One God, One Mediator Between God and Men (1 Timothy 2:3–6)

1 Tim. 2:3, 4. For this is good and acceptable before God our Saviour, Who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.

“Acceptable”—before God, and “good”—in what sense? One could understand “good” also as good before God; but one may also see in the word “good” an indication of the inner moral goodness of the act of prayer, as a testimony of love toward all. — God is “our Saviour” not only in that He desires salvation, but because He has arranged the manner of salvation and actually saves all who are being saved by that manner, actively helping them to make use of it. — God, Who desires the salvation of all, desires that all should come to the knowledge of the truth concerning salvation, namely that it is only in the Lord Jesus Christ. This is an indispensable condition of salvation. The prayer of the faithful for the salvation of the unbelieving is pleasing to God precisely because it promotes the fulfillment of this condition.

The thought grows ever more firmly established that the Apostle, in commanding prayer for all people and for their rulers, had in mind prayer for their salvation. Only to this thought do the present verses fully correspond. Pray for the salvation of all, because this is pleasing to God, Who desires all to be saved. But even if this thought is not recognized exclusively, it must in any case be recognized as the second chief thought alongside the first: for this is the one on which the Apostle dwells with particular attention. Blessed Theodoret writes: “The divine Apostle commands prayers for kings to be offered not only for this reason (‘that we may lead a quiet life’), but also that, laying aside ungodliness, they might be instructed in godliness.” Oecumenius continues: “For to pray for all people, even the Greeks (the unbelieving), that they may be converted, is good and pleasing to God.” “What does this mean (that is, good and pleasing)?” asks St. Chrysostom and answers: “That it is pleasing to God and He desires that prayers be offered for the salvation of all. For He ‘desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.’ Therefore imitate God. If He desires that all should be saved, desire the same yourself; and if you desire this, then pray for it; for it is proper for such people to pray. Do you see how the Apostle by every means persuades the soul that one must pray even for the pagans? This, he says, is pleasing to God; through this we become like Him, because we desire what He desires.”

God the Saviour desires all to be saved. Why, then, are not all saved, and why do not all continue to be saved? Because God, Who desires all to be saved, does not work out their salvation by His omnipotent power alone, but, having arranged and offered to all a wondrous and unique manner of salvation, desires that all should be saved by freely and willingly approaching this manner of salvation and making rational use of it. This is why the Apostle, having said that God our Saviour “desires all men to be saved,” added: “and to come to the knowledge of the truth”—placing in the latter the condition for the former. “To come to the knowledge of the truth”—that is, to come into the knowledge of the truth. “What truth? Namely, faith in Him” (St. Chrysostom)—faith that there is no other salvation than in the Lord Jesus Christ, as is said immediately (verse 5). The preaching has gone out into the world. Those who hear give heed, lay up in their heart what they have heard, understand the truth, arrive at the decision to follow it, follow it, and are saved by the God-ordained manner. This entire path is the path of free, rational will, which grace accompanies, confirming its movements.

And here is, on the one hand, the reason why not all are saved, and on the other, the place for the influence of the prayer of the faithful for the salvation of the unbelieving.

Not all are saved because not all hearken to the word of truth, not all incline toward it, not all follow it—in a word, not all desire it. “If God desires (all to be saved), then why does what God desires not come about?” — asks Oecumenius—and answers: “Because they do not desire it; for God does nothing here by compulsion.” We read something similar in Ambrosiaster: “If God, Who is called Almighty, desires all men to be saved, why then is His desire not fulfilled? God desires all men to be saved, but only if they come to Him. For He does not desire this in such a way that even the unwilling should be saved; but desires their salvation only if they themselves also desire it. Just as He deprives no one of salvation by His omnipotent power, so He saves no one by it. A physician announces to the community that he is ready to heal all—but, of course, if the sick come to him. So also here: those who come to the Physician of souls are saved. The salvation would not be true if it were given against one’s will. And the one who received it could not rejoice in the salvation received, if it were possible to receive it compulsorily; not to mention that here the one sick in spirit cannot receive the spiritual medicine unless he surrenders himself wholeheartedly to its action. Here not a bodily but a spiritual healing takes place, which brings no benefit either to those who doubt it or to those who do not desire it. For faith, which gives salvation, if the soul does not receive it with all desire, will not only bring no benefit but will even harm (will serve to greater condemnation). The grace of faith has the power to pour the saving medicine only into those who surrender themselves to it wholeheartedly.”

There is room for the influence of the prayer of the faithful for the salvation of the unbelieving at all the turning-points of the movement of free will along the path of salvation, from the first hearkening to the word of truth to the reception of salvation. It influences the first hearkening to the Gospel, the understanding of what is at stake, the inclination toward it, and the decision to follow it. How? This cannot be pointed out tangibly; but that it exists is suggested by the present passage. It is pleasing to God, he says, when the faithful pray for the salvation of the unbelieving—certainly because this promotes their salvation. Since this salvation is conditioned by the knowledge of the truth or the full reception of faith, which free will attains by making several turnings in its movement, it is evident that the prayer of the faithful which assists in the salvation of the unbelieving exerts its influence on the successful completion of all these turnings of the will and finally on the very reception of salvation. The holy Church believes this, expressing her faith in the prayer for the catechumens, who are those on their way toward the reception of salvation.

αα) This is evident from His institution of one mediation between Himself and all people (1 Tim. 2:5, 6)

1 Tim. 2:5, 6. For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, Who gave Himself as a ransom for all: the testimony at the appointed time.

The particle “for” connects this passage with what precedes it as a reason. To what precisely does it refer in this force? One may relate it to what stands immediately before: “to come to the knowledge of the truth”—thus: God desires all to be saved through the knowledge of the truth—namely this: that salvation is in the Lord Jesus, and only in Him, because there is no other path to salvation. As there is one God, so also there is one mediator between God and men. People, in Adam, fell away from God, in Whom is their life—they fell away and sank into the realm of death. Before them lay either to remain in this death forever, or to open the path to reunion with God, without Whom the power of death could not be cut off and their life could not return to its true condition. Since neither they themselves nor any other creature, even the highest, had the power to open and arrange this, the boundless love of God for mankind intervened on their behalf. God’s counsel decreed that the Only-begotten Son of God should become incarnate for the deliverance of men from their extreme misery, without departing from the bosom of the Father, so that, having died in the flesh, He might destroy the power of death and, having quickened human nature in Himself through the resurrection, become the living unifier of men with God. The Son of God came to earth, became incarnate, suffered, died on the cross, rose again, ascended into heaven—and sits at the right hand of God the Father in human nature, which, having been united with His Divinity in His Person, remains united with God the Father, with Whom He never ceased to be one. Thereafter—those who believe in Him, and are mystically joined to Him, are made one with Him and through Him are united with God; as He Himself testified, speaking with His disciples: “I am in My Father, and you in Me, and I in you” (Jn. 14:20). There is no other path to reunion with God, in which reunion is salvation. “No one comes to the Father except through Me” (Jn. 14:6), says the Lord. “The Apostle here speaks as he spoke in another place: ‘one God the Father, and one Lord Jesus Christ’ (1 Cor. 8:6)” (St. Chrysostom). There is no other mediator and there can be none. As God is one, so also the mediator between God and men is one. Seek no other, and if anyone should offer to point one out to you, do not follow him. Consequently, there is no other salvation either—than in a living union with the Lord Jesus. This is the truth that God, Who desires all to be saved, desires all to know—to know, receive, and through it attain salvation.

The mediator, μεσιτης,—is not one who speaks an intercessory word in defense, but one who actually stands in the middle and unites those between whom he mediates—a unifier, “one who has joined together in Himself what was divided” (blessed Theodoret), and a living unifier. Such is His essence.

Since, in saying “one God” and “one mediator,” the Apostle had in view only to show that there is no other salvation than in the Lord Jesus—as God is one, so also the mediator between God and men is one—all other questions that may arise in this connection can be passed over without loss to the understanding of the Apostle’s words. It is permissible, however, to reflect in passing that when it is said: “there is one God,” this is said not to the detriment of the truth of God’s triunity, but to show that the incarnation of one Person of the Triune God gave rise to no division in the one Nature of God. The incarnate Son did not become external to God, as the word “mediator” might suggest: for in the mediator between God and men there is God of God and man of men. Having become such through the incarnation, the Son did not stand apart from the Father; but took up, accomplished, and sustains the incarnate mediation without departing from the bosom of the Father. Arranged for our salvation, this mediation did not divide God. God remains One even with it.

Likewise when it is said “one mediator,” this is said not to the detriment of the truth of two natures in the mediator, but to show that the two natures in Him do not make two mediators. Even with two natures He is one. As mediator, He is God of God and man of men; but there is one Person—the incarnate Son of God. Oecumenius writes: “Since one who is to be a mediator between God and man had to partake of both, so as to be able to mediate between them, the Son of God, the eternal Word, came (to us on earth) by becoming incarnate, being thus from two natures, Divinity and humanity, but after their union understood and worshiped in one Hypostasis.”

Therefore, when what follows says “the man Christ Jesus,” this does not affirm the unity of nature in Him—it does not affirm that He is only man and not also God—but only shows how He became the mediator; and He became the mediator through the incarnation. So blessed Theodoret: “The Apostle called Christ Jesus a man because he called Him a mediator, and Christ became the mediator by becoming incarnate.” One may therefore understand the word “man” as meaning “the One who became incarnate,” thus: one mediator, the One who became incarnate—meaning, the Son of God named Christ Jesus.

Our commentators direct their words above all to clarifying the meaning of the mediation. Blessed Theodoret writes: “As one who intends to reconcile two persons who are at odds with each other, standing between them and holding one with his right hand and the other with his left, brings them into friendship: so Christ, having united humanity with His divine nature, established an inviolable and indissoluble peace. But if Christ, according to the teaching of Arius and Eunomius, is without share in the substance of the Father, then in what sense is He a mediator? With us (in that case) He would be united, since He is consubstantial with us in His humanity; but with the Father He would have no union, if, as they teach, He is separated from the divine nature. But the divine Apostle called Him a mediator—meaning therefore that He is in union both with the Father according to Divinity, and with us according to humanity.” St. Chrysostom says: “The mediator must partake of both sides in relation to which he is the mediator; for it is proper to a mediator, possessing what belongs to each of the two sides for which he is the mediator, to bring them into mutual communion. But if he possesses what belongs to one side and is separated from the other, then in such a case he is not a mediator at all. Consequently, if Christ Jesus has no share in the nature of the Father, He is not a mediator but is separated from Him. Therefore we acknowledge that just as He became a partaker of human nature because He came to men, so also of the divine nature He is a partaker because He came from God. Since through Him two natures were being united, He had to be close to both natures. For just as some place occupying the middle (between two locations) touches each of them; so also the one who unites two natures must be a partaker of both natures. Consequently Christ Jesus, just as He became man, was also God. Being only man, He would not have become a mediator; because He had to speak (in a divine manner) with God. Likewise, being only God, He would not be a mediator; because those (Oecumenius: would not have endured Him; better: He could not represent the persons of those) for whom He serves as mediator would not have received Him.”

“Who gave Himself as a ransom for all.” — “Ransom,” αντιλυτρον,—redemption price. The mediation was no easy matter; it did not consist only in an intercessory word, but in deed, and required sacrifice. This was because of the condition of those on whose behalf the mediator took up the mediation. The latter had fallen away from God through sin and stood under the wrath of God for the guilt of sin—because of sin they were subject to the tyranny of Satan, and through both of these—to death. God was pleased to be reconciled with those who had fallen away; but in order that those who had fallen away might rise to the capacity for entering into reconciliation, it was necessary to free them from all the bonds that held them in base slavery—namely the offended justice of God, sin, the devil, death. The mediator undertook to accomplish this, bearing without guilt what lay upon the guilty ones for whom he mediated. Having become incarnate, He took upon Himself human nature, pure and sinless, and by surrendering it to death on the cross He thereby satisfied the justice of God; the satisfied justice of God opened the gates to the outpouring of mercy and grace upon the guilty—who, being received into mercy and sanctified by grace, break the bonds of sin, and through this also cast off the bonds of slavery to the devil; thus they at last become sons of the resurrection, over whom death has no power. By all of this together the ransom is accomplished, and the mystery of the mediation enters into force. The root and beginning of all is this: that the incarnate Son of God, as mediator, gave Himself—gave Himself to death on the cross. Therefore the Apostle encompasses the entire work of mediation in this one thing: “Who gave Himself as a ransom.”

Blessed Theodoret writes: “When all were under the dominion of death, Christ was not subject to death—both as God, because He had an immortal nature, and as man, because He had committed no sin that causes death. But He gave Himself up (to death) as a kind of redemptive price, and freed all from the slavery of death.”

Let us also note here in passing: is it not for this reason also that the Apostle first said of the mediator that He is “the man Christ Jesus”—because he was about to say immediately after: “Who gave Himself as a ransom?” For in order to offer such a sacrifice, He had to have something to offer—namely humanity—and to become man. “He must have something also to offer” (Heb. 8:3), the Apostle says in another place. And what is this? Flesh and blood. “Since… the children have partaken of flesh and blood, He also Himself in like manner partook of the same, that through death He might bring to nothing him who has the power of death, that is, the devil, and deliver those who through fear of death… were all their lifetime subject to bondage” (Heb. 2:14, 15).

“The testimony at the appointed time.” These are subsidiary words. And it is difficult to determine what thought the Apostle had in mind here. Let us set these words in relation to what precedes. The Son of God, having become incarnate for the mediation between God and men, gave Himself to death as the redemption of all—of all, not only Jews but also Gentiles. This act of the boundless love for mankind of God the Father, Who gave up the Son, and of God the Son, Who gave up Himself, is a testimony. A testimony to what? To this: that “God desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth”—not only Jews but also Gentiles. Therefore you, the faithful, in praying for the unbelieving Gentiles, do something pleasing to God, because thereby you assist in the fulfillment of what God desires, namely the salvation of all—and of the Gentiles. That this is the direct will of God is evident from the fact that the mediation He instituted between Himself and men embraces all men, and that the mediator, in giving Himself to death, gave Himself as the redemption of all people without distinction or exception. St. Chrysostom sees this train of thought in the Apostle: “Who gave Himself as a ransom for all.” What then—does this mean for the Gentiles also, tell me? Yes. — And in spite of the fact that Christ died also for the Gentiles, will you not consent to pray for them? So why, you will ask, did they not believe? Because they did not desire to (he said above: because the world had not yet attained the truth), but on His part everything was done. Of this His passion testifies, he says. — For all—and for the Gentiles—to be saved was appointed from eternity. Such is the eternal will of God; but the testimony concerning it was given at the proper time: “at the appointed time”—that is, “at the fitting or proper time” (St. Chrysostom), “when men had already been made capable of believing” (Oecumenius),—“in the times foreordained and predestined by the most blessed Trinity” (Clement in Oecumenius). This testimony, manifested at the proper time, is the very institution of this salvation of all. By this is expressed the same as what we read in the Epistle to the Galatians: “But when the fullness of time came, God sent forth His Son… to redeem those under the Law” (Gal. 4:4, 5). — To interpret and spread abroad this testimony, the Apostle further says, has been laid upon me.

ββ) This is confirmed by the appointment of the Apostle himself for the calling of the Gentiles (1 Tim. 2:7)