also truly born the Son of Man. Just as He took a body from the Virgin by His own act, so He also took a soul of Himself—a soul which is never derived from human parents alone. And since He, the very same one, is the Son of Man, how absurd would it be to make Him into another person—a sort of prophet inspired by the Word of God—in addition to the Son of God, who is the Word? For our Lord Jesus Christ is both the Son of God and the Son of Man.

St. John Chrysostom: However, lest you should improperly infer a change in His incorruptible nature from the statement that “the Word was made flesh,” the evangelist adds, “And dwelt among us.” For that which inhabits is not the same as, but is different from, the habitation. They are different in nature, I say, although in their union and conjunction, God the Word and the flesh are one, without any confusion or loss of substance.

Alcuin of York: Alternatively, “dwelt among us” means He lived among men.

John 1:14b

St. John Chrysostom: Having said that we are made sons of God only because the Word was made flesh, the evangelist now mentions another gift: “And we saw His glory.” We would not have seen this glory if He had not become visible to us through His union with humanity. For if the Israelites could not endure to look on the glorified face of Moses and needed a veil, how could stained and earthly creatures like us have endured the sight of unveiled Divinity—a sight not granted even to the higher powers themselves?

St. Augustine of Hippo: Alternatively, because “the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us,” His birth became a kind of ointment for the eyes of our heart, so that through His humanity we might discern His majesty. Therefore, it follows, “And we saw His glory.” No one could see His glory who was not first healed by the humility of the flesh.

For dust from the earth, as it were, had flown into humanity's eye. The eye was diseased, and earth was sent to heal it again. The flesh had blinded you; the flesh now restores you. By consenting to carnal desires, the soul had become carnal; hence, the eye of the mind was blinded. Then the physician made an ointment for you. He came in such a way that by the flesh He destroyed the corruption of the flesh. And so, “the Word was made flesh,” so that you might be able to say, “We saw His glory.”

St. John Chrysostom: He adds, “As of the Only-Begotten of the Father.” This is because many prophets who worked miracles, like Moses and Elijah, had been glorified. Angels also appeared to men, shining with the brightness belonging to their nature, and the prophets saw Cherubim and Seraphim in glorious array. But the Evangelist draws our minds away from these, raising them above all nature and every rank of fellow servants, and leads us up to the summit Himself. It is as if he said, “The glory we beheld is not that of a prophet, or any other man, or an Angel, or Archangel, or any of the higher powers, but the glory of the very Lord, the very King, the very and true Only-Begotten Son.”

St. Gregory the Great: In the language of Scripture, “as” and “as it were” are sometimes used to indicate not likeness but reality. This is the meaning of the expression, “As of the Only-Begotten of the Father.”

St. John Chrysostom: It is as if he said: We saw His glory, a glory that was fitting and proper for the Only-Begotten and true Son to have. We have a similar figure of speech, derived from seeing kings always splendidly robed. When a person's dignified bearing is beyond description, we say, “In short, he carried himself like a king.” In the same way, John says, We saw His glory, the glory as of the Only-Begotten of the Father.

When angels appeared, they did everything as servants who have a Lord, but He appeared as the Lord, even in a humble form. Yet all creation recognized its Lord: the star called the Magi, the angels called the shepherds, and the child leaping in the womb acknowledged Him. Yes, the Father bore witness to Him from heaven, and the Paraclete descended upon Him. The very universe itself shouted louder than any trumpet that the King of heaven had come. For demons fled, diseases were healed, the graves gave up the dead, and souls were brought from wickedness to the greatest heights of virtue. What can one say of the wisdom of His precepts, of the virtue of His heavenly laws, of the excellent establishment of the angelic life?

Origen of Alexandria: Regarding the phrase Full of grace and truth, the meaning is twofold. First, it can be understood in relation to the Humanity and the Divinity of the Incarnate Word. The “fullness of grace” refers to the Humanity, according to which Christ is the Head of the Church and the firstborn of all creation. For the greatest and original example of grace—by which a man, with no preceding merits, is made God—is manifested primarily in Him.

The fullness of Christ's grace may also be understood as the Holy Spirit, whose sevenfold operation filled Christ's Humanity. The “fullness of truth” applies to the Divinity. However, if you would rather understand “fullness of grace and truth” in relation to the New Testament, you may rightly say that the fullness of the New Testament's grace was given by Christ, and the truth of the Old Testament types was fulfilled in Him.

Theophylact of Ohrid: Alternatively, He was “full of grace” because His word was gracious, as David said, Full of grace are your lips. And He was “full of truth” because what Moses and the Prophets spoke or did in figures, Christ did in reality.